martillo@mit-athena.ARPA (Joaquim Martillo) (09/17/84)
Probably this company which did not permit women to wear pants at work also did not permit men to wear dresses at work.
dubois@uwmacc.UUCP (Paul DuBois) (09/18/84)
> Personally, I think that only dress codes which mandate ungendered neatness > and professionalism should be legal. Here in Wisconsin, shoes are required in all state buildings - the reason, I believe is health-related. I confess this is a little vague, but the point is that some dress code requirements may proceed on a basis other than that of mandating appearance. P.S. I've seen plenty of people barefoot in state buildings here. But the official position is that they're required. I suppose someone got athlete's foot or stepped on a piece of a broken coffee cup or something. -- Paul DuBois {allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois "Make me to go in the path of thy commandments; for therein do I delight." Psalm 119:35
hawk@oliven.UUCP (Rick) (09/18/84)
If men are required to wear three piece suits, it's reasonable to require women to wear dresses. [Or perhaps a choice between dresses and the three-piecer :-)] If the dress code for men simply says well dressed or is not specific, then no, it's not reasonable to make this requirement. rick -- [hplabs|zehntel|fortune|ios|tolerant|allegra|tymix]!oliveb!oliven!hawk
alan@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Alan Algustyniak) (09/18/84)
>...a woman was just hired for a secretarial >position ... She found ...that women are >required to wear dresses... >She did not learn of this requirement until her first day on the >job, when her boss saw her wearing pants. > >As far as I know, there was no special dress code for men, but there might >have been. Oh? What do you think might have happened if one of the men tried wearing a dress? I suggest that he would have found that men are required to wear pants. sdcrdcf!alan P.S. I can't think of any instance in which preventing female employees from wearing a pants suit in lieu of a dress makes any sense at all, except for lecherous reasons..
ron@brl-tgr.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) (09/20/84)
Yes, I would suspect that the shoe requirement is for the same reason there was one where I used to work. The liability insurance required it. -Ron
mab@ttidca.UUCP (Michael A. Bloom) (09/30/84)
> Probably this company which did not permit women to wear pants at work > also did not permit men to wear dresses at work. At least one other response answered this in a similar manner. It seems to me that women wearing pants suits to work is not analogous (as implied) to men wearing dresses to work. If a man were to wear a dress to work, it would at the very least seem unbusiness-like. Not so for a woman wearing a pants suit. In fact, I feel that a pants-suit is more appropriate in a business environment than a dress. If there is to be a dress code at a place of work, it is better to choose attire that emphasizes professionalism than attire that emphasizes gender. The old adage "clothes makes the (wo)man" may also be pertinent here. Choosing the form of the individuals whose responses brought up the idea of "men wearing dresses at work": Assume for the purposes of the following question that the world was set up so that wearing gym clothes in the office was not uncommon for men, and women customarily wore pants suits. Suppose you were hired by a company where it was *required* that men at desk jobs wear gym clothing.... (because it is society's norm, of course) and you prefer to wear a suit. But you end up wearing what your company requires. How professional would you feel at that job? Care to guess at your chances for advancement? I do admit to some exaggeration, but isn't that what is needed in response? -- Michael A. Bloom (TTI, Santa Monica) {cadovax,flick,philabs,randvax,trwrb,vortex,wtux2}!ttidca!mab or ttidca!mab@RAND-UNIX.ARPA
mark@uf-csg.UUCP (mark fishman [fac]) (10/12/84)
<>
My personal opinion is that a preoccupation with attire over substance
reflects an atavistic, anal-retentive stage in human development that
ill-befits our emergence from the cave.
Anyone who actually credits that "clothes make the man (or the woman)"
ought probably to be wearing some pieced together from Mastodon hides.
(..flame off....but I'm building a fire to ward off the prehominids
wielding Brooks Brothers clubs)