In
employment discrimination law in the United States, both
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the
Age Discrimination in Employment Act contain a BFOQ defense. The BFOQ provision of Title VII provides that:
United States Code Title 29 (Labor), Chapter 14 (age discrimination in employment), section 623 (prohibition of age discrimination) establishes that One example of
bona fide occupational qualifications are
mandatory retirement ages for
bus drivers and
airline pilots, for safety reasons. Further, in advertising, a manufacturer of men's clothing may lawfully advertise for male models. Religious belief may also be considered a BFOQ; for example, a
religious school may lawfully require that members of its
faculty be members of that denomination, and may lawfully bar from employment anyone who is not a member. Fire departments can require firefighters to be able to lift a given weight to demonstrate that they will be able to carry fire victims out of a burning building. Most
militaries around the world have a weight and personal fitness standard to help make sure troops are able to carry physically demanding missions. While religion, sex, or national origin may be considered a
bona fide occupational qualification in narrow contexts, race can never be a BFOQ. However, the First Amendment will override Title VII in artistic works where the race of the employee is integral to the story or artistic purpose. A good example would be if there was a biographical film of
Martin Luther King Jr., it would be integral that the lead actor must be an
African American male. (This consideration is not limited to race.)
Bona fide occupational qualifications generally only apply to instances in which the BFOQ is considered reasonably necessary to the normal operation of a particular business. For example, a
Catholic college may lawfully require such positions as president, chaplain, and teaching faculty to be Catholics, but membership in the Catholic Church would generally not be considered a BFOQ for occupations such as secretarial and janitorial positions. Mere
customer satisfaction, or lack thereof, is not enough to justify a BFOQ defense, as noted in the cases
Diaz v. Pan Am. World Airways, Inc. and
Wilson v. Southwest Airlines Co. Therefore, customer preference for females does not make femininity a BFOQ for the occupation of
flight attendant. However, there may be cases in which customer preference is a BFOQ – for example, femininity is reasonably necessary for
Playboy Bunnies. Several
breastaurants like
Hooters have also used such requirements of femininity and female sex appeal under a BFOQ defense. Customer preference can "'be taken into account only when it is based on the company's inability to perform the primary function or service it offers,' that is, where sex or sex appeal is itself the dominant service provided." While certain other laws don't contain a BFOQ defense, the general import of such a defense is often recognized. For example, the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) does not contain a BFOQ defense; nonetheless, according to the
United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, "an employer may defend the use of a qualification standard that screens out an individual on the basis of disability by showing that the standard is job related and consistent with business necessity." == United Kingdom ==