Well, I’m already smiling, so no smilie needed. But, finding an example of a woman with three boobs doesn’t really set any sort of femininely precedent. 
[QUOTE=Dangerosa]
Someone who won’t follow a rule about a tie might not follow the rules about appropriate use of their employee discount, or appropriate disclosure of financial information.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, of course. Because we’re Disney Villains! Muahaha!
:rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Chimera]
Yes, of course. Because we’re Disney Villains! Muahaha!
:rolleyes:
[/QUOTE]
You forgot to twirl your mustache in a maniacal manner.
[QUOTE=DiosaBellissima]
You forgot to twirl your mustache in a maniacal manner.
[/QUOTE]
What mustache? No facial hair rule, remember?
It was implied they had a mustache, as they took offense to the implication that a mustache wearer would be a less than stellar employee.
Frankly, when I’m Queen of the United States, you can only have a mustache if it’s either a: amazingly magical and fantastic, like a handle bar mustache or Stalin-stache b: twirlable or c: a fu manchu, just because they are funny. Basically, you can only have a mustache if it is for my personal entertainment- after all, I’m the queen.
[QUOTE=Bear_Nenno]
Point being that a company could easily tell someone with a shaving condition that he has to shave using clippers and he is not allowed to have facial growth in excess of 1/8th of an inch. Nothing medically wrong with that. But I dunno much about the corporate world or private business.
[/QUOTE]
If the company goal is to have a “professional” appearance, then they ought to realize that 1/8" stubble looks a hell of a lot worse than a full but neatly trimmed beard.
Frankly, I’m wondering if the Great Depression/WWII generation is ever going to release its death grip on how this country is run.
[QUOTE=Phase42]
Frankly, I’m wondering if the Great Depression/WWII generation is ever going to release its death grip on how this country is run.
[/QUOTE]
Sure. They’re almost all dead by now. It won’t be much longer before the last one keels over.
[QUOTE=DiosaBellissima]
You forgot to twirl your mustache in a maniacal manner.
[/QUOTE]
I have a full, but well trimmed beard. Therefore no over-dramatic mustache twirling is necessary to draw attention to my evilness.
[QUOTE=DiosaBellissima]
It was implied they had a mustache, as they took offense to the implication that a mustache wearer would be a less than stellar employee.
Frankly, when I’m Queen of the United States, you can only have a mustache if it’s either a: amazingly magical and fantastic, like a handle bar mustache or Stalin-stache b: twirlable or c: a fu manchu, just because they are funny. Basically, you can only have a mustache if it is for my personal entertainment- after all, I’m the queen.
[/QUOTE]
You are my hero.
[QUOTE=mobo85]
For many years, Disneyland required its employees to be clean-shaven, as facial hair was often symbolic of hippies and other un-Disneylike riffraff. The park now allows mustaches- although at one time it didn’t, despite the fact its founder had one.
[/QUOTE]
I know a guy, now in his 60’s I’d guess, who 30-40 years ago worked at Disneyland as a member of a Dixieland ensemble within the park (he plays clarinet). Part of his costume, I’ve heard him say, was a fake mustache. He asked if he could just grow one himself, and was told no.
:smack:
[QUOTE=DiosaBellissima]
Frankly, when I’m Queen of the United States, you can only have a mustache if it’s either a: amazingly magical and fantastic, like a handle bar mustache or Stalin-stache b: twirlable or c: a fu manchu, just because they are funny. Basically, you can only have a mustache if it is for my personal entertainment- after all, I’m the queen.
[/QUOTE]
Well of course. Everybody knows the Queen gets free mustache rides. It’s one of the perks of royalty!
[QUOTE=Q.E.D.]
Sure. They’re almost all dead by now. It won’t be much longer before the last one keels over.
[/QUOTE]
With today’s (and tomorrow’s!) advances in modern medicine there’s no telling how long they’ll be able to lord over sanity.
[QUOTE=Phase42]
Well of course. Everybody knows the Queen gets free mustache rides. It’s one of the perks of royalty!
[/QUOTE]
That just seems like the highway to chaffing. Ouchie.
[QUOTE=Dangerosa]
Someone who won’t follow a rule about a tie might not follow the rules about appropriate use of their employee discount, or appropriate disclosure of financial information. Personally, I think there are better ways, but a tie (beard, business dress, no visible tatoos and single ear piercings for women) is a darn easy way to separate out the rules followers from the iconoclasts before they get hired.
[/QUOTE]
And it’s just as easy to say that someone who wears a tie and is clean shaven might not follow the rules on stock options, or be tempted to bankrupt thousands of employees pension plans. Nope, a person with a tie would never do that. :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=tomndebb]
Actually, I sort of figured that Raza had interviewed at EDS of GM, guessing that the Perot brand was deeply embedded on all the guys he left behind in EDS when his GM takeover failed.
[/QUOTE]
EDS bought themselves away from GM in… uh… 1996 or so.
Since then, the stock has tanked, and all manner of questionable shenannigans have taken place.
When I started, as a temp, in 1995, the rule was essentially military grooming regulations, and as a tape monkey working in the bowels of an Operations building, I had to have on slacks, tie, and appropriate shirt. Technically, they still required women to wear skirts/dresses, but it was overlooked in wacky California when they wore pants.
Things loosened up a bit as time went on, but the old guard was still firmly intrenched, along with their dislike of anyone with long hair or unusual demeanor.
Tristan- Laid off in 2001, thank god.
[QUOTE=Phase42]
Well of course. Everybody knows the Queen gets free mustache rides. It’s one of the perks of royalty!
[/QUOTE]
Paging Phase42 - Call for you on line 1 - Says her name is Liz… 
Fireman. SCBA. No beard.
I also was an EDSer in the Ross Perot-Roger Smith era. At the time I couldn’t grow a beard, so it was kinda moot. It sucked running data cable in automotive plant, wearing a GQ quality suit, too.
It is ridiculous. Unless they can come up with a valid health of safety reason, those sort of requirements are archaic and asinine. Why on earth men should be required to emasculate themselves on a daily basis I’ve no idea. I’m rather crazy on this topic, but I suspect it has to do with men in beards having a perception of being vital, and dominant, rather than scruffy. By shaving, you are one of the “boys”. Traditionally, beards have been associated with power, vitality and wisdom. The dirty hippie thing is pretty recent. A beard is a nice, natural part of most men’s faces; and as long as it is kept neatly, is IMHO a lot nicer to look at than a weak chin, or fat neck, stubble, or razor burn.
[QUOTE=Raza]
That ended the interview, as it ended my interest in employment with this company.
[/QUOTE]
I hope you made it clear that the stupid facial hair rule played a role in your disinterest. Might be the first chip in the armour of stupidity.
[QUOTE=Skylark]
The United States Navy sadly requires its men to be clean-shaven
[/QUOTE]
For some reason, in my mind, a ship’s captain is always bearded. Is the rule for non-officers only?
[QUOTE=ParentalAdvisory]
What does clean-shaven mean in this context? Does it mean no facial hair at all, or you’re allowed to have a beard, but you can’t come in having “neck beard”? Because if it’s the latter, just keep your beard tidy.
[/QUOTE]
I’ve never encountered such a definition of clean shaven. So far as I know, it has alwyas meant “no facial hair at all.”
[QUOTE=ParentalAdvisory]
And it’s just as easy to say that someone who wears a tie and is clean shaven might not follow the rules on stock options, or be tempted to bankrupt thousands of employees pension plans. Nope, a person with a tie would never do that. :rolleyes:
[/QUOTE]
Dangerosa’s point wasn’t that a person who wears a tie is inherently more honest. Her point was that there is a reason that employers sometimes look for people who are willing to conform to rules.