I don't mean in an office atmosphere or anything. I'm talking retail/customer service/food industry/cleaners -low-level, unskilled jobs.

Dress codes as they relate to health or safety standards are perfectly reasonable, and I'm not disputing that. Steel-toed boots may not be all that comfortable, but a broken foot is even moreso.

Ditto for things relating to employee identification -name tags, shirts, hats -whichever it is your company has deemed the standard employee look is also reasonable. There's not much more annoying as a customer than walking into a store and not being able to figure out works there and who doesn't.

But beyond that, what's the point in dictating, say, what colour an employee's shoes must be or what styles of hair are allowable? To me, rules like this seem completely arbitrary and needless.

I work in a movie theatre now. I like my job, and have been told I'm picking up on what to do fairly quickly and am doing it well. Swell.

But in the space of two shifts I got shit from two different managers for my footwear and earrings. Our dress code says nothing about earrings, and for footwear only says it must be black (black? why black?) and close-toed. I've been wearing black, close-toed knee high boots. But, as I've been told, those and my earrings are "not work appropriate and are unprofessional looking."

Unprofessional? I work in a movie theatre, for Christ's sake. Half the staff are wearing sneakers, but my boots aren't work-right? WTF?

My roommate works in restaurant that's semi-upscale, but part of a chain. His dress code actually requires him to wear a belt, dress shoes, and a button-up black dress shirt. He works in the kitchen, far from customer eyes.

I can think of so many examples of strange and unnecessary rules regarding appearance. One friend can't have visible piercings -and she works in a store where half the merchandise is piercing jewelry. Try explaining that one. Another was told to dye her hair back to a "natural" shade from green or lose her job. She's a maid.



Does anyone here work in a management position, or work in head office for some sort of retail/customer service/restaurant/etc. business that can give me a little clarity on the reasoning behind this nonsense? What is the point in these arbitrary dress code rules? ESPECIALLY considering these are not generally the sort of businesses where customers care how the staff are dressed.

Image is everything and if that's what corporate wants then so shall it have.

It's all about uniformity as a whole. We want everyone, even the guy in the back, to look the same. That way if the public should ever look behind closed doors it's all still one big happy team. There are no misfits, neat-freaks, nerds etc. no one is different, everyone just looks like they work at insert company name here.

Appearances mean a lot to clients, movie-goer and retail consumer alike, and so we have dress codes.

I could care less what you wear in your off-time but when you're in my shop, theater, restaurant, brake shop, tattoo parlor, or bakery doing whatever it is you're supposed to be doing to keep them coming back for more then you need to dress accordingly.

RenHoek said:

But what the hell for? If the employee is neat in appearance, wears the company gear, and most importantly does their job efficiently and with enthusiasm, then who gives a flying fig what colour his shoes are?

I haven't at this job, but at previous ones I've held the employees have done informal customer polls on the topic. Surprise, surprise -not one said they cared even the slightest bit about nail polish or hair colour. Time and again, what concerns customers is service, efficiency, quality of product, and staff friendliness. Not shoe colour. Not hairstyles. Not piercings. Not whether or not their cashier wears a belt. Nada.

God forbid companies actually listen to what their staff and clientele have to say, I suppose....

Alot of people feel uncomfortable being served by someone whos 'different'. I know when I worked in retail many older people felt uncomfortable about being served by this girl that had pink streaks and numerous nose rings. It was weird though because I had one nosering and normal hair but was told to take the ring out but she was never asked to change anything, not her hair or noserings. weird. Although your right about the belt and shoe colour thing, and working in a shop that sells things you're not allowed to wear. I dont get that.

Arnotts said:

I read an article on www.bmezine.com that said something like 60% of young people in North America have piercings other than the traditional earlobe piercings, and that nearing %40 have at least one tattoo. If those numbers are even close to being true, that's a pretty high number of potential employees to be dictating a change in appearance, or not hiring to begin with.

People can only get used to changes in society or fashion if they're exposed to it. I'm sure the parents and grandparents of today's older people were horrified to see them as teenagers in bobby sox, or t-shirts(underwear, remember) as regular clothing. It's a little unreasonable then for them to expect people now to conform to their ideas of wearable propriety.

Ultimately, businesses are only hurting themselves by dictating these ridiculous rules. I can think of several RL examples where stores or restaurants have been desperate for new hirees, but have refused to bend their rules on appearance and so were left wanting. This includes one retail store I applied for a managing position about two years ago. They said I was qualified, but refused to hire me because I have more than one ring in each ear, and have a ring in my nose. 6 months later the parent company forced them to close because they still didn't have a manager. Now, was that my fault for daring to look "different" (different my ass, the people I know my age who don't have something so-called different about their appearance I can list on one hand) or theirs for being twits about the dress code?

I understand where it comes from, but I, like you, don't agree with it. If there's a standard uniform, then I understand specifying a certain color shoe, a belt, but as far as hair color, piercings, etc. that's personal and not the clothes you're wearing.

It's simply a fear that anything out of the norm will affect sales, that customers will be afraid of the freaks with the blue hair and go to a different movie theatre instead.

The point of dress codes is that it conveys a sense of familiarity to the customers. That the employees there are organized, and working toward the same goal of providing consistency.

Fortunately, if you don't agree with the dress code, there are other jobs out there in the world. And if they don't like your dress code, there are other potential employees in the world.

Personally, I think that you're correct in that it really depends on the job as to how important a dress code is to me as a customer.

Like you, I get the whole safety aspect, as well as the desire for employees to look neat and uniform but some things in my opinion are just unreasonable

At my old job if you had a facial piercing you had to take it out during your shift or cover it with a band-aid...Okay, if it's just a tiny nose stud, what looks worse: that or a huge band-aid on your nose?

You're all putting waaay too much thought into this (which is great don't get me wrong!) but corporations don't. For them it's simple, they don't want ANY singular customer to walk away from spending money in their store. Therefore, thou shalt all look the same...

I'm all for freedom of expression and whatnot (one of several reasons to choose self-employment if you can!) but the corps. are out for that almighty dollar (U.S. or Canadian! ) so they'll dictate right down to the question of facial hair, yay or nay.

CarrieMpls said:

Thing is, unless the target customer is deeply conservative, most don't care about hair colour or piercings or footwear or whathaveyou. In all the jobs I've ever had, I can only think of one negative comment from a customer about my appearance, but I've gotten several compliments. The most came from -and managers obviously will never believe this - about my hair from elderly women when I had a green mohawk.

Dauphin said:

How does shoe colour convey consistency? Do customers even look at our feet? I find that very hard to believe. Does someone's lip ring preclude them from good customer service and product knowledge?

thekidsgirl said:

I've seen jobs that do that to their employees. Clearly a big-ass bandaid on your face is less distracting to the consumer than a cute little gem.

RenHoek said:

But is there any proof that customers will be turned away by the appearance of employees, if the quality of product and service is good?

Like I said, piercings, tattoos, odd hair colours or cuts aren't extreme anymore. No one but the most deeply conservative is going to be spooked by an eyebrow ring or assymetrical hair. And who's looking at employee's shoes, or checking to see if they're wearing a belt? The very idea that a customer would be wary of staff who look "different" (and this so-called different is pretty well mainstream at this point anyway. If Hilary Duff can have a belly ring, it's hardly an extreme statement) is absurd, and IMO just shows how out of touch some people in management or office positions really are with their own companies and customers.

meow85 said:

My friend Ant had to put a bandaid right under his bottom lip and customs would constantly ask him if 'his injury had healed yet'

I've never worked for a company that was that anal.

Actually, the place I work now (and the one before that) doesn't give a fuck if you have piercings, multi-coloured hair or what you wear really - and we do sometimes deal with client.

But then again, these are smaller businesses (staff wise) that does not have high-turnover positions but has positions that are actual careers. Maybe that makes a difference.

Holy grammar issues. I'm not even gonna bother editing. Yikes.

thekidsgirl said:

Oh, that'll attract a customer alright. Let them think instead of a lovely piercing, that the employee has some freaky, festering, unhealing wound on their face.

I'm really starting to believe that people who invent these dress codes have shut their rational brains up in their sock drawer.

JustErin said:

It all depends on the company, but much of dress codes does seem pretty arbitrary when they are in place. My movie theatre, for example, doesn't care about piercings, tattoos, or hair -but my boots and earrings are unprofessional looking. Okee dokee.

Most jobs are not about personal expression.
What you may think is tasteful isn't to the owner or the company or to its consumers.

Your being paid to do what they want.

Not for your fashion faux pas.

JustErin said:

I see it all like a "pretty package" type marketing.

Godiva chocolatier for example....

They are run by the Campbell Soup Co. They charge close to $40.00/lb for their chocolate.

They do so because of costs, pretty gold foil, boxes, ribbons, and the knowledgeable trendy store clerk sharply dressed in black and white to complete the "shopping experience". Its the same reasons why windows are dressed impeccably and all stores are usually located in a trendy shopping district.

The same reason why you will not see a fat older woman dressed in plain clothes selling clothing at a Gucci/ Versace/ Armani, or CD's and books in Tower Records (do they still exist? ) They are marketing a "look" and the employees have to reflect that as well.

Same rules apply to store locations as well, you will not see a dollar store next to a Tiffany's. Areas of cities are sectioned out to see what stores will be placed where. Most outlet stores are located in "discount districts", for example.

horatio said:

But is there actually any proof that customers care about employee appearance? Providing the staff are neat and clean and wear their staff t-shirt or nametag or whatever other i.d. -and more importantly, do their job well -I've never seen any evidence that would support this claim. What difference do the colour of an employee's shoes make? Are customers going to be turned off by brown pants instead of blue? Is someone going to refuse to buy a burger from someone with a shaved head?

And since we're on the topic, why draw a line between "unnatural" hair colours and "natural" ones. Bottle-blonde is just as fake and unnatural as sky blue, and yet no one's suggesting that Miss Prom Queen alter her hair colour for her boss.

paintedlady said:

Wearing black and white if black and white has been deemed the employee uniform isn't the same thing as telling someone they HAVE to wear a belt. In that case, it falls under the heading of employee identification.

And at the risk of sounding like a broken record, is there any proof that customers will be turned off by an employee in boots instead of high heels? Drop earrings instead of studs?

At my roommate's restaurant, the female waitstaff HAVE to wear high heels. Have to. Why? Is someone going to refuse their salad if their server comes out in flats? If the waitress looks like her feet might not be killing her, is a customer going to storm out without paying?

meow85 said:

why yes, yes there is.
people totally avoid certain chain stores in one area verses another because of how the employees groom themselves.
its all in the details.

I work in retail and we have to wear suits, it's SO stupid! It's mainly to try and convince the custers that we are 'upstcale. But most people work for minimum wage and do the dirty work behind the scenes.soem can't even afford to buy the clothes that this upscale store sells. It's all phony, the shit is made in china and Idonesia little cou7ntries where people work in sweatshops anyway.

horatio said:

Grooming implies cleanliness. I'm not disputing that. I'd reprimand an employee too who showed up without having showered.

But style of shoes? Whether or not a girl wears hair clips? Do people actually avoid businesses over petty details like that that in no way actually affect their shopping experience? Again, I've worked jobs like this since I was 16 and have never seen anything that would support this idea.

Dayclear said:

I once turned down a job offer in a clothing retailer because, while none of the products were below $100, they only paid staff $9 an hour, and actually expected employees to purchase and wear the merchandise! Dumb fucks.

I understand the motivation of using employees as walking mannequins, but even with the staff discount the product was unreasonably priced to garner a full work wardrobe on the wages they paid.
[Edited 1/13/09 9:29am]

meow85 said:

I'm a little torn on this. I think a uniform is basically to identify employees to customers & keep a consistent style (ie red & yellow at McDonalds).

But I worked at a movie theater and the uniforms were so stupid looking with the short sleeve shirts & bow ties Why did they want us to look stupid?

As for piercings & tattoos & weird hair color/styles, here in Berkeley that is less of an issue, but part of me also says that people who do some of these things are deliberately trying to look like they are not a cog in the corporate machine, or rebelling against traditional fashions, conservative appearances. I think that's fine, but it does have consequences. People look at you as not "one of them." That's what you want, that's what you get.

I don't have specific evidence that it scares customers away, but I think it definitely DOES scare some of them away. Maybe you don't care about those people and think they're silly to be scared of a nose ring, but your company does care. They want everyone to feel comfortable.

meow85 said:

It IS a little stupid, I agree. But I think maybe part of it is just so you don't have to have these kind of discussions to determine where the line is at uniformed/not in uniform.

If strict guidelines are set, then there's no question. The company can point to the rules "our employees wear belts, black shoes, pink socks." If there's grey area then there's room for fights and that's just a waste of time (and possibly legal fees) to a company.

meow85 said:

I was told yes when I was a manager at Elisabeth (plus size Liz Claiborne)
regarding that wearing THEIR clothing made a difference in the shopping experience for the customers. I think it was all BS to get employees to spend $$ on their product. And also it made employees not wear competitor's products in the stores.

The high heels only makes sense for seducing and not buying food, but I guess that what restaurants like 'Hooters' are for. Makes no sense, I agree with you Meow. The owner will only have an employee that'll need more breaks and be less efficient at her job.