Sen. Michaela Cavanaugh's bill (LB1060) would add hair textures and protective hairstyles to the definition of race under the Nebraska Fair Employment Practice Act. 

Protective hairstyles that limit the stress of environmental factors on natural hair include braids, dreadlocks and twists.

Black women have said that in some workplaces, to be accepted, they are expected to wear their hair more like people with naturally straight hair. But getting their hair to look like that involves heat and chemical straightening that can cause damage and health concerns. 

The bill was advanced by the Business and Labor Committee to the full Legislature on a unanimous vote, but at least a couple of committee members said they voted to advance only so it would be debated on the floor. One member, Sen. Ben Hansen, voted no Monday on advancing the bill and two, Sens. Steve Halloran and Julie Slama, were present not voting. 

Natural hairstyles such as Afros and protective styles such as dreadlocks can be looked at with assumptions of unprofessionalism, Cavanaugh said, and not clean-cut like a sleek hairstyle considered to be more Eurocentric and conforming to common beauty standards. 

At the hearing on the bill, a dozen people, some representing such organizations as the ACLU of Nebraska, Women's Fund of Omaha, Omaha NAACP, League of Women Voters and University of Nebraska Department of Black Studies, gave supportive testimony. Seven represented themselves. 

Terri Crawford said when her son applied for a job in Sarpy County he was told he did a good interview and had good credentials, but to continue in the job process he would need to cut his dreadlocks. That was even though there were several white women that had long hair that was pulled back, she said. He was not given the option of pulling his back. 

Morgann Freeman said she had been asked in several jobs to change her natural hair pattern and texture to comply with professional expectations. She has worked in a variety of jobs in which she has faced discrimination and has had to explain her hair pattern, upkeep and style, she said. 

It "creates a work environment where we feel uncomfortable, where we don't feel like we can be our full, complete selves as everyone else around us is," Freeman said. 

During more than 90 minutes of debate, some senators said the bill was not necessary and would put pressure on businesses to do something they didn't want to do. 

Hansen of Blair said that while he can't put himself in someone else's culture, he questioned whether the bill was needed. 

"Right now are we seeing a preponderance of lawsuits or complaints to this state that pertain to a law such as this?" Hansen said. "What kind of Pandora's box are we opening with this bill?"

Would someone of Japanese heritage feel disparaged because they can't wear a kimono to work, he asked. Or someone with a Viking heritage because they can't wear a mohawk? 

Halloran of Hastings said he was not sure how far the law should go with personal characteristics. This may be legitimate, but there could then be never-ending cases of circumstances or characteristics or personal quirks that anyone might have that could cause discrimination. 

Omaha Sen. Megan Hunt said the opponents seemed to be in three camps: Those who do not want to restrict anything private businesses are able to do; those who don't want to expand the list of protected groups; and a third that comes from racism, saying that dreadlocks and natural hairstyle, for instance, are dangerous, unprofessional or unsafe, comparing hairstyles to ratty jeans or flip flops. 

Cavanaugh said she would bring an amendment on second-round debate that would take care of workplace safety concerns regarding hairstyles and ensure the bill does not replace safety guidelines. 

In her closing statement, she said the courts are conflicted on whether anti-discrimination laws protect what are considered to be changeable traits such as hairstyles. 

While some of her colleagues might not think the bill is necessary, she said, she sees women who work in the Capitol and elsewhere who think it's important. 

The bill costs nothing, she said, and would make some feel valued as staff and residents of Nebraska.

"Your lives have not been impacted by this," she told senators. "(But) it is necessary because these women think it is necessary."

The bill advanced on a 26-9 vote, with 10 senators present not voting and four excused.