true false

Sue Ann Nivens owned a Temporary Worker Agency in Tyler, TX. She sent employees to companies who needed temporary workers to fill in while their permanent workers were on vacation or leave. Sue Ann noticed that many of her employees that were filling in at professional offices such as accountants, lawyers or doctor's offices were showing visible tattoos on their arms, legs and necks. Sue Ann was worried that she would start losing business because of the tats. She institutes a new appearance requirement, requiring all tats to be covered up by clothing. Mary Richards, a heavily tatted employee, objects to the new policy. Mary sued Sue Ann for gender discrimination under Title VII. Mary claims the "no tat" rule was only instituted when she was hired even though several male employees had visible tats. Sue Ann denied gender discrimination. Sue Ann is correctthe policy does notdiscriminate on the basis of gender.