Do you have a Personal Injury case? Click here to fill out a form to find out more
Call us at 1-888-CALL-SAM or email us

The Bernstein Advantage

Hooters Sued by Server Claiming She Was Put on "Weight Probation"


Nation’s Restaurant News

By Alan J. Liddle
May 25, 2010

ROSEVILLE, Mich. A waitress at a Hooters restaurant here is suing the chain's parent company for discrimination in a flap tied to her allegations that management put her on “weight probation” because of the fit of her uniform.

Attorneys for waitress Cassandra Marie Smith, 20, filed a complaint Monday in the Circuit Court for Macomb County, Mich., against Hooters of America Inc., alleging the violation of Michigan discrimination prohibitions and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The suit names as defendants Atlanta-based Hooters of America, operator or franchisor of about 455 casual-dining restaurants, and its subsidiary Hooters of Roseville Inc.

Hooters of America said it could not comment about the specifics of the lawsuit stemming from its company-store operation because it had not yet been served with the complaint. However, the company said in a statement that "no employee in Michigan has been asked to lose weight and that the company does not enforce any weight requirement."

Smith’s lawsuit contends that restaurant and chain managers have “constructively discharged” the woman, or put her in employment limbo where she is not working but has not been fired, “because she was unable to meet Hooters’ discriminatory and illegal requirements of a ‘Hooters Girl.” It further alleges that the defendants told Smith's co-workers and others that she was on weight probation, thereby making the Roseville restaurant an "intensely humiliating,” “deeply offensive” and an “untenable environment” for the young waitress.

Sources at the Sam Bernstein Law Firm, one of three sets of attorneys representing Smith, said the woman had an exemplary performance record as a two-year employee of the restaurant and was made a shift leader prior to being told May 14 that her job was in jeopardy because of the fit of her uniform. Among other allegations, Smith’s suit accuses the defendants of violating Michigan’s unique Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act, which bars employers from discriminating on the basis of weight and height.

The suit alleges that during a May 14 job performance evaluation Smith was “admonished, disciplined and counseled” by store managers and representatives of Hooters of America’s human resources department, and that at the end of the session she was required to acknowledge in writing that she was on 30-day weight probation.

Smith’s weight “is within the medically acceptable range” for a person of her height and age, and she was more than 12 pounds lighter on the day she alleges she was put on weight probation than on the day she was hired, the lawsuit indicates.

Mike McNeil, vice president of marketing for Hooters of America, said the company was “perplexed” by Smith’s story, as it has heard it, and that it hopes to “begin to get some clarity on the matter in the near future.”

“We have heard and read that Miss Smith claims she was put on ‘weight probation,’ while in other articles admitting she was not asked to lose weight and that she actually weighs 10 pounds less than she did when she was hired,” McNeil said. “She has stated that she is still employed but she has missed all of her scheduled shifts for the past week. We are now seeing that she claims she was ‘discharged,’ however no such action has been taken by Hooters.”

Hooters officials said the chain has never been sued for weight discrimination and added that it “welcomes the opportunity to defend ourselves against these baseless and self-serving charges.”

Smith’s complaint seeks lost wages and damages for emotional distress, as well as exemplary damages and other relief the court deems appropriate in an amount exceeding of $25,000.

TopGet Help Now

no fee guarantee

Our Clients:

"The Bernstein family of lawyers . . . I trust them, I believe in them, and you can too."
"You can really talk to the Bernstein family of lawyers. They are good people you can trust."
"The Bernsteins took care of me and my family. The Bernstein Law Firm put me first. The Bernsteins are great lawyers."
"If you need legal help, then you need to call the Bernsteins - the Bernstein Law Firm."
"The Bernstein Law Firm worked tirelessly to get me the compensation I deserved."
"I wanted to put the history and experience of three generation of Bernstein lawyers to work for me. And it worked."
"The Bernstein family treated me like I was family. Fighting for me. The Bernstein Law Firm was with me every step of the way."
"The Bernstein Law Firm fought for me and got me results."
"I called the Law Offices of Sam Bernstein. It was the best call I ever made."
"Sam Bernstein fought for my rights, stayed with it, and never quit."
"Sam's office did what they said they would do."
"I knew I needed help in the fight. I knew I shouldn’t do this on my own. I Called Sam. Sam fought for me and got results."
"I talked to Sam personally about my case…Sam Bernstein's office does it right."
"When I got hurt…I knew I needed a well-established law firm with substantial resources and experience."
"After my auto accident…I didn't really know what to do…I Called Sam. I'm glad I did."
"I Called Sam Bernstein. I needed a strong, trustworthy firm with a national reputation."
"After my son's fatal accident…I called his office. His office visited me at home and answered all of my questions. His firm is protecting my legal rights."
"I didn't know where to turn until I called Sam. Sam's office went right to work for me…I would strongly recommend Sam Bernstein."
"These are good people, working hard, to help those who need support through tough times. I am proud to know the Bernstein's and call them my friends."
"It was me against a large corporation. I knew I needed a tough smart attorney fighting for me. I'm glad I called Sam."
[read more]

Our Results:

Car/Truck Accident
$3,000,000
A truck driving recklessly and at an excessive speed strikes our client. Our client suffered catastrophic injuries.
Medical Malpractice
$2,875,000
Medical malpractice involving general anesthetic of a young child during surgery. Our client suffered severe and permanent brain damage.
Car Accident
$2,700,000
Our client's vehicle was rear-ended by a bus. Our client suffered a Closed Head Injury (CHI), coma condition, internal bleeding, and spinal trauma.
Burn Injury
$2,200,000
An explosion occurred while pumping gas. The explosion was caused by the gas station. Our client suffered major burns.
Burn Injury
$2,150,000
Our client, a young girl, suffered electrical burns resulting in permanent scarring.
Car Accident
$2,000,000
Our client died as a result of multiple injuries caused by a car accident.
Car/Truck Accident
$3,000,000
A truck driving recklessly and at an excessive speed strikes our client. Our client suffered catastrophic injuries.
Medical Malpractice
$2,875,000
Medical malpractice involving general anesthetic of a young child during surgery. Our client suffered severe and permanent brain damage.
Car Accident
$2,700,000
Our client's vehicle was rear-ended by a bus. Our client suffered a Closed Head Injury (CHI), coma condition, internal bleeding, and spinal trauma.
Burn Injury
$2,200,000
An explosion occurred while pumping gas. The explosion was caused by the gas station. Our client suffered major burns.
Burn Injury
$2,150,000
Our client, a young girl, suffered electrical burns resulting in permanent scarring.
Car Accident
$2,000,000
Our client died as a result of multiple injuries caused by a car accident.
[read more]
Get Help Now
.