I'm not mistaken at all. Your example does not reflect the situation that Pac encountered. Your example has a standard that is known prior to accepting employment AND the standard is stated for all to apply. If some people were allowed to have tats and piercings and your were not, you would have grounds for unfair labor practice IF you could prove the policy was not equally applied. Additionally, the burden to convince a judge and/or jury would be on you if you were the plaintiff complaining against your employer. Few people will dispute that the suspension Pac received was excessive and unprecedented. (I'm not saying undeserved) In the prior post, I've stated that although Pac has grounds for a suit based on excessive punishment and arbitrary standards, there is no way in hell he could convince a jury that he is credible. The defense would destroy him before the case went 30 minutes into it. Plus, he already accepted/acknowledged his punishment as fair by withdrawing his appeal. I'm not a Pac apologist. It's important to clarify issues that are incorrectly represented.