meow85 said:

quit being thick headed.

yes, i do...i get extremely annoyed by some wait staff if they look dumpy or try to interject their douchy personality/trends into their looks.
I get super annoyed when people wear ill fitting linty faded black dress pants and 10 year old black shoes with curled up toes. Or women who wear faded black stirrup pants showing off their flat saggy buttocks while im trying to eat.
It may be black but it certainly exudes their personality and what is acceptable to them. When the place allows crap like that to happen then it shows me that their attention to detail is lacking and they really dont care about the consumer experience.
Or if guys wears the company button up/polo 10 times too big and have it all puffed up around their sagging kakis. Their hats cocked to the side. Their aprons hanging off their neck to the floor.
Its sass. Its says FUCK YOU! to the customer.
Yes it is a show, one that somebody pays for.

NDRU said:

If people are scared of a little nose ring, I'm amazed they can even leave their houses in the morning. Things like that are pretty prevalent now. Like I said, the number of people my age who don't have something so-called different about their appearance I can count on one hand. Practically everybody I know has a tongue stud or arm tattoo or ear plugs. It's gotten to the point that I'm actually surprised when I see someone with no modifications of any kind.


Your movie theatre uniforms sound so unfortunate though. It's a shame more companies don't realize that bad uniforms actually are a contributing factor to high turnover rates. But God forbid they actually pay attention to what staff are saying. Why bother trying what might work when you can do what you've always done, I guess. Nevermind it's less costly to hire and then maintain a regular staff instead of having to do hiring cycles every few months. You'd think the cost of re-hiring and training alone would be enough to convince them to pay attention to the people who do the direct work (customer interaction) for a company. The uniforms at my theatre aren't so bad, consisting of a black and blue t-shirt style shirt, and baseball caps for those who work with food. And for some reason, our shoes have to be black.

NDRU said:

Employee identification is perfectly reasonable, but what's the point beyond that? Why should it matter so much that strict guidelines are set? Customers do not care what sort of shoes their waitress wears, so why does the boss?

meow85 said:

I CARE

paintedlady said:

I think it should be enough for retail staff to wear clothing that looks like it came from the store, supplemented by some actual product, and just not wear logos or brand names belonging to a competitor. Either that, or all stores requiring their employees to wear the merchandise should provide reasonable staff discounts or employee incentives. A %10 staff discount doesn't even cover the tax, and that's all many stores give.

I won't name names, but the restaurant in question is no Hooters. It is part of a chain, but it's one that's more upscale. A waitress regaularly working 8 hour shifts in high heels will soon be a crippled waitress. Not only is this rule unnecessary, it's also sadistic IMO.

meow85 said:

I don't think that most customers really care about that stuff, actually. What I mean is if the employees are supposed to wear a black shirt and someone wears a black shirt that says "fuck customers," then you can see why they might add the clause "black shirt with no writing on it."

They don't want to waste the time arguing with someone who says "it was a black shirt, who cares what it says?"

So they set up strict rules so that there's no room to do anything too extreme. It's all arbitrary, of course, but they want to have a certain image, and in this day of extreme fashion, they have to set up some strict guidelines to protect themselves and their images. Your belt isn't hurting their image, no, but THEY have to keep to the rules or it opens up the opportunity for the person wearing the "fuck customers" shirt to say "you let her wear the crazy belt!"

horatio said:

That's not what I'm talking about at all, but thanks for insulting me while you presume.

Everything you mentioned would be considered by all but the most free-wheeling employer as being unkempt and therefore unacceptable. I'm not talking about showing up at work looking like a grub. I said right in my initial post that employees should be neat and clean in appearance, and that that's a perfectly reasonable demand.

I'm asking what difference it makes what colour the staffs' pants are, or why companies think customers are scared off by jewelry, or why certain hair colours are verboten. Is it unhygienic? Does it detract from an employee's work skills or customer service? Does it pose a health or safety hazard? Does it interfere with employee identification or uniform to either customer or employer? Will it actually scare off potential consumers? If none of these can be answered yes to, then isn't the rule arbitrary and shouldn't we be asking why the fuck the company has it in place?

horatio said:

So if you go out to restaurant for dinner tonight, and your waitress has on a pair of clean, tasteful flats, you'll walk out of the restuarant?

Keep in mind, horatio, I'm not talking about issues of cleanliness as you assumed.

NDRU said:

I don't think anyone with anything resembling social skills or sense of reality would wear a shirt that says Fuck Customers and not expect some repurcussions. Something like that obviously would pose a problem for the business, and so it's reasonable. Many dress codes include passages about "no vulgar language or obscene images" -and I agree fully with it, because it can hurt the business.

meow85 said:

I do think that in this day & age, people should be able to have green hair & nose rings as long as they're wearing the uniform. I don't think that would be an issue here.

And yes, I wore the worst uniform ever! My god they weren't only ugly, they were old & worn out! My crotch had patches in it.

meow85 said:

right, I only use that as an extreme example. I'm curious, what were the earrings that they said were inappropriate?

Also, if it's not in the dress code, then can they really enforce it?
[Edited 1/13/09 10:04am]

meow85 said:

yes jewlery can scare off people. fashion and individualism as a whole is a requires a certain amount of sass. And it typically is related to some sort of offensive social movement/social status.
Piercings in ones face could be associated with Punks, Sex, Bondage.
Long dangly earrings and heavy makeup could be associated with the look of a Cholo. Some people may look at boots as being a hooker or associate them with Hells Angles.
Or it could be offensive because its last seasons fashion.
What ever the reason it much safer that the companies implement the rules across the board rather than letting a clueless employee decide what is acceptable for them.

NDRU said:

I can even understand strict dress codes in an office, where people still have the notion that professionals can only be professionals if they've got suits on. It's a bizarre idea IMO that someone in jeans isn't capable of being an accountant, as if their pants affect their math skills, but it's so ingrained that for now there's no point arguing it.

But somebody selling you burgers or movie tickets or teddy bears? It's just ridiculous to even think it makes a difference.




That sounds awful.

My worst uniform was when I was dishbitch in a restaurant a few years ago. In spite of the fact that the company surely hires both men and women in all their restaurants, and people of a variety of sizes, as standard company practice kitchens uniforms were only ordered in Men's Large.

I'm 4'11'' and just barely over 100 lbs, and barring any massive weight gain, that's the size I'll always be as an adult. I actually had to take my uniform to a professional seamstress, so many alterations were needed to make the thing wearable, and even then the company didn't reimburse me for the cost. And even after the seamstress had her way with it, the "t-shirt" sleeves came halfway down my forearms.

meow85 said:

quit being thick headed

horatio said:

that's basically it. Most people agree that some rules (like no vulgar language) are appropriate. So the companies have to draw the line somewhere, and it's in their best interest to draw very specific lines--even if they're arbitrary.

Meow85 although I can appreciate your concerns you're putting waaay too much thought into this. Ever heard of branding? No, not the painful searing your flesh type but the product type. That's ALL that dress codes are really about. The corps. are trying to sell "the whole package" in pursuit of the almighty dollar.

If you're at work in a theater and they want you to look like an old-timey usher with a bow tie, then so be it.

If you work in a clothing store and they would prefer you to wear the clothes they sell and they give you an employee discount so you can buy their crap and wear it, so be it.

I love piercings & tattoos and colored hair as much as the next guy but there is a time and place for everything and in some retail settings, it's neither the time or place. For the most part I'm with Horatio & NDRU on this. And all the informal studies in the world won't ever get behind what people REALLY think...

Ultimately all I can say is, deal with it, wear what your employer asks/ demands of you and save your money. When you have some set aside go into business for yourself and make up your own dress code. Problem solved!


[Edited 1/13/09 10:19am]

NDRU said:

Dangly and mismatched, like I always wear. I checked, and there's nothing in the written dress code mentioning earrings, mismatched or otherwise.

The manager who took issue with my boots actually handed out a not-so-veiled threat of firing if I continue to wear them, in spite of the fact they meet the requirements of being clean, black, and close-toed. And since like most low-level jobs this one isn't union they certainly can enforce it even if it's not in writing. There's no law protecting non-union employees against arbritrary workforce stupdity.

I think dress codes start out with good intentions on management's part (a professional looking staff to serve customers well) but often get mired in minutiae. Sometimes, management is just being stupid, or maybe just inconsistent, or even sexist (like making women wear high heels). Often, though, management has to deal with whiny employees ("You let Betty have a nose ring! So why can't I wear piercings all over my face?") who push things and make management uncomfortable. If you give an inch, some people will take a mile and push things to the limit, so management decides they don't want to take a chance. Their response, though, can often be silly when looked at in specifics, but they try to make a decision they feel is best. Plus, they have to deal with employees who really want to make social or political statements through their appearance, but all management really wants is employees who care more about their jobs. Management is not always right or smart, unfortunately, but those are the breaks.

meow85 said:

Problem there is most Unions I've dealt with would probably side with the employer on the boots issue.

horatio said:

20 or 30 years ago, perhaps. But it's 2009 and even the angelic Mormon babysitter has a

nose ring

There is no Cholo/Chola culture here. I'm willing to bet some people around these parts have never even heard of them. They're not high-heeled boots, not thigh-high, not leather, and definitely not bike boots. If that's the case, shouldn't baggy pants be banned as being so last century?
So you're saying employees are too dumb to dress themselves and need some fatass in corporate head office picking out their trousers for them? Gotcha.

RenHoek said:

But this doesn't answer my basic, initial question of: Do customers really give a shit? I have not once seen any evidence that they do. Employee identification is one thing, dictating how someone can wear their hair is another.

Do blue shoes instead of black really interfere with the "brand"? Really?

With an attitude like yours, you will never work at anything but a menial job.

meow85 said:

unfortunately most people need and like to be told what to do. they are unable to think and reason logically for themselves.

Efan said:

The basic assumption there seems to be that certain appearances preclude an employee from doing their job efficiently, and serving their customers well. Prove to me an Obama t-shirt or a lip ring interferes in any way, and I'll buy this argument.

meow85 said:

YES SOME OF US GIVE A SHIT.
ENOUGH OF US CARE THAT IT WARRANTS YOU BEING TOLD WHAT TO WEAR.
ENJOY!

RenHoek said:

The ones I have wouldn't.

Genesia said:

Bullshit. Have you seen how university professors dress?

Genesia said:

meow85 said:

If you're looking down from on top of Mt. Corporate, you bet! Get it straight, dress codes aren't really about you or your personal sense of expression. THEY.DON'T.CARE! It's about conformity, representing the brand and doing what your bosses tell you to do!

There's really nothing more to it!!!

I'd always wondered why they shave everyone's head in boot camp and the same rule applies here. Everyone is the same, there is no room for individuality and don't be a shred different.

For all intents and purposes I look like I should be beggin' for change right now and I've had clients look at me a little odd when they first meet me. But it's MY business and I'll do what I like, fortunately I know how to sell window treatments and so they buy from me because they know they are getting exceptional service.

horatio said:

Please answer the question, and quit shouting.

If you go out to dinner tonight at a restaurant, and the waitress has flats on instead of high heels, or a tasteful skirt instead of pants, are you going to leave without eating anything? Will it interfere with the enjoyment or quality of your meal?

If you go shopping for shirts, and the guy has an eyebrow ring, will his facial jewelry destry the quality of the garment, disrupt the atmosphere of the store, or alter the price?