Afraid that your dress code will cause your employees to up and quit? Gentle Reader, you've come to the right place.
Dear Miss Mannerly:
I am an HR Manager for a major metropolitan employer. Now that it is June, some of our employees are coming to work in t-shirts and shorts, or very skimpy sundresses. We want to issue a dress code, and hope to have it rolled out by July 15. Meanwhile, how should we deal with our employees who are dressing inappropriately now? Better Late Than Never
Dear Better Late Than Never: Oh, dear. Miss Mannerly is afraid that July 15 is too late to be issuing a summer dress code. A dress code is correctly issued in December or January, when everyone is bundled up in sweaters and coats and boots, and preoccupied with the holidays. In the winter, no one will feel singled out by your dress code, and they’ll have some time to acclimate themselves to the rules before they actually need to follow them. So please wait until this winter to publish your new dress code. (If you’re must get it done earlier, Miss Mannerly will allow you to publish it in October as long as you aren’t in the South, where October is still sundress-and-sandals weather.) Then you can properly remind employees about your dress code next spring and start enforcing it next summer.
As far as the summer of 2018 is concerned, Miss Manners will give you a dispensation to counsel employees if their dress is creating a safety issue, risks alienating your clients or customers, or is indecent. Things will be better next year, she promises.
Dear Miss Mannerly:
I am a male HR manager for an employer in a small town. We have one female employee who is pretty “well endowed,” and during the summer she wears tank tops to work that show a full inch of cleavage. I honestly don’t think she realizes how much she is revealing. She and I have known each other for a long time, and we have a very good relationship. I feel that someone needs to talk with her about the way she dresses, but despite our good relationship I’m uncomfortable doing it because I’m afraid she will be embarrassed (since I’m a guy) or may even think I’m sexually harassing her. I have a female HR coordinator who is willing to talk with her, but the coordinator is kind of a “bull in a china shop” -- not very tactful. Which of us do you think should talk to this employee? Paralyzed by #MeToo
Dear Paralyzed: Although your concerns are well-founded, Miss Mannerly would prefer that you be the one to talk with your employee. You already have a good relationship with her and apparently have some -- manners. Miss Mannerly suspects that your employee will take the “counseling” better from you than she might from your less diplomatic coordinator. Another option would be to ask a female who isn’t in HR to have the talk with her. Does she have a female supervisor or manager who can discuss this in a gentle way? If yes, that may be the way to go. If not, you are Miss Mannerly's choice.
Dear Miss Mannerly:
I am a line supervisor at a manufacturing plant. One of my machine operators has a pair of earrings that he wears from Memorial Day to Labor Day, with very few exceptions. They are giant, dangly wooden scrolls. (I am not kidding!) The earrings reach the top of his shoulders. We have a strict safety rule that employees cannot wear jewelry while operating machinery. My employee is well aware of this rule, which has been in our employee handbook since the 1950s. Every day during the summer when he comes to work, I have to tell him to take the earrings off before he can start work. He always complies, but I am fed up with having to talk to him about it. What can I do? It seems silly to send him home when it’s just a pair of earrings, and I need him on the job. Too Old for This Malarkey
Dear Too Old: Safety violations are outside Miss Mannerly's realm, but if you will allow her to say so, it appears that the braids and beard on this gentleman could be a problem, as well. In any event, Miss Mannerly suggests that you warn him next time that you will be constrained to start progressive discipline if you have to mention the earrings again. The time after that, Miss Mannerly gives you permission to start progressive discipline. (But only after you get the approval of your HR Department.)
Dear Miss Mannerly:
I’m the Vice President of HR for a medium-sized U.S. company. During the summer, we have lots of dress code violations, and the offenders are always women. My CEO wants us to issue a new dress code for women (we’re planning to roll it out in January). I’m fine with a dress code, but I feel like we are asking for trouble if it is aimed exclusively at women. The CEO says there is no point in including rules for men because men never violate the code. We have both agreed to do whatever you say. Help! Terrified of a Lawsuit
Dear Terrified: Miss Mannerly understands the CEO's position, but you are correct – a dress code aimed exclusively at one gender presents difficulties for employee relations, assuming it is not against the law. (Miss Mannerly has been told that in New York City, it’s illegal to have gender-specific dress codes.) You can issue a gender-neutral dress code while including items that, as a practical matter, will pertain only to women. For example, in a very conservative environment, the code could say, “Business attire: Suit (black, navy, or charcoal gray) with matching jacket, and pants or skirt. Skirt length should be no longer than mid-calf and no shorter than knee-length. Button-down collar shirt with necktie, or blouse. Necklines should at or above the collarbone. Shoes should be closed-toed. Heels should not be more than 2 inches high. Jewelry should be limited to wrist watches, wedding/engagement rings, and earrings of no more than 1/2” below the ear lobe. Necklaces are acceptable but may not be more than 18 inches in circumference.” If the men are already dressing professionally, then Miss Mannerly gives them permission to simply ignore the new dress code. But the women will get clear guidelines without being made to feel singled out.
Dear Miss Mannerly:
Are you really Robin, and are all of these letters made up? Skeptical
Dear Skeptical: Miss Mannerly considers it a faux pas that you would ask this question. Why are you so skeptical? Why can’t you trust anybody?
Image Credits: From flickr, Creative Commons license. Gentleman kitty by Miss-Cynical; Labor Day by Mike Licht; dude (actually attending ComicCon 2009 in San Diego) with earrings, tats, and braids by Kevin Dooley; young woman in sundress by Javcon117*; guy who should be wearing a shirt by Tony Alter.
- Partner
Robin has more than 30 years' experience counseling employers and representing them before government agencies and in employment litigation involving Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with ...
Robin Shea has 30 years' experience in employment litigation, including Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (including the Amendments Act).
Continue Reading
Subscribe
Contributors
- William A. "Zan" Blue, Jr.
- Obasi Bryant
- Kenneth P. Carlson, Jr.
- James M. Coleman
- Cara Yates Crotty
- Lara C. de Leon
- Christopher R. Deubert
- Joyce M. Dos Santos
- Colin Finnegan
- Steven B. Katz
- Ellen C. Kearns
- F. Damon Kitchen
- David C. Kurtz
- Angelique Groza Lyons
- John E. MacDonald
- Alyssa K. Peters
- Sarah M. Phaff
- David P. Phippen
- William K. Principe
- Sabrina M. Punia-Ly
- Angela L. Rapko
- Rachael Rustmann
- Paul Ryan
- Robin E. Shea
- Kristine Marie Sims
- David L. Smith
- Jill S. Stricklin
- Jack R. Wallace
Archives
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010