# It's wrong for employers to discriminate based on style of dress **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 19, 2004, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-wrong-for-employers-to-discriminate-based-on-style-of-dress/280650 "2004-12-19T15:04:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 2\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-wrong-for-employers-to-discriminate-based-on-style-of-dress/280650/61 "2004-12-23T20:07:36Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > **In the case of oversupply** > > [There have been many candidates for the job, and now it’s down to Jim and Bill, who both seem equally qualified.] > > We can take Jim who showed up at the interview with a four-in-hand. Or Bill who wore a bow. You know, both would seem to be equally qualified, but that bow tie–heh heh, it’s such a minor thing, I know. But why a _bow_? It could be a sign of, I don’t know, maybe needing to show off a bit, be a little different. Why take a chance? Yeah, Jim’s our man. Maybe the boss wants people who fit in. In that case the bow could make a difference. Or maybe the boss wants someone different from the rest. In that case the bow could be a plus. Or. maybe the boss is so fashion-blind it makes no difference. An interviewee evaluates the company as well as the other way around. Perhaps someone wearing a bow would be unhappy working for the first boss, so everyone would win if he doesn’t get the job. > [@](#): > > My guess is that the the entire way corporations exist and do business will be absurdly, laughably outdated in 100 years. People will look back and see the system for the inefficient, wasteful, overly stressful POS that it is. Dumbass dress codes will barely be a footnote on this tale of frivolity and greed. Our science of economics will seem about as sophisticated as the phlebotemies and potions of 18th century medicine. > > The system will evolve into something that actually produces what society needs without torturing the producers. Indeed, any company of 2004 would have no chance of competing with a company of 2104. So I agree with your point about evolution, but it will take a long time before frivolities such as dress codes are weeded out of the meme pool. Well, in my industry dumbass dress codes have been weeded out for ages. And no, there isn’t an informal dress code of jeans or you’re dead. Even sales guys are starting not to wear suits while making calls that involve engineers - the technical experts from the companies don’t. That’s a shift, since when I was doing technical marketing support as an expert I used to wear a suit. Most companies now have standard polo shirts or t-shirts for those doing booth duty in trade shows. I guess we’re more evolved than other industries. 🙂 > [@](#): > > I’m the president of a company, just getting started, and I intend to have a dress code: suits and ties, old-fashioned stuff. I want to run it like a 1960s company style-wise but like a 2100s company mindwise. I’ll tell my employees straight up: The suits and stuff are nothing more than packaging and branding. Don’t take it too seriously. But I want REAL originality and unorthodoxy in the realm of thought. Don’t expect a resume from me - or from most of the other world famous experts that I know. ---
**Author:** ![fluiddruid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fluiddruid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fluiddruid)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-wrong-for-employers-to-discriminate-based-on-style-of-dress/280650/62 "2004-12-23T21:15:28Z")
I do some interviewing, and while not a major part of the process, the dress of the candidate does make a first impression with me. If a candidate comes in wearing a faded t-shirt with a death metal band and torn jeans, I am concerned that this person will act unprofessionally with customers (over the phone). I am not expecting a power suit or anything, but if the person couldn’t bother to wear something even business casual I tend to think that they may not bother to fulfill other job expectations. To me, it implies “I don’t care enough about this job to change my behavior.” This is a big red flag. Is this necessarily true? Maybe not. I would definitely not rule them out entirely, but they usually rule themselves out in many other ways anyway so I’ve never **had** to not hire them because of dress. Sadly, being at work is not about being an individual. Because of the nature of my business, I need people who can fulfill expectations, not people who will make executive decisions on their own. The job is pretty much to sit on the phone and help customers. If a person decides to be creative or individualistic and go do something else that they feel needs doing, well, that’s a problem. If a potential client is coming through the center (accounts are worth huge sums for the company, and therefore we are under the scrutiny of upper management), I don’t want to hear “but who cares about them – we don’t want them if they can’t accept us the way they are”, I want to hear “sure, is business casual okay?” And, if you don’t wear business or business casual to an interview where you know what is societally expected, I tend to feel that you may not be willing to bend in the future. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not expecting things to necessarily be well-put-together; I’m not trying to divide out the fashion victims. Lord knows I’m not a particularly snappy dresser myself. I wore business clothes all through interviewing and training though, just to present a good impression. Qualified candidates who really want the position will tend to do that. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-wrong-for-employers-to-discriminate-based-on-style-of-dress/280650.md?page=3)