Can I Be Fired For My Dress Code At Work In California?

A 2025 guide for Southern California employees from Fraigun Law Group, serving Los Angeles, Ventura, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Santa Barbara, Kern, and Imperial Counties.

You put on what feels right for the job and for who you are. Then a supervisor pulls you aside about your hair. Or your headscarf. Or the shoes they want you to buy. Or the way your shirt fits. Suddenly you are wondering a simple but stressful question: can I be fired for what I wear at work in California?

Short answer: employers can have reasonable dress and grooming standards. Long answer: California gives you some of the strongest civil rights protections in the country, and many dress code rules cross legal lines, especially when they conflict with race, religion, gender identity or expression, disability, or when the employer makes you pay for uniforms or required items. Below, we explain what California law says in 2025, how recent cases and headlines fit in, and practical steps you can take if you were disciplined, sent home, or fired over appearance.

What counts as a “dress code,” and when is it legal?

California employers generally may set reasonable standards for appearance that are tied to business needs or safety. That could mean rules about neatness, closed-toe shoes around machinery, or a “professional attire” guideline in client-facing roles. But even a neutral policy must be enforced in a non-discriminatory way, and it must bend when the law requires accommodation. The California Civil Rights Department (CRD) is explicit that if an employer imposes a dress code, each employee must be allowed to dress in accordance with their gender identity and gender expression, and the policy must be enforced fairly. Key carve-outs where California law protects you:

• Race and hair
  California’s CROWN Act prohibits discrimination based on traits associated with race, including hair texture and protective hairstyles like braids, locs, and twists. In 2024, AB 1815 clarified and expanded how “race” is defined across California’s civil rights laws, effective January 1, 2025. This reinforced that policies targeting natural or protective hairstyles can violate state law. 

• Gender identity and expression
  Dress codes must allow you to dress consistent with your gender identity and expression and be enforced even-handedly. California’s official CRD guidance states this plainly.
  
• Religion
  California requires reasonable accommodation of religious dress and grooming practices except where the employer proves significant difficulty or expense. That includes items like hijabs, turbans, yarmulkes, religious jewelry, and beards. State law has long recognized these rights under FEHA and AB 1964. At the federal level, the U.S. Supreme Court’s EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch decision confirmed that employers violate Title VII when they make an employment decision to avoid accommodating religious dress. In 2023, Groff v. DeJoy raised the federal bar for claiming “undue hardship,” requiring employers to show a substantial increased cost to deny religious accommodations. California’s standard is at least as protective.
  
• Disability
  FEHA and the ADA require employers to reasonably accommodate disabilities, which can include adjustments to uniforms or footwear, unless doing so would pose an undue hardship. The CRD provides accommodation guidance and tools for the interactive process.
  
• Uniforms and who pays
  If your employer requires a uniform of distinctive design or color, California law says the employer must pay for it and for required maintenance. Generic wardrobe items that are “generally usable” in the occupation are different. Courts have held, for example, that slip-resistant shoes that are not part of a distinctive uniform typically do not require reimbursement. Employers also must reimburse necessary business expenses under Labor Code section 2802. 

What changed recently? Headlines that matter in California

Hair and identity at work
In 2025, a former In-N-Out worker in Los Angeles County sued, alleging he was harassed and then fired over braids and sideburns, arguing the company’s grooming rules violated the CROWN Act. The case is pending, but it underscores how appearance rules that target race-linked traits invite legal risk in California.

Who pays for the new uniform?
In September 2025, Starbucks workers filed lawsuits over a new dress code, alleging the company failed to reimburse required attire. California employees raised similar concerns. Whether a specific outfit is a reimbursable “uniform” depends on how specific and distinctive the requirements are, but the legal issue is very active. 

Religious accommodations get stronger nationally
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Groff v. DeJoy clarified that to deny a religious accommodation, an employer must show a substantial increased cost in the overall context of its business. California already uses a similarly demanding standard for religious accommodations under FEHA. 

“Can I be fired for my hair in California?”

If your hair texture or protective style is tied to race, California law protects you. That means grooming rules that ban braids, locs, twists, afros, or other protected styles can be unlawful when they result in discrimination. The 2019 CROWN Act established these protections and AB 1815 clarified and extended definitions effective January 1, 2025. If you were disciplined or sent home because of your natural hair or protective style, talk to a lawyer promptly and document everything. 

“Can my boss forbid me from wearing pants?”

No. California Government Code section 12947.5 makes it an unlawful employment practice to refuse to let an employee wear pants because of the employee’s sex. If your employer has a rule that effectively says “women must wear skirts,” that is unlawful under California law. 

“Can my employer tell me how to dress if I am transgender or nonbinary?”

Employers may set neutral standards, but they must allow you to dress in a way that aligns with your gender identity and gender expression, and they must enforce the policy in a non-discriminatory way. This is not optional. California’s CRD has issued clear guidance on these rights. If you are being singled out or told to dress “as your sex at birth,” that raises legal concerns.

“Can I be required to remove or alter religious dress or grooming?”

Generally no, unless the employer shows a legally sufficient undue hardship. In California, employers must reasonably accommodate religious dress and grooming practices and cannot respond by sidelining you away from the public as a supposed “accommodation.” Federally, Abercrombie held that employers cannot base hiring or firing decisions on a desire to avoid accommodating religion, and Groff now requires a showing of substantial increased cost to deny accommodation. 

“Can I be made to pay for required work clothes?”

If your employer requires a distinctive uniform or a logoed outfit, they have to cover the cost and maintenance under California law. If the rule is just “black pants and a white shirt,” and those items are commonly usable outside the job, reimbursement typically is not required. When in doubt, look at how specific and distinctive the requirement is, and keep receipts if you had to buy items. California’s wage orders and DLSE guidance treat truly distinctive uniforms differently from general wardrobe. Recent lawsuits over dress code changes highlight how quickly this can become a legal issue. 

“What about tattoos, piercings, or hair color?”

Appearance policies can regulate tattoos or piercings if they are neutral and applied evenly. But a rule that conflicts with sincere religious practice, targets traits linked to race, or is used to police gender expression crosses legal lines and must be modified or accommodated. California’s CRD guidance on non-discriminatory enforcement applies here too. 

“My employer has gender-specific rules. Is that allowed?”

Courts have sometimes allowed different grooming rules for men and women when they do not impose a heavier burden on one sex. The Ninth Circuit’s Jespersen v. Harrah’s case is often cited, but it also teaches that policies rooted in sex stereotypes are risky, and employees can prevail if they show unequal burdens. Many California employers now avoid gender-specific dress rules and write gender-neutral standards to reduce legal risk.

“Safety or business necessity vs. my rights”

Personal protective equipment and genuine safety needs can justify limits on clothing or accessories. But even safety-based policies must be applied fairly and must accommodate religion or disability where possible. If a safer alternative allows you to comply with your faith or disability-related needs, California law expects an interactive process to find that solution.

“If I was written up or fired over dress code, what should I do?”

1. Save the paper trail
   Keep the written policy, any emails or texts, and notes of conversations. If others are allowed to break the rule without punishment, write down names, dates, and examples. This kind of “comparator” evidence can matter.
   
2. Ask for accommodation in writing when applicable
   If the issue is related to religion, disability, or gender identity or expression, put a clear accommodation request in writing and propose workable options. California’s CRD publishes tools to help employees and employers engage in the interactive process. 
3. Do not buy expensive items before you know who pays
   If you are told to purchase specific attire, ask whether it is a distinctive uniform the employer must provide or reimburse. Save receipts. California requires reimbursement of necessary business expenses. 
4. Note deadlines
   To pursue a claim under California’s FEHA, you generally must submit an intake form to the CRD within three years of the last discriminatory act. If you choose to sue in court, you must first obtain a Right-to-Sue notice from the CRD, then you typically have one year to file. Federal EEOC deadlines are different.
   
5. Get legal advice early
   Dress code cases are fact-specific. The same rule can be legal in one workplace and illegal in another depending on how it is written, applied, and whether accommodation is possible.
   

Real-world examples that map to California law

• Braids, locs, or twists
  You receive a warning to “cut or change” your protective style to comply with a “neat hair” policy. Because the CROWN Act protects race-related traits and AB 1815 clarified the definitions in 2025, this policy may be unlawful as applied. Document the warning, keep screenshots of the policy language, and contact counsel.
  
• New, specific outfit required and no reimbursement
  The employer suddenly requires solid black shirts, specific pants, and special footwear. Whether this is a reimbursable uniform depends on how distinctive the requirements are. Lawsuits against large retailers and restaurants show how contested these expenses can become. Ask about reimbursement under Labor Code section 2802 and save receipts.
  
• Headscarf, turban, or beard for religious reasons
  You are told to remove or alter religious dress for “brand” reasons. California law requires reasonable accommodation. The Abercrombie case confirms that avoiding accommodation is not a lawful basis for an employment decision, and Groff raised the federal threshold for employers claiming undue hardship.
• Gendered uniform list
  A policy states that “women must wear makeup and skirts” while men must keep hair short. California prohibits bans on pants based on sex, and gender-specific rules that place heavier burdens on one group are vulnerable. Employers are expected to enforce dress codes without discriminating based on gender identity or expression.
  

What about truly neutral rules?

Say your employer requires plain, non-logo black pants and closed-toe shoes for everyone in a warehouse. That is likely legal. If they require a branded jacket in a distinctive color, they generally must provide it or pay for it. If a neutral rule collides with religion or disability, California law expects an accommodation unless the employer shows significant difficulty or expense.

How Fraigun Law Group can help

Fraigun Law Group represents employees across Southern California who were disciplined, sent home, or terminated because of appearance or dress rules. We listen to your story, compare it to California’s current law, and build a practical strategy. That might be a focused letter seeking accommodation and back pay for time you were sent home, a demand for uniform reimbursement with supporting receipts, or a discrimination claim where your employer enforced a dress code to police your race, religion, gender identity or expression, or disability.

If you are in Los Angeles, Ventura, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Santa Barbara, Kern, or Imperial County and you are asking yourself “can I be fired for my dress code at work in California,” reach out. The conversation is confidential, and time limits apply.

Quick Terms to Know

• CROWN Act
  California law that bans discrimination based on traits associated with race, including natural hair texture and protective hairstyles. Clarified by AB 1815, effective January 1, 2025. 
• Reasonable accommodation
  A change to a rule or practice that allows you to work consistent with your religion, disability, or gender identity or expression, unless the employer shows legally recognized undue hardship. California’s CRD publishes guidance on this process. 
• Uniform vs. general clothing
  Distinctive design or color that identifies the employer is a uniform the employer must provide or pay for. General items like plain black pants usually are not. Facts matter.

You can be fired for violating a lawful dress code in California, but many dress codes are not lawful as written or as enforced. When a policy targets protected traits, refuses reasonable accommodations, or makes you pay for distinctive uniforms, California law is on your side. If this is happening to you in Southern California, Fraigun Law Group is here to help you sort the rules from your employer’s overreach and pursue the relief you deserve.