Oh No! Stunning London TV Worker Sacked for Allegedly Being Too Pretty (Photos)

A television personality in Europe has reportedly lost her job for being too good looking, according to her claims.

                                                 The sacked TV worker, Emma Hulse
 A London TV laborer claims she was expelled from her occupation at a Soho generation organization for being "too gorgeous".

Emma Hulse says she was sent home from her outsourcing shift at the focal London TV organization by an administrator who advised her: "You ought to be on a catwalk".

The 24-year-old, who lives in Mayfair, said she was just five minutes into her eight-hour move when her manager advised her to clear out.

Organization UNIT TV, in view of Great Marlborough Street, acknowledged the occurrence happened and have since expelled the worker who was professedly included, who had just been working there for three months.

 Ms Hulse told the Standard: "We should complete at 6pm and I arrived for 9.30am and when I arrived this other runner began disclosing to me what I ought to do.

"At that point they send me on a run. At that point my specialist content me that I'm did not require anymore.

"I arrived and addressed the line administrator and he asked me, 'would you say you are a model? Is it accurate to say that you are not doing catwalks, why are you not at the front of house?'

"I was wearing a lipstick however from my viewpoint I was not improper. I was wearing a shirt and pants. I truly didn't think I looked wrong.

"At that point he took my number, he recommended we go for a drink."

She included: "I was very baffled to be sent home. I didn't generally comprehend what to do.

"Perhaps that organization utilizes plain looking individuals and possibly on the off chance that you don't look that way they don't take you, possibly I was a diversion.

"I do camera working too, I work for a wide range of organizations and nobody has sent me home in light of the way I look. Particularly inside an innovative organization you ought to be allowed to wear what you need."

 Adam Luckwell, proprietor of the organization, told the Standard the worker who was supposedly included was rejected toward the finish of a three month probation period.

"We found there were various things we were not content with," Mr Luckwell said. "We chose not to proceed with the business and ended the agreement inside three months. We felt he was an awful fit for us and a portion of the things he was doing was not in accordance with the organization's arrangement".