Abercrombie & Fitch has experienced some recent bad press with its statements about how only attractive and rich people should be allowed to wear its clothes; and now its popular brand Hollister has just been found guilty of discrimination against those with disabilities in a case that began four years ago in Colorado. It has not been a good month for the company.
The original complaint was filed against two Hollister stores in Colorado from disabled customers accusing the clothing shops of being unfriendly to those in wheelchairs. One patron explained how he had difficulties getting into the store, but finally managed. However, once inside he could not maneuver his chair throughout the store because the merchandise was placed too close together.
Another plaintiff describes how she feels discriminated against in her Hollister store and her disability is much more prevalent than in others places because she requires help to shop.
A third customer complained about the steps that the store had at its entrance. Hollister wants to present an appearance of a southern California beach house, with a raised patio and shuttered windows. Because of this, it was impossible for disabled people to enter the store without help.
After the initial complaints, investigators found that numerous stores across the country violated the same Americans with Disabilities Act regulations and the lawsuit grew. In 2012, the case was granted a class action certification and then targeted all 248 Hollister stores.
Once Hollister got wind of the allegations, the company argued that its stores welcome all people, including those with disabilities. And despite the shops all having stairs at the entrance, those in wheelchairs can still enter the store via a side door. However, the doors were hidden and often times blocked by tables of merchandise.
One plaintiff simply refused to enter the side door and was philosophically opposed to it. The doors are made to look like shutters and she felt that visually it was a way of keeping out the €riffraff.€
The outcome of the case was surprising to the company. It still maintains as it did throughout the trial that the stores all follow the rules of the ADA; however, the court disagreed. The court felt that the stores were built well after the passing of the ADA and therefore it seems that Abercrombie & Fitch purposefully designed its entrances this way.
Based on the current drama that circles the company it is plausible that the company did do this on purpose. The brand wants its style to be utilized only by the rich and thin; however, to be successful, it will still need the patronage of the middle-class average-looking people. This case demonstrates how the store may want to keep disabled people out as it would not benefit the image of the brand.
The original complaint was filed against two Hollister stores in Colorado from disabled customers accusing the clothing shops of being unfriendly to those in wheelchairs. One patron explained how he had difficulties getting into the store, but finally managed. However, once inside he could not maneuver his chair throughout the store because the merchandise was placed too close together.
Another plaintiff describes how she feels discriminated against in her Hollister store and her disability is much more prevalent than in others places because she requires help to shop.
A third customer complained about the steps that the store had at its entrance. Hollister wants to present an appearance of a southern California beach house, with a raised patio and shuttered windows. Because of this, it was impossible for disabled people to enter the store without help.
After the initial complaints, investigators found that numerous stores across the country violated the same Americans with Disabilities Act regulations and the lawsuit grew. In 2012, the case was granted a class action certification and then targeted all 248 Hollister stores.
Once Hollister got wind of the allegations, the company argued that its stores welcome all people, including those with disabilities. And despite the shops all having stairs at the entrance, those in wheelchairs can still enter the store via a side door. However, the doors were hidden and often times blocked by tables of merchandise.
One plaintiff simply refused to enter the side door and was philosophically opposed to it. The doors are made to look like shutters and she felt that visually it was a way of keeping out the €riffraff.€
The outcome of the case was surprising to the company. It still maintains as it did throughout the trial that the stores all follow the rules of the ADA; however, the court disagreed. The court felt that the stores were built well after the passing of the ADA and therefore it seems that Abercrombie & Fitch purposefully designed its entrances this way.
Based on the current drama that circles the company it is plausible that the company did do this on purpose. The brand wants its style to be utilized only by the rich and thin; however, to be successful, it will still need the patronage of the middle-class average-looking people. This case demonstrates how the store may want to keep disabled people out as it would not benefit the image of the brand.
SHARE
