954
[REPOST] Woman says she started wearing ‘terrible wigs’ after work banned her pink hair
(www.thelondoneconomic.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2023
954 points (97.4% liked)
Malicious Compliance
18048 readers
12 users here now
People conforming to the letter, but not the spirit, of a request. For now, this includes text posts, images, videos and links. Please ensure that the “malicious compliance” aspect is apparent - if you’re making a text post, be sure to explain this part; if it’s an image/video/link, use the “Body” field to elaborate.
======
-
We ENCOURAGE posts about events that happened to you, or someone you know.
-
We ACCEPT (for now) reposts of good malicious compliance stories (from other platforms) which did not happen to you or someone you knew. Please use a [REPOST] tag in such situations.
-
We DO NOT ALLOW fiction, or posts that break site-wide rules.
======
Also check out the following communities:
!fakehistoryporn@lemmy.world !unethicallifeprotips@lemmy.world
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
"They think this is better?"
Yes, they actually do. They're probably conservative dickheads. They know that pink hair is code for "I am a tolerant and kind person; I might be gay but not necessarily; I support counterculture ideas."
They hate the counterculture ideas. They don't hate the color pink. Covering it up with a terrible wig makes it about something else.
Or anyway, so they think. What they've actually done is given her an opportunity to start conversations about the pink hair.
Keen insight. I wouldn't have known she exists otherwise.
Hah! It doesn't even take that. All you need is a middle-management who doesn't support the rights of their workforce, is inconvenienced should a customer gin up complaints about OP's hair-color (whatever it is), and is generally just lazy and indifferent, learning from upper mgmt that growth & profits are 99% the things that count, followed by limiting liability situations. The workers themselves are just an inconvenient expense in the equation.