How do you all react to this story?

What should you do when your employee is *too attractive"? 

What do you think of the case/ruling? What would you do if you were in the woman's situation? In the man's situation?

Based on the video I don't consider the woman in question particularly attractive. But I do know what it is being seriously attracted to and tempted to "behave inappropriately" with a co-worker. Though I'm not completely dead when I have a student worker who is attractive, I feel far too old to be tempted to do anything in that respect, and my negativity toward my job makes that even more unlikely. But I'm not going to moralize about married men who shouldn't have their thoughts stray, since I'm going to enjoy a nice pair of legs, etc. whenever the opportunity presents itself.

---

I seen this the other day... without knowing all the case history, it seems weak on the surface in the court of law.

Basic premise, it is illegal to discriminate on ethic background or sexual orientation, but Iowa now is splitting the hairs based on looks?

I read about he "low cut" top and other accusations, but after her long tenure of employment it seems that behavior would have been more prevalent earlier than now.

Me thinks it was the wife's insecurities that prompted the termination.. unjustly in my opinion. And the fine state of corn upheld it.

What next.. incorrect eye color? Shade of hair?

---

Well, it's common knowledge that attractive people have gotten a lot of jobs over better qualified unattractive people. The only person looking like a douche' is the dentist. Something tells me there's a little more to this than the overview in the article.

---

I think the business size is a huge factor in this case. If it was a company of a 1000, where she could be assigned to another dentist. But in a small business there may not have been another position for her (some pun intended). In a business, if there is a conflict or potential conflict between two workers, and it cannot be resolved, and they cannot be split apart, one of them will be let go. In this case, the boss cannot very well let himself go.

---

It's bullshit, essentially.

Wow.

---

For some reason I just thought of the dentist in the original MASH movie.

---

I did not see where they talked about low cut clothing on her part but I certainly would not hire a woman who dressed provocatively.

I can agree with the courts. It may have ended up in the IA Supreme Court but it had to start in the regular state court and went to the Appellate court before hand. Every decision would have been the same. This is not a case of illegal discrimination. (Everyone discriminates every day. When you choose a blue shirt instead of a red one. Drink a latte instead of a reg coffee, that is discrimination. It is acceptable.) You can discriminate by hiring a working mom instead of a single, tattooed, pierced 20 year old. you can terminate her based on her looks as well.

---

I hope this dentist loses his business. Lame.

---

Total bullshit!