Results 1 to 64 of 64

Thread: Hiring experience, stereotypes

  1. #1

    Default Hiring experience, stereotypes

    I'd love to hear everyone's thoughts on job hunting, etc.

    The quote at the bottom caught my eye this morning because it's what I love; rational thought over typecasts.

    In my case, over a year ago I quit my position of ten years to take time off to spend some more time with my family, do a major renovation, volunteer work, etc. - and then pursue a new hopefully socially valuable career that I could work at well into what most people consider "the retirement years". So I'm about to start looking and of course will face (if it really exists), 'older worker' discrimination.

    Ironically, when I was young graduate I never understood the idea that younger hires were preferential to older hires - but I heard it a number of times over the years. Things like "Let's get some younger people in here..". I later worked with people across all age groups and still don't understand it. One former boss, a great old engineer, worked to age 87 and at any I'd have loved to work under him at any time.


    Words of Jim Chanos, Hedge Fund manager:

    "JC: The thing I look for most is intellectual curiosity. One of the best analysts we
    ever had was an art history major from Columbia. She had no formal business school training. She was so good because she was very intellectually curious. She was never afraid to ask why and if she didn’t understand something she would go figure out everything she could about it. This is almost something that you can’t train. You either have it or you don’t."

  2. #2

    Default

    I remember being told that people like to hire people who are similar to them, who seem to have a similar outlook, attitude and personality. I think this is true, and its why many organizations form a particular culture, a group of like minded individuals, which can be a strength (similar goals) and weakness (lack of diversity).

  3. #3

    Default

    Yeah, a friend called it: "Like Hires Like". That might be good for some businesses and catastrophic for others.

  4. #4

    Default

    As an employer I do have certain criteria when hiring people. My criteria are based on the needs of my business and that goes far beyond ability or competence. You have to understand that as a business owner I have to make decisions that are good for my business.

    For example, I need people who will relate well to my customers. I need people who can speak English clearly but I also need diversity in culture. With my most recent hire I was adamant that I needed a young white girl in order to balance the demographics in my business and as a result I turned away qualified applicants because of their skin color and age. If all my staff are brown skinned I will have a hard time attracting Caucasian customers. That's just the way it is. People are more comfortable dealing with other people from their own cultures. (You may think I am not justified but if you knew the type of business I ran you would understand)

    When I worked in the IT field I know that the company I worked for preferred to hire young NAIT or U of A grads because they were so eager to learn new technologies and prove themselves. They were like energizer bunnies.

    I can also understand why EDO Japan prefers to hire Asians. As a customer I would rather buy Asian food from an Asian. And I would rather buy Indian food from an Indian. If I walked into a surfing shop I would not expect to be greeted by a middle aged overweight woman. And when I go to a medical specialist I prefer if they look like they've got some experience under their belt.

    My point is that discriminatory hiring is justified if it makes sense for the business. Employers will always try to cater to their customers demands and expectations, even if it means turning away a qualified candidate based on age, gender or ethnicity. Nobody should be surprised by this.

  5. #5

    Default

    The latest hiring taboo: class - The Globe and Mail

    “All listed hobbies, although some were “upper class” (sailing, polo and classical music) while others were"‘lower class" (pick-up soccer, track and field and country music). The result? Sixteen per cent of the first group got a callback, compared to 1 per cent of the second.”

    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/busi...g-taboo-class/

  6. #6

    Default

    Try to find a restaurant where the hostess is not a young, beautiful lady in a short dress and high heels.

    Don't try to tell me that those are job requirements.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Try to find a restaurant where the hostess is not a young, beautiful lady in a short dress and high heels.

    Don't try to tell me that those are job requirements.
    Hmm, so you’re suggesting that young, beautiful ladies in short dresses is all that one can encounter out there?

    When I was younger - and single - I’d have loved to take on that challenge.
    Last edited by KC; 20-09-2018 at 07:42 AM.

  8. #8

    Default

    I had a friend in his 40's get a job in a restaurant where part of his job was seating people. Many assumed that he was the owner or manager.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  9. #9

    Default

    Try an Albert's or a Smitty's
    I am in no way entitled to your opinion...

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Try to find a restaurant where the hostess is not a young, beautiful lady in a short dress and high heels.

    Don't try to tell me that those are job requirements.
    That depends how you define "job requirements".

  11. #11

    Default

    One word, "cleavage"

    My daughter worked at Chili's on Whyte and after hiring her, she was expected to serve customers on the third floor terrace, taking plates of food and drinks from the ground floor kitchen in high heels, a short dress and v-neck top. She was an experienced waitress and would only wear moderate heels, a buttoned shirt and moderate length skirt. Management pressured her to conform but she protested that the male staff wore normal shoes or runners, buttoned shirts and pants. They did not fire her but gave her less hours and jobs like cleaning drains to get her to quit.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spudly View Post
    Try an Albert's or a Smitty's
    Let's not go there.

    I prefer my food to not come in a trough.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    One word, "cleavage"

    My daughter worked at Chili's on Whyte and after hiring her, she was expected to serve customers on the third floor terrace, taking plates of food and drinks from the ground floor kitchen in high heels, a short dress and v-neck top. She was an experienced waitress and would only wear moderate heels, a buttoned shirt and moderate length skirt. Management pressured her to conform but she protested that the male staff wore normal shoes or runners, buttoned shirts and pants. They did not fire her but gave her less hours and jobs like cleaning drains to get her to quit.
    I have a young adult daughter as well so I understand where you're coming from but the fact is that the atmosphere is a big part of what makes a restaurant successful, and the people who work there are part of the atmosphere. Just as we want the furniture to look nice, we also want the servers to look nice. High heels, short skirts and V-necks make girls look nice. There's no getting around that.

  14. #14

    Default

    Then you've obviously never been to either and just want to hear yourself b!tch about something... as usual.
    I am in no way entitled to your opinion...

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    One word, "cleavage"

    My daughter worked at Chili's on Whyte and after hiring her, she was expected to serve customers on the third floor terrace, taking plates of food and drinks from the ground floor kitchen in high heels, a short dress and v-neck top. She was an experienced waitress and would only wear moderate heels, a buttoned shirt and moderate length skirt. Management pressured her to conform but she protested that the male staff wore normal shoes or runners, buttoned shirts and pants. They did not fire her but gave her less hours and jobs like cleaning drains to get her to quit.
    I have a young adult daughter as well so I understand where you're coming from but the fact is that the atmosphere is a big part of what makes a restaurant successful, and the people who work there are part of the atmosphere. Just as we want the furniture to look nice, we also want the servers to look nice. High heels, short skirts and V-necks make girls look nice. There's no getting around that.
    Women are not furniture. Apparently ypu'd consider Hooters to be fine dining due to the short shorts and tight t-shirts.

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post

    Women are not furniture. Apparently ypu'd consider Hooters to be fine dining due to the short shorts and tight t-shirts.
    "women are not furniture". Gee, thanks for that fine example of a strawman. Did you miss the part where I said I also have a young adult daughter?

    I said high heels, short skirts and V-necks make girls look nice. Hooters goes a bit further than that, wouldn't you say? Personally I don't find that Hooters uniforms make girls look nice, but I'm sure some people do. It depends on the type of atmosphere you're going for I guess.

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post

    Women are not furniture. Apparently ypu'd consider Hooters to be fine dining due to the short shorts and tight t-shirts.
    "women are not furniture". Gee, thanks for that fine example of a strawman. Did you miss the part where I said I also have a young adult daughter?

    I said high heels, short skirts and V-necks make girls look nice. Hooters goes a bit further than that, wouldn't you say? Personally I don't find that Hooters uniforms make girls look nice, but I'm sure some people do. It depends on the type of atmosphere you're going for I guess.
    So you didn't state this equivalency?

    Just as we want the furniture to look nice, we also want the servers to look nice

  18. #18

    Default

    Do I really have to explain that to you? Really?

  19. #19

    Default

    Not in the least. Men are expected to appear professional and competent. Women are expected to appear sexy and desirable and should complement the decor. That basically it?

    You apparently agree with the restaurant instead of the servers.

    JOEY restaurant server forced to wear heels despite ‘bleeding’ feet

    A former JOEY hostess recalled being told in 2007 that she’d only get promoted to a server if she “lost weight and got hotter.”


    “‘Oh ya after like six months of running around in heels, you’ll really slim down,'” she claimed to have been told. “Keep in mind the most I ever weighed was 125 pounds.”


    As for getting “hotter,” that apparently involved her hair being longer.


    “It was a disgusting and degrading place to work,” she wrote. She told Global News she experienced the same policies at two locations.

    https://globalnews.ca/news/2694492/j...bleeding-feet/
    Last edited by kkozoriz; 20-09-2018 at 04:27 PM.

  20. #20

    Default

    Apparently this does need explaining for you.

    Obviously both men and women in a restaurant are expected to look good, but the way that's done is different between the sexes. Most people understand this. Apparently you don't. Maybe you prefer girls to wear slacks. That's totally your prerogative. Most people will agree however that girls look better in mini skirts.

    And please stop with the strawman arguments. Argue like an adult or don't argue at all.

  21. #21

    Default

    Most people understand that it is done. That doesn't mean that they agree with it. Even Earls has changed their tune.

    BTW, most servers are women, not girls.

    Would you then agree that women who are lawyers should wear mini skirts in court? What about surgeons and the operating room? Or is it just in a restaurant that they should be expected to appeal to you?

    Joey's high heels policy in training session left woman's feet bloody

    A former employee says that during a Joey Restaurants' training session she was required to wear high heels as part of the dress code, leaving her feet bloodied, but the company is calling it a misunderstanding and says its code allows the wearing of wedges, flats or heels.


    The 21-year-old Edmonton woman, whom CBC News has agreed not to name, took a photo of her bloodied feet from wearing high heels during a training session in late April.


    Her friend, Nicola Gavins, posted it on Facebook and it has garnered a lot of criticism of the Vancouver-based company.


    The woman says she was told by her manager that she had to wear heels, a minimum of a one-inch heel and a maximum of a three-inch heel. She also got a training manual from Joey that said the same.

    CBC Marketplace investigated the dress codes at some of Canada's top restaurant chains and heard from dozens of female staff who say they felt pressured to wear revealing outfits or risk losing shifts.


    Earls, which is owned by the same company as Joey, recently amended its policy to allow female servers to wear pants instead of skirts.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmon...post-1.3577885


    There's a link to the training manual that states heels must be at least 1 inch high to a maximum of 1 1/2 inches but the company claimed otherwise even thought heir own training manual had it in writing.

  22. #22

    Default

    I thought hiring was supposed to be based upon qualifications, education and experience. Did not know that if someone thinks you don't look pretty enough, you can't do your job.


    I wanna see our police women forced to wear heels, skirts and cleavage. let's see how that flies...

    New male EPS uniforms

    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 20-09-2018 at 06:09 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  23. #23

    Default

    Hiring is mostly of course based on qualifications and experience, but you'd be naive to think that your looks don't matter. Of course in some jobs it matters more than others but there's a reason companies have dress codes, and there's a reason that good looking people are more likely to get hired and promoted. And that reason is called "human nature". As people we care about the way things (and people) look. We just do.

  24. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spudly View Post
    Try an Albert's or a Smitty's
    Or Swiss Chalet..or any number of places.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  25. #25

    Default

    "Good evening Vincent. We'll be your waiters tonight. May I interest you in a cocktail?"


  26. #26

    Default

    I don't even know what point you're trying to make, honestly.
    Your responses on this thread are just so stupid.

  27. #27

    Default

    Apparently you have a density greater than lead.

    What would be wrong, in your world, of a restaurant hiring gentlemen like in post #25? Fine dining, like where a host or waiter would usually be wearing white shirt, black slacks and a tie. The same place you'd see noting wrong with a woman wearing a mini skirt, push up bra and a deep plunging blouse.

    Hey, if the ladies are there for your leering pleasure, why not something for the ladies that are dining there as well?

  28. #28

    Default

    I feel like I'm talking to a woman. Are you a woman? This is what women do. I say something like "mini skirts look nice" and she responds with "What!!!! You want me to dress like a slut for your leering pleasure?????? How dare you!!!!!! You sick *******!!!!!"

    (Well, to be fair, not all women do that. Just the crazy ones)

  29. #29

    Default

    Both men and women should dress to match the workplace. If a woman wants to wear 3 inch heals or flats, that is her business. Comfort and personal preference should prevail. Moon boots and fuzzy slippers are not appropriate.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  30. #30

    Default

    Exactly. Forcing women to wear shoes that make their feet bleed is of course stupid, but it's not unreasonable to require servers to wear certain specific articles of clothing like mini skirts, white tops, black pants, cummerbunds, dress shoes, or a uniform of any sort as long as it's comfortable and appropriate for the job. If a job requires you to wear things you don't like, then don't take that job.

  31. #31

    Default

    If a restaurant wants staff to wear black bottoms and white tops or company yellow shirts with their slogan and brown bottoms and brown shoes that is reasonable IMHO.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  32. #32
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,482

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
    Hiring is mostly of course based on qualifications and experience, but you'd be naive to think that your looks don't matter. Of course in some jobs it matters more than others but there's a reason companies have dress codes, and there's a reason that good looking people are more likely to get hired and promoted. And that reason is called "human nature". As people we care about the way things (and people) look. We just do.
    Just because we all know that hiring on looks over competency happens doesn't make it right and doesn't mean that particularly blatant examples of it shouldn't be called out.

    As for sexist dress codes, that one is a bit more difficult. There is a long history of women wearing different styles than men and most people would agree that some things that generally look good on women look ridiculous on men and vice-versa. The problem is when women are expected to look sexy while men working the same job are expected to look professional. Women in the hospitality industry are well aware that the miniskirt and low cut top will lead to more tips from certain types of customers - isn't that enough incentive?

  33. #33

    Default

    Some women (and men) may choose to dress sexy for tips, others maintain a professional edge and get the respect of customers based upon quality of service. It is about choice.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  34. #34

    Default

    Exactly. Offer women the choice to wear the same as me (i.e. white shirt, black pants, etc). I'm much more likely to tip for good service than I am for a miniskirt and low cut top.

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post


    Just because we all know that hiring on looks over competency happens doesn't make it right and doesn't mean that particularly blatant examples of it shouldn't be called out.


    As for sexist dress codes, that one is a bit more difficult. There is a long history of women wearing different styles than men and most people would agree that some things that generally look good on women look ridiculous on men and vice-versa. The problem is when women are expected to look sexy while men working the same job are expected to look professional. Women in the hospitality industry are well aware that the miniskirt and low cut top will lead to more tips from certain types of customers - isn't that enough incentive?
    There's also a segment of customers that would tip more if the women were topless. Does that make it OK for a restaurant to demand that women dress like that?

  35. #35

    Default

    Businesses can implement any dress code they want.

  36. #36

    Default

    Wrong. Seriously wrong

    Appearance and dress codesINFORMATION SHEET


    In Alberta, employers have the right to establish the appearance, grooming and dress standards that they believe are necessary for the safe or effective conduct of their business. An employer can set reasonable appearance, grooming and dress standards in areas such as aesthetics, health and safety, unless these standards discriminate against employees based on any of the protected grounds under the Alberta Human Rights Act.


    Standards or codes should not be used to exclude an individual from employment or to treat an employee adversely based on any of the protected grounds. The protected grounds are: race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, religious beliefs, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, physical disability, mental disability, marital status, family status, source of income and sexual orientation. For more information, see the Commission information sheet Protected areas and grounds under the Alberta Human Rights Act.


    Employers have a duty to accommodate the individual needs of employees based on the protected grounds, up to the point of undue hardship. For more information about the duty to accommodate, see the information sheet Employment: Duty to accommodate and the interpretive bulletin Duty to accommodate.
    https://www.albertahumanrights.ab.ca...ess_codes.aspx
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 21-09-2018 at 06:17 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  37. #37

    Default

    Not seriously wrong at all. As your quote says, companies can set any dress code they want (within reason of course), as long as the dress code doesn't discriminate, which is pretty obvious since discrimination is against the law.

  38. #38

    Default

    And you don't think that forcing women to wear mini skirts, low cut tops and high heels shoes that cause injuries isn't discrimination?

  39. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
    Businesses can implement any dress code they want.
    And your boss can make you wear the Easter Bunny suit every day at work or you are fired...
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  40. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    And you don't think that forcing women to wear mini skirts, low cut tops and high heels shoes that cause injuries isn't discrimination?
    No.

  41. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
    Businesses can implement any dress code they want.
    And your boss can make you wear the Easter Bunny suit every day at work or you are fired...
    Ha! If my boss (if I had a boss) made me wear an easter bunny suit I would quit!

  42. #42

    Default

    That is the point of labour laws. Protection for the employees from bosses that demand unreasonable or even illegal acts under the threat of firing or demotion.

    All responsible bosses and manager understand and follow labour laws.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  43. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    And you don't think that forcing women to wear mini skirts, low cut tops and high heels shoes that cause injuries isn't discrimination?
    No.
    Then as a boss or manager, you would be violating Alberta law. Employees have rights.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  44. #44

    Default

    Really? Can you show me a reference to a case where the courts have said it's illegal to require your employees to wear mini skirts, low cut tops or high heel shoes?

  45. #45

    Default

    Vincent's idea for new nurse uniforms to be required by AHS.


  46. #46

    Default

    I like it.

  47. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
    Really? Can you show me a reference to a case where the courts have said it's illegal to require your employees to wear mini skirts, low cut tops or high heel shoes?
    Here you go.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/wom...ghts-1.3476964
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  48. #48

    Default

    Not exactly definitive examples are they?

    The only discrimination case in that article is the one discriminated against because she was pregnant. The judge didn't say anything about it being illegal to implement a dress policy with tight fitting tops, just that they can't stop giving her shifts because her pregnant belly doesn't fit the dress code.

    The second one is not discrimination. Although I agree that if you're having a "beach themed event" and the decision is made to wear bikini tops, it should definitely be optional. Obviously bikini tops are very revealing and can be understandably uncomfortable for people. And I don't think it's fair to implement a dress code that makes people uncomfortable, especially if the person has already been working there and that dress code was not a part of the requirement for accepting the job.

    Third one never even went to a hearing so there's no ruling on that.


  49. #49

    Default

    There's nothing in the Alberta Employment Standards guide regarding dress code but the Alberta Human Rights Commission says this about dress code.

    In Alberta, employers have the right to establish the appearance, grooming and dress standards that they believe are necessary for the safe or effective conduct of their business. An employer can set reasonable appearance, grooming and dress standards in areas such as aesthetics, health and safety, unless these standards discriminate against employees based on any of the protected grounds under the
    Alberta Human Rights Act.
    Standards or codes should not be used to exclude an individual from employment or to treat an employee adversely based on any of the protected grounds. The protected grounds are: race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, religious beliefs, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, physical disability, mental disability, marital status, family status, source of income and sexual orientation. For more information, see the Commission information sheet
    Protected areas and grounds under the Alberta Human Rights Act.

    Employers have a duty to accommodate the individual needs of employees based on the protected grounds, up to the point of undue hardship. For more information about the duty to accommodate, see the information sheet
    Employment: Duty to accommodate
    and the interpretive bulletin
    Duty to accommodate.

    In other words, you can require people to wear certain types of clothing as long as it does not violate anybody's rights on any of the protected grounds. And if those protected grounds conflict with the dress code then the employer has a duty to accommodate up to the point of undue hardship (such as in the pregnancy case).

  50. #50
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,346

    Default

    When I was working at Xentel, in early 2000's up to the last day 2012, they had a strict dress code. No mussel shirts, no shirts with logo's, no thongs in the summer for ladies, but they would allow Muslim's time for Maghrib etc. I couldn't figure out back then why they wouldn't let me celebrate Ostara at the time, when I was into that sort of thing, oh well. They and my current place of employment were are sensitive to women wearing perfume because some people have allergies.

    The other thing about Xentel, quite often I'd pass by young people filling out a hard copy of the job application, they're about to put down their date of birth etc. That's not necessary at that stage of the hiring process. They don't even need to include their SIN, that comes later. Just offering my 50 years of experience in the work force.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  51. #51

    Default

    You cannot force women to wear high heels but not require that from men too. That would be an obvious case of sex discrimination. Clear and simple.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  52. #52

    Default

    This was in today's Edmonton Journal (via the Financial Post): https://business.financialpost.com/e...-a-bra-at-work
    I am in no way entitled to your opinion...

  53. #53

    Default

    Vincent's opinion is not supported by legal protections given to employees for their human rights. Case closed.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  54. #54
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,346

    Default

    When I was working at Xentel, they never said anything about high heels. Thongs (not the ones worn above the knees ) were part of their dress code back, then but things change. Most HR know the Alberta standards and the loopholes. But I could never figure out why up to recently, my current place of employment was able to get away with a 6 month probation for new hires, not taking income tax off a pay cheque. They don't do that now of course.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  55. #55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    You cannot force women to wear high heels but not require that from men too. That would be an obvious case of sex discrimination. Clear and simple.
    Ha ha! Sex discrimination. So if a restaurant required men to wear a suit and tie it would be dsicrimination if they didn't also require it of women? Give me a break. No judge is going to call women's wear sex discrimination anymore than they would call men's wear sex discrimination.

  56. #56

    Default

    It would be sexual discrimination if a restaurant required their male servers to wear a tight tank top and shorts while their female servers wore long skirts/slacks and a button-up top with long sleeves, wouldn't it?

  57. #57

    Default

    Vincent is making a fool of himself is his attempts to model himself after his idol, Ron Burgundy.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  58. #58

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    You cannot force women to wear high heels but not require that from men too. That would be an obvious case of sex discrimination. Clear and simple.
    Ha ha! Sex discrimination. So if a restaurant required men to wear a suit and tie it would be dsicrimination if they didn't also require it of women? Give me a break. No judge is going to call women's wear sex discrimination anymore than they would call men's wear sex discrimination.
    Funny, I thought that mini skirts were appropriate clothing.

    Tenn. judge issues dress code for female lawyers

    MURFREESBORO, Tenn. -- The wardrobe choices of some female attorneys who frequent Rutherford County's courts have prompted one judge to set some fashion rules.


    Attorneys in the county have groaned to their colleagues and judges that certain female attorneys are showing up in attire that pricks the sensibilities of a profession long known for its conservative dress code.


    Some female lawyers, according to many in the local legal community, are appearing in court in revealing blouses, miniskirts and, in at least one instance, sweatpants.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...wyers/2418211/

  59. #59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    You cannot force women to wear high heels but not require that from men too. That would be an obvious case of sex discrimination. Clear and simple.
    Ha ha! Sex discrimination. So if a restaurant required men to wear a suit and tie it would be dsicrimination if they didn't also require it of women? Give me a break. No judge is going to call women's wear sex discrimination anymore than they would call men's wear sex discrimination.
    Funny, I thought that mini skirts were appropriate clothing.

    Tenn. judge issues dress code for female lawyers

    MURFREESBORO, Tenn. -- The wardrobe choices of some female attorneys who frequent Rutherford County's courts have prompted one judge to set some fashion rules.


    Attorneys in the county have groaned to their colleagues and judges that certain female attorneys are showing up in attire that pricks the sensibilities of a profession long known for its conservative dress code.


    Some female lawyers, according to many in the local legal community, are appearing in court in revealing blouses, miniskirts and, in at least one instance, sweatpants.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...wyers/2418211/
    They are appropriate clothing.

  60. #60

    Default

    In appropriate settings.

    And if it's appropriate for a male server to wear a white shirt and black pats, for example, then it should be appropriate for women to wear the same.

  61. #61
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,482

    Default

    ^ One could turn that around and suggest that the business that encourages female employees to wear low cut tops and miniskirts should be OK with their male employees showing up the same way. Or, to make the scenario a bit more realistic, in short sleeve button down shirts and dress shorts.

    I am all in favor on non-sexist dress codes (and not just in the hospitality industry), but they will take some getting used to.

  62. #62

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    In appropriate settings.

    And if it's appropriate for a male server to wear a white shirt and black pats, for example, then it should be appropriate for women to wear the same.
    Appropriate settings? Who decides? Citizenship ceremonies?

    My view if the women wants to, then it’s appropriate.

  63. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cumberland View Post
    It would be sexual discrimination if a restaurant required their male servers to wear a tight tank top and shorts while their female servers wore long skirts/slacks and a button-up top with long sleeves, wouldn't it?
    lol. No. It would be ridiculous, but not discrimination.

  64. #64

    Default

    Why would it be ridiculous? I bet there'd be lots of women who'd like some beefcake with their dinner.

    Oh right, it's only women who we're supposed to sexualize at work. I forgot.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •