Question

Hooters is a successful chain of restaurants and bars that features waitresses in tight shirts and very short shorts. Hooters also markets T-shirts that bear its name as well as its slogan, “More Than a Mouthful.”

Former Hooters waitresses filed a class action lawsuit, alleging that the atmosphere Hooters created in its restaurants allowed them to be sexually harassed. One waitress noted on a talk show, “We thought it was a family restaurant. [The uniforms] made us look stupid.” The former waitresses have noted that Hooters hired no male wait staff, and that all of the waitresses at its restaurants are very young and mostly blonde. Customers, cooks, and managers, according to the women, made lewd comments and, on occasion, touched them. The women contend that Hooters’ atmosphere, their mandatory uniforms, and all-male management caused them to be sexually harassed. The EEOC and Hooters settled the litigation. Hooters’ dress policy and its slogans and practices remain the same. Hooters continues to enjoy great success, and it recently created Hooters Airlines, a company that flies to resort destinations and features Hooters girls as flight attendants.

Questions:

1. Should the women have known of the problems when they agreed to work at Hooters? What bearing should such knowledge have on their right to allege harassment?

2. What ethical obligations does an employer such as Hooters owe its employees in the creation of its atmosphere?

3.What role should managers play in minimizing customer harassment?

4. Would you work for and/or patronize Hooters?  

5. Every Wednesday, the Chicago-are Hooters resaurants donate half of what they earn selling spicy chicken wings to the Holy Family Lutheran Church. Between 1993 and 1995, the Hooters restaurant gave $15,000 to the church. On one Wednesday, Hooters brought in calendar girls and a Playboy Playmate for autographs in order to increase business. When asked about the combination of Hooters and religion, Pastor Charles Infelt responded, "We're not asking people to go there. I live in a larger Lutheran world. We try not to get into that side of life. We just accept their money. We don't evaluate. Our role is to be gracious and thankful. I don't wan to get into negative thoughts." Evaluate this relationship.

Answer 1

Note: This response is in UK English, please paste the response to MS Word and you should be able to spot discrepancies easily. You may elaborate the answer based on personal views or your classwork if necessary. Also, you would have to answer no. 4 since the teacher asks for your views.

(Answer) (1) Yes, Hooters is a very old establishment. Unless these are the women who first began working at Hooters when it first opened, they should have been aware. The women should have known about the risks that come with being in a precarious environment. Having said that, the women deserve to be respected and treated like human beings. It would be similar to an accountant joining a company that they know demand long hours and expect too much from their employees. Some decisions are made purely for the employee to get themselves in a better financial position.

An organisation that takes advantage of the desperation of its employees is unethical indeed.

(2) Hooters owe its staff bouncers and security personnel. Furthermore, Hooters should have a strict policy against harassment and should complain to the authorities in order to take punitive measures if necessary. Also, Hooters must reserve the right to deny service to any customer who does not treat the staff in an ethical manner.

The USP or unique selling proposition of Hooters is not really the food but the waitresses in tight and flimsy uniforms. If Hooters were to change that, they would need a different USP and marketing strategy altogether. If that is to happen, it would be a properly analysed marketing decision. Also, to make sure that the past errors are not repeated, Hooters would have to change uniforms and have a broader employee description.

(3) Firstly, it would help if the managers are women and not men who simply cannot comprehend the behaviour, emotions and character that entail “consent” and “respect.” Secondly, Hooters would need to invest in security and hearing out any employee grievances. Also, employee complains about harassment in the workplace should be firmly acted upon.

(5) Pastor Charles’ actions are riddled with a certain level of hypocrisy. Accepting money earned from actions that his congregation would believe are unethical would be indirectly condoning that activity. It would seem that Pastor Charles’ would even accept a donation from a mob boss if "We're not asking people to go there. I live in a larger Lutheran world. We try not to get into that side of life. We just accept their money. We don't evaluate. Our role is to be gracious and thankful. I don't want to get into negative thoughts" were his words. Logically, it would amount to the same thing.

Hooters, on the other hand, are indirectly paying the Lutheran church in order to build a brand image and exhibit a certain stratum of benevolence. This common behaviour that a celebrity or an organisation would generally indulge in. It is very easy for a superstar to visit a children’s hospital or donate a few thousand dollars from the millions they make. It increases their fan following as it calibrates their image better.