Do religious protections extend to grooming habits? (Photo: Associated Press)

Plaintiff: The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has filed an anti-discrimination suit in U.S. District Court on behalf of Christopher Woodson: Virginia man, professional mover, and practicing Rastafarian since 2004.

"Rastafarians do not cut their hair based on their sincerely held religious belief that they should grow their hair in an unbridled or dreadlocked fashion in order to be one with nature," the EEOC complaint reads. And so, "Woodson has worn his hair and beard in the dreadlock hairstyle from 2004 to the present."

Defendant: Lawrence Transportation Systems, a Virginia-based moving company, which the EEOC claims discriminated against Woodson on the basis of his hairstyle, and hence, his beliefs.

The claim: According to court documents, Lawrence Transportation System holds an employee grooming policy "that requires hair, facial hair, beards and general grooming to be 'neat, clean and trimmed,'" and otherwise very much non-Rasta.

In May of 2008, the complaint alleges, Woodson applied at Lawrence's Waynesboro, Va. location "for a vacant loader position." Woodson came to the job opening with 14 years experience—in fact, prior to his 2004 Rastafarian conversion, Woodson had worked the same job for Lawrence for several years before "voluntarily leaving" the company. Lawrence was allegedly interested in rehiring Woodson, under the condition that he "cut his hair."

Bad haircut: Woodson refused. Presented with the demand that he shear, Woodson instead "offered to tie his hair up, wear a head wrap or wear a cap over his head." Obscuring the hair growth wasn't good enough for Lawrence Transportation, which refused to hire a full-maned Woodson.

At length: Lawrence Transportation, under representation by Spilman Thomas and Battle, released a statement yesterday essentially confirming Woodson's account of the events—but denying the religious discrimination.

"Lawrence Transportation did not hire Mr. Woodson because he would not comply with our personal appearance policy," the statement reads. According to Lawrence Transportation, employees are required to have "close personal contact" with customers, and non-standard hairstyles could affect Lawrence's ability to "provide the service expected by" these people.

"[Woodson's] hair was down to the middle of his back and he was asked to get it cut to about shirt collar length," the statement contines. "He refused to comply with this neutral policy."

What price, victory: The EEOC would like to see Woodson awarded back pay (with interest), punitive damages, legal fees, and a position with Lawrence Transportation as a loader—hair intact.