{"id":117271,"date":"2017-09-11T23:14:07","date_gmt":"2017-09-12T03:14:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=117271"},"modified":"2017-09-11T23:14:07","modified_gmt":"2017-09-12T03:14:07","slug":"bikini-baristas-sue-washington-city-over-dress-code-law","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2017\/09\/11\/bikini-baristas-sue-washington-city-over-dress-code-law\/","title":{"rendered":"Bikini baristas sue Washington city over dress code law"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\u201cJust<\/a>
\u201cJust like Starbucks with green aprons, UPS with brown trucks and outfits, and Hooter’s with short-orange shorts, the baristas’ attire evokes a message at work,\u201d the lawsuit says, adding that such messages include \u201cfreedom, empowerment, openness, acceptance, approachability, vulnerability and individuality.\u201d (Photo<\/a> by Franklin Heijnen\/Flickr<\/a>, CC BY-SA 2.0<\/a>)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

SEATTLE \u2014 Seven bikini baristas and the owner of a chain of the coffee stands called \u201cHillbilly Hotties\u201d sued the city of Everett, Washington, on Monday, saying two recently passed ordinances banning bare skin violate their right to free expression.<\/p>\n

The suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Seattle, says the ordinances passed by the Everett City Council deny bikini-stand employees the ability to communicate through their attire, are vague and confusing, and unlawfully target women.<\/p>\n

\u201cJust like Starbucks with green aprons, UPS with brown trucks and outfits, and Hooter’s with short-orange shorts, the baristas’ attire evokes a message at work,\u201d the lawsuit says, adding that such messages include \u201cfreedom, empowerment, openness, acceptance, approachability, vulnerability and individuality.\u201d<\/p>\n

One of Everett’s new laws requires the workers to wear a minimum of tank tops and shorts. It specifically applies to employees at \u201cquick service\u201d restaurants, which also include fast food and food trucks.<\/p>\n

The other redefined the city’s lewd conduct ordinance and created a new crime of facilitating lewd conduct. Both ordinances took effect early this month.<\/p>\n

The city cited \u201ca proliferation of crimes of a sexual nature occurring at bikini barista stands throughout the city\u201d in adopting the measures.<\/p>\n

\u201cEmployees and owners of barista stands where this conduct occurs are making large sums of money from overtly sexual, lewd conduct, and prostitution,\u201d the city declared in one of the measures.<\/p>\n

A spokeswoman said the city had no comment on the lawsuit.<\/p>\n

Everett and Snohomish County, where it’s located north of Seattle, have had a troubled history with the shops, which in some cases have operated as drive-thru strip clubs or even brothels. A former Snohomish County sheriff’s sergeant pleaded guilty to helping launder money from a prostitution operation run out of some of roadside stands and was sentenced to one year in jail.<\/p>\n

The proprietor of another chain, the Grab-N-Go espresso huts, was convicted of sexual exploitation of a minor after he employed a 16-year-old girl at his stands. Prosecutors said his business model relied on the baristas performing lewd shows.<\/p>\n

But Jovanna Edge, who runs five Hillbilly Hotties stands, including two in Everett, said the city’s new laws are unnecessary. A few years ago, she said, she gave Everett police permission to log in and view surveillance video of her stands so they can observe what’s happening in real time.<\/p>\n

\u201cI don’t want to hide anything from them,\u201d Edge said Monday. \u201cEverybody needs to follow the rules, to not step out of the box and take their clothes off for people. That’s a way to keep them honest.\u201d<\/p>\n

Since the laws took effect, she said, \u201cI have people who are threatening to quit because they’re not making any money.\u201d<\/p>\n

Among the allegations in the lawsuit is that the laws’ definitions of what skin must be covered up are confusing. The dress code for baristas refers to the \u201cupper and lower body,\u201d stomach, and back below the shoulder blades, among other areas.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe length of a common woman’s shirt is often short enough that stretching or bending would reveal part of her back or stomach,\u201d the lawsuit says.<\/p>\n

The other measure bans \u201can exposure of more than one-half of the part of the female breast located below the top of the areola.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cTo properly enforce the citywide ordinance, a police officer must determine the location of the ‘top of a woman’s areola,’ which can only be seen by exposing the breast,\u201d the complaint says. \u201cThis would subject women to humiliating and offensive searches.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

SEATTLE \u2014 Seven bikini baristas and the owner of a chain of the coffee stands called \u201cHillbilly Hotties\u201d sued the …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":33,"featured_media":117278,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,17],"tags":[23570,23571],"class_list":["post-117271","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-news","category-news-w","tag-bikini-baristas","tag-dress-code-law","mauthors-gene-johnson","mauthors-the-associated-press"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/117271","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/33"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=117271"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/117271\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/117278"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=117271"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=117271"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=117271"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}