Employee Dress Code Policy
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
Employment
Training |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
HR
Management |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
As an HR person, can an employer enforce a dress code policy on 1 person in the company? For instance, can the supervisor of the Director of Sales and Marketing set a dress code rule for her to wear suits only? We are a small company of 45 people and there are 2 sales and marketing offices. One is in Orlando and 1 in Miami. The boss is setting rules for Orlando sales and marketing Directors only but they are all under 1 department. Is this allowed?
The best course of action for this employer would be to implement a dress code that affects the Sales Managers at both locations, in Miami and Orlando.
When an employer singles out an employee for disparate treatment, it can constitute discrimination under the law – even if that’s not the employer’s motive. Suppose the employer tells Sally that she must wear only business suits to work, but allows Marie to continue to dress in “business casual” attire. If Sally and Marie have the same job and are of different races or colors, this could be illegal discrimination.
It’s possible that in this case, “Sally” has a history of wearing low-cut shirts, see-through blouses, low-cut pants with midriff-baring tops, shorts or other inappropriate attire. Or, she may simply come to work in “casual-casual” attire rather than “business casual” clothing. The employer may be trying to solve the problem indirectly, by asking Sally to wear only business suits. However, such a strategy can create more problems than it solves.
If this is the case, the employer is better off simply addressing the issue of inappropriate clothing with Sally, rather than issuing a new policy.
There is ample legal precedent for employers to have different dress codes for men and women. And, there is precedent for an employer to have different dress codes in different regions, or for other bona fide business reasons.
It would be appropriate, for example, to require sales managers in
Chicago to wear business suits, but permit those in Florida to dress more casually. That’s because wearing a suit is standard practice in the Midwest, and less common in Florida. However, that dress code should apply to all Sales Managers in the Chicago area. A bona fide business reason for different attire might also exist. Suppose that a hotel management company has a golf resort in
Miami, but a hotel catering to a business clientele in Orlando. In that situation, it would be reasonable to have the Sales Manager in Orlando wear business suits, while the Miami employee wore golf attire or business casual. That’s partly because the sales person should dress like the clients she is targeting.
This entry was posted
on Friday, April 25th, 2008 at 12:45 pm and is filed under
Employment Training, Human Resources Management.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
3 Responses to “Employee Dress Code Policy”
Leave a Reply
-
Ask a Question
Categories
- Attendance Management (811)
- Benefits (1222)
- Compensation (1194)
- Employment Training (295)
- Hiring and Staffing (718)
- Human Resources Management (1916)
- Labor Laws (1032)
- Management / Leadership Development (294)
- Performance Management (178)
- Structural Development (41)
- Termination (429)
- Workplace Health & Safety (218)
- Workplace Management (396)
Blogroll
Archives
Recent Posts
-
Maternity Leave
December 4th, 2008 -
Lost Payroll Check
December 4th, 2008 -
Unemployment benefits after job elimination in Texas
December 4th, 2008 -
Maternity leave
December 4th, 2008 -
Misconception on Training and Development
December 4th, 2008 -
Salary non exempt
December 4th, 2008 -
Floating Holiday
December 3rd, 2008
Pages
October 16th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
My husband is a software engineer. If you’ve hung around any IT folks in the U.S. for very long, you know that they make business casual look fancy.
Software engineers are the folks that have to work overnight the day a product goes live. How neat your code is trumps how neat your clothes are.
The corporation where my husband works has recently decided that the quality of dress might be more important than the quality of work. They can’t quite make up their mind if the IT department is allowed to wear jeans or not and considering taking disciplinary action against those who don’t show up in khakis.
But to be culturally competent, there’s going to be mixed standards if you have a combination of fields in one company. Gone are the days where one size fits all and everyone wears a tie.
See more of this post on my blog: http://culturalfusion.typepad.com
October 16th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
Hi Gretchen! Well, that is certainly an interesting point of view.
Here’s how the issue looks from the employer’s persepective: Many HR pros have found that workers who dress professionally act more professionally. An informal survey of SHRM members indicates that when a company switches from a business casual environment to more professional dress, absenteeism rates go down and productivity goes up — even when the number of hours worked are the same.
In another recent study, 46% of HR managers surveyed said that professional dress is one factor they consider when evaluating employees and giving raises, with the most professionally dressed workers receiving the biggest salary increases.
Employees in many fields, including hospitality management, work overtime at all hours of the day and night, and wear suits while doing it.
You frame this as a cultural issue, but it really is not. If your husband grew up in the U.S., he is a member of the same culture as his employer. If an employee from Africa wants to wear the colorful robes of his native country to work, that is a cultural issue. Even then, the employer is under no obligation to make exceptions to the dress code.
When dress is a religious issue, as when Muslim women wear head coverings, employers may be required to make exceptions to the dress code.
Most employers would regard being slovenly and unkept as more of a personality flaw, rather than a cultural difference.
During the dotcom boom of the late 1990s, IT professionals were in high demand. They commanded high salaries, and got away with a lot — including dressing like they were 6-year-olds on a camping trip.
In this economy, there is much more competition for IT jobs. Many highly competent computer professionals are willing to dress the part. Heck, some of them would wear a kilt to work if it meant securing a good job.
Professional dress, good grooming and technical skill are not mutually exclusive. Very few companies permit white-collar workers to wear jeans. Requiring that employees at least wear khaki pants is a long way from a repressive dress code — in fact, it is a very casual one.
A number of companies initially reported increased morale when implementing a business casual dress code in the 1990s, but it was short-lived. Most of them have returned to a more professional dress code, for a number of reasons. Even the number of companies that permit casual Fridays is declining.
So there are definitely two sides to this issue. Thanks for posting your comments! We look forward to reading your blog! ~ Caitlin
October 16th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Caitlin,
Thanks for your thoughtful reply!
Regarding the cultural issue … I think we have a different view as to what constitutes culture. As citied in your own post, regional differences are a huge factor.
I do understand where you’re coming from in citing culture as defined upon boundaries of nation-states, but in terms of cultural competency, I have a different take on the definition of culture.