CMS is a claims processing company in Mobile, Alabama. Chastity Jones, a black woman, completed an online employment application for a customer service position with CMS. Jones interviewed with a company representative and was hired immediately afterward. Following the interview, Jones met with CMS’s human resources manager Jeannie Wilson. Wilson noticed that Jones had dreadlocks and informed her that she could not hire Jones with her hair in dreadlocks. At the time, CMS had a race-neutral grooming policy which read as follows: “All personnel are expected to be dressed and groomed in a manner that projects a professional and businesslike image while adhering to company and industry standards and/or guidelines. Hairstyle should reflect a business/professional image. No excessive hairstyles or unusual colors are acceptable. When Jones said that she would not cut her hair, Wilson told her that CMS could not hire her, and asked her to return the paperwork she had been given. Jones did as requested and left. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed suit on Jones’s behalf, alleging discrimination on the basis of race. The court ruled in favor of CMS, holding that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on immutable traits and that dreadlocks, though culturally associated with race, are not an immutable characteristic of black persons. What do you think of the court’s reasoning? As our country and workplaces become more multicultural, what ethical considerations must firms account for in their policies and hiring practices?