Are work suits on the way out?

[ortega76]

As many of you no doubt remember, a month ago Swiss bankers UBS released a 40-odd page dress code. In typical Swiss fashion, it was precise and comprehensive. For men, it spelled out permissible suit colors and hygiene. For women it provided step-by-step detail on make-up. It made quite a splash on the web, as Americans were kind of put-off by the draconian document. Discussing it with a friend who works in HR at a large financial services company, she said she really liked it as she was tired of having to make oblique suggestions to fresh-out-of-college kids that had no idea how to dress. Several articles and our discussion mentioned Gen Y kids getting raised to "express themselves" in their personal wardrobes. So you get funky clothes in schools and kids (even parents) who often fight school dress codes with fervor.

http://www.banktech.com/blogs/228800618

I thought about this yesterday. I had to take my 6-month old daughter to a major hospital here in Chicago for a check-up and as I sat in the lobby waiting for my girl, I overheard several early twenty-somethings indicate they were all med-students there for residency interviews. I found it shocking that out of 5 very smart kids, only one had on what I would consider interview attire. One guy had on a black suit, black cap-toes, a white shirt and a tie. Frankly, he was clearly foreign (accent) and so he doesn't really count. One young lady looked like a gypsy with a sparkly headband and a broom-skirt! Another guy had on hemp slip-ons that were frayed and oil-stained. These guys are bright enough to be potential doctors, but no one had sat down with them to demonstrate what to wear to an interview!

OK, I know that wearing a suit and tie as a working doctor is a recipe for cross-contamination and that scrubs are the uniform of a doc making rounds or operating. But I think there has to be some way of giving younger people the tools to dress appropriately and convey a sense of dignity and confidence. Yes, their grades are important. They do interview with doctors after a few initial rounds of interviews, but their initial interviews are with HR (my girl is a nurse at this place so I asked). To me, that means a pretty traditional interview is taking place.

[Cousi]

As someone involved in the interview process, I find it amazing what people will wear to an interview. I had a discussion some years ago with a contemporary who was complaining about having a hard time getting hired. When I pointed out his numerous facial piercings, he said "I'm not stupid; I take them out for the interview" to which I responded "and you think they won't see the holes?"

This inevitably ends up with the old saw of "they should accept me for who I am" which is a trite and frankly whiny complaint. If you want something (a job) from them (the employer) that means that you need to accept them, they don't have to accept you at all. During the interview process, you're looking for personality for the most part. By the time you've gotten an interview its been determined that you have the skills so the interview is really to determine two things: 1 - did you lie on your resume? and 2 - do I want to work with this person? If you show up to an interview wearing Birkenstocks and a tie-die t-shirt that first question has become immediately irrelevant because the second one has already been answered.

People are judged by their looks. Depending on what study you chose to believe, anywhere from 60 to 90% of what you're saying is done through non-verbal communication: what you're wearing, your facial expression, what you do with your hands, are you fidgeting, do you look tired, do you look like you've just come home from a rave and thrown on your best suit, do you have holes in your face - these are all things that people see and evaluate you on, often times without even realizing it.

At the same time, people forget the interview process goes both ways. Just because you're interviewing at a company doesn't mean the guy before you is someone you want to work with or for. How would you react if the person interviewing you for an office job was wearing a t-shirt with holes in it sporting a three-day uneven beard with residual pieces of lunch in it? What if when they shook your hand their hand was cold, clammy and damp? As they spoke to you, were they nervous and fidgety? Could you smell them before you saw them? Would you want to work for a guy like that? (I say guy because if your interviewer is a woman sporting a three-day beard there are other issues at play.) Before going into the interview, do you know what the company does? Are they publicly traded? How do their stocks look? What sort of environment is it? What sort of cars were in the parking lot? Even if you aren't consciously aware of it, you are judging them just as they are judging you. If you're the kind of person who has piercings and goes to raves every weekend, you're likely thinking the clean-cut guy wearing a shirt and tie that's interviewing you really needs to loosen up and live a little.

I swear, if we really wanted high school to prepare people for life, we'd be teaching them how to balance a checkbook, change the oil in their cars and how to interview. [/soapbox]

[Super Ordinary Guy]

As someone involved in the interview process, I find it amazing what people will wear to an interview. I had a discussion some years ago with a contemporary who was complaining about having a hard time getting hired. When I pointed out his numerous facial piercings, he said "I'm not stupid; I take them out for the interview" to which I responded "and you think they won't see the holes?"

This inevitably ends up with the old saw of "they should accept me for who I am" which is a trite and frankly whiny complaint. If you want something (a job) from them (the employer) that means that you need to accept them, they don't have to accept you at all. During the interview process, you're looking for personality for the most part. By the time you've gotten an interview its been determined that you have the skills so the interview is really to determine two things: 1 - did you lie on your resume? and 2 - do I want to work with this person? If you show up to an interview wearing Birkenstocks and a tie-die t-shirt that first question has become immediately irrelevant because the second one has already been answered.

People are judged by their looks. Depending on what study you chose to believe, anywhere from 60 to 90% of what you're saying is done through non-verbal communication: what you're wearing, your facial expression, what you do with your hands, are you fidgeting, do you look tired, do you look like you've just come home from a rave and thrown on your best suit, do you have holes in your face - these are all things that people see and evaluate you on, often times without even realizing it.

At the same time, people forget the interview process goes both ways. Just because you're interviewing at a company doesn't mean the guy before you is someone you want to work with or for. How would you react if the person interviewing you for an office job was wearing a t-shirt with holes in it sporting a three-day uneven beard with residual pieces of lunch in it? What if when they shook your hand their hand was cold, clammy and damp? As they spoke to you, were they nervous and fidgety? Could you smell them before you saw them? Would you want to work for a guy like that? (I say guy because if your interviewer is a woman sporting a three-day beard there are other issues at play.) Before going into the interview, do you know what the company does? Are they publicly traded? How do their stocks look? What sort of environment is it? What sort of cars were in the parking lot? Even if you aren't consciously aware of it, you are judging them just as they are judging you. If you're the kind of person who has piercings and goes to raves every weekend, you're likely thinking the clean-cut guy wearing a shirt and tie that's interviewing you really needs to loosen up and live a little.

I swear, if we really wanted high school to prepare people for life, we'd be teaching them how to balance a checkbook, change the oil in their cars and how to interview. [/soapbox]

Excellent points, now if only we could put them into work within our society....

I saw a very beautiful young lady the other day with a face full of piercings and tattoo's everywhere, literally everywhere. Hair black with streaks of brilliant red and blond.
She was in a coffee shop talking to what seemed like a friend of hers (who didn't have any visible tats or piercings)... The friend was in scrubs and they were chatting about jobs...

The friend mentioned that where she worked they were going to hire two more people.
The gypsy looking lady with tattoos said great, can I go back to work now with you and talk to someone about a job ??

I was getting my latte and heading for an open table which was next to them,,, I realized as I walked by I was involuntarily shaking my head no as I heard her ask this question...

But I figured if they saw me, they just figured I was an old geezer who just didn't get it with the youngsters these days.....

Obviously, one of us for sure didn't get it......

[davidg]

I've a young guy in my office (government agency) who doesn't seem to understand that at times dress can also make an interview easier by playing into a clients preconceptions (we all have them). For example, when talking to "baby boomers" you are more likely to have an easy interview if they see you as a professional.. and dressing the part helps. He doesn't seem to get that people's confidence in your abilities are only partly the result of your actual ability and the rest is based on perception.

[ortega76]

Here's the thing. Personally, I straddle both sides of this issue. I have worked a variety of jobs in fairly conservative fields AND I have an arm full of tattoos with my ears pierced. I have no body piercings. I have a ton of friends with crazy hair and facial piercings. I have friends who have never even thought of a tattoo.

While I am currently a stay-at-home dad, my last position was as a menswear store manager. I wore a shirt and tie at minimum, and generally wore a suit. Once, I had to come to the store on my day off after the cops came to arrest a shoplifter. My employees were amazed when I showed up in a short-sleeved shirt (with tattoos visible) because I always wear a long-sleeved button-up. Why? It's appropriate in my workplace. When I come home, I change into something a little funkier. But I do it while at home! You know when I cover tattoos? When meeting new people I might need to impress. Like my wife's workplace social functions. Like playdates (although the kids love tattoos) with some of the parents on my street because I found an amazing rental on a great block with million dollar homes.

If you work in a creative field or work for yourself, then your appearance is your own. You might or might lose business because of how you dress, but then that might be true if you dressed in a suit everyday. My girl's hairstylist has two-tone hair and full tattoo sleeves. The guy who owns my favorite sandwich shop has a shaved head with a spider tattoo on the back. Hey, he works for himself and makes a damn good Italian beef. If these guys and gals want to express themselves, they are doing the right thing as far as employment. And they probably realize that if they chose to step outside the mainstream in their appearance, things might be difficult for them in some ways.

[Super Ordinary Guy]

Again more excellent points.

Cause like you said, you understand there are times when you have to look a bit more professional. It is just expected by society and those that play by those rules will have the best of both worlds..... and the better jobs IMHO.

[ortega76]

You know who I blame for this? Dr. Gregory House. Seriously, I know the guy is a fictional character but he embodies so much of this attitude many Americans have about their physical appearance. The guy is a genius and he is surly and rude. He dresses in crumpled tees and sneakers while his underlings are generally much more appropriately dressed. Oh, but he's a genius so it doesn't matter. He's judged on his abilities, not his social graces.

Guess what. None of us is Gregory House.

[Indy Parise]

You know who I blame for this? Dr. Gregory House. Seriously, I know the guy is a fictional character but he embodies so much of this attitude many Americans have about their physical appearance. The guy is a genius and he is surly and rude. He dresses in crumpled tees and sneakers while his underlings are generally much more appropriately dressed. Oh, but he's a genius so it doesn't matter. He's judged on his abilities, not his social graces.

Guess what. None of us is Gregory House.

By extension, though, we are also blaming Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and the character of Sherlock Holmes, a large inspiration for House (arguably, House is a modern interpretation of Holmes) as Holmes was also known to dress and act rather innapropriately. Holmes even kept his mail affixed to his mantle with a pen-knife. I think this is the case of a person achieving enough and proving themself enough for their reputation to trump their appearance. Once you have achieved a certain status, you can dress however you damn well please because you've already proven your proficiency to an insane degree. Mind you, most of us will never achieve such notoriety or fame, but it is still a valid point. I blame this a bit more on the same culture switch that led to the decline of hats; the "grunge" period that began with the hippy generation of the 60s and 70s. Many of the hippies probably forgot or plain never learned how to dress appropriately for a job interview or business meeting, instead dressing in tie-dye and bell-bottom jeans etc. Dressing in a suit and tie were completely against the hippy philosophy and were a symbol of "the man." Without this knowledge, they were unable to pass it down to their children. My grandfather was a sharp dresser, I know from photographs and the wardrobe he left behind. I'm sure at some point he passed down this knowledge to my father, but my father doesn't know his arse from his elbows when it comes to wearing a suit and tie. Now, my father dresses well, but not professionally if that makes sense. Whenever my dad has to dress formally, he looks like he belongs on a tropical island somewhere in khakis, a silk shirt (untucked) and a non-matching blazer. He does not own a matching suit or a tie. He never was able to pass down that knowledge to me, so I had to figure it out on my own. My grandfather knew it, so where along the line was it lost? The saddest thing is that even kids who try to make an effort don't have the resources to do it right. So many times I see vests with pants worn too low showing shirt in between, often displaying a belt as well and ruining the effect that a three-piece suit is made for. No one is there to tell them that a vest overlaps the pants or that suspenders are more appropriate with a waistcoat. Hell, I had to help my friend put on cufflinks with french-cuffs for prom because he didn't know how. Somewhere this knowledge was lost and remains lost, even to those wishing to find it.

[Doug Palumbo]

IP...great post and good to have you back!

[Henri Defense]

I'm currently working at a BMW dealership. For my interview, I wore a suit. Since being hired, I've see many "kids" coming in for interviews. I actually saw one guy wearing a bandanna and backwards cap. Luckily, I never saw him again.

I have one tattoo, on my forearm. I made my employer aware of this at the time of the interview, and they told me plainly, "We have quit a few guys with tattoos, you'll just have to wear long sleeves." End of conversation. It was easy and painless. They understood, I understood, no big problem. At the end of the day I put on my t-shirt and let my tattoo speak for itself and who I am. I am not my job. I don't want to be my job! So when at work, I'm a professional, after punching out, I get to be me. Not that hard to do. One that that is a bit difficult for me, is that the dealership is just a day job. At night I'm an actor. So I'm constantly changing my appearance for rolls etc. Mainly this means growing my hair out, cutting it differently etc. So it's difficult for me to main a completely professional appearance haircut wise, and this can actually get a bit annoying for me because I don't want to be grouped in with the "kids" but it is what it is, and thus far hasn't been a major issue, just a personal annoyance.

On a side note, I've come to discover that a lot more young women seem to not know how to dress "appropriately" for work. At least in my work place. You can always tell who the women are that are trying to "get noticed" as they're dressed waaaaay too provocatively. And even more surprisingly, it irritates a lot more men than you'd think. I had a co-worker show up to work one day, and she was wearing a red dress, that in essence is something more appropriate of she was a lounge singer and laying on a piano, and a lot of guys commented that it wasn't attractive, but more of a distraction and nuance.



Henri



Henri

[Bendingoak]

I look at it this way. I don't care about how you look , tattoos eating, or whatever. To each their own. The person ability to do the job should be the only thing that matters but you should take some care in your appearance on a interview. Suit and tie gentlemen. If you don't it just gives off that you just don't care. Why would I want to hire someone who didn't put the effort. That's not a lot to ask.

John

[ortega76]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-12418046

11 February 2011 Last updated at 06:10 ET
Are work suits on the way out?
By Tom de Castella
Journalist
On Fridays many dress down, but is the suit in general decline as the standard business wear?
Once upon a time British cities at rush hour were a sea of grey suits, bowler hats and umbrellas.
The contrast with today is stark. It's not just the arrival of women in the workforce that has changed things but the shift away from suits to smart casual, jeans and even in some quarters trainers, T-shirts and flip flops. For both sexes.
A recent poll of 2,000 British workers by online bank First Direct found that only one in 10 employees wears a suit every day, more than a third of staff opt for jeans and only 18% regularly wear a tie.
Earlier this year, UBS created brief uproar when it unveiled a 43-page dress code for staff. It soon backed down in the face of much mockery over its demand for women to wear skin coloured underwear and men to have monthly haircuts.
But there were some unlikely defenders.
The Financial Times's work commentator Lucy Kellaway wrote in her column: "Clad in my sloppy flannel pyjamas and fleece dressing gown, I'm looking again at the UBS booklet and thinking how crisp those lovely shirts look and marvelling at the wisdom of the advice."
Rather than Big Brother as critics had claimed, it "smacks of big sister and a kindly, helpful one at that", she wrote.
However, Claire McCartney of the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, the professional body for human resources practitioners, says such prescriptive dress codes are becoming increasingly old-fashioned.
"There's definitely a tendency for employers to let their staff feel comfortable in what they are wearing," she says.
"Obviously there will always be limits to what is appropriate. But there is a wider acknowledgement that you don't have to wear a suit to be smart."
Cary Cooper, professor of organisational psychology at Lancaster University Management School, agrees that the world has moved on. Formality is out, and about time too.
"Even in the City, people are wearing suits but no ties. They aren't coming in with jeans but smart casual."
Many professions have been "dress down" for decades but the trend in financial services began on Wall Street with dress down Friday about 15 years ago, he believes." The objective was to let staff get on with paperwork on a Friday and wind down to the weekend. It led people to question why they needed to wear a suit in the first place."
But there'll be a suit hanging there and a tie in a drawer in case they have to go and meet clients, he says. But doesn't this rush towards chinos, shirts and jumpers signal a lowering of the tone and a loss of focus?
"I disagree," says Prof Cooper. "There's no definitive research on the effect of dress on productivity. But I'd be surprised if we didn't find that smart casual saw productivity rise. The more informal an office - as long as it's not slovenly - the better the communication. It's about making the office less stressful."
While the suit may survive, Prof Cooper believes the tie has had its day.
"What is the point of a tie? It's the weirdest thing. If someone from Mars went into an office the first question they'd ask is 'what's that thing round your neck?"
Suits were once the unimaginative uniform of middle-aged men, but today some argue it's the casual look that smacks of blandness. The artists Gilbert & George, synonymous with smart, tailored suits, certainly think so.
In an interview with the Evening Standard in 2009, Gilbert said: "We are more offended by blue jeans than anything else. They are appalling. It's a uniform," before George adding: "It's the fear of standing out. The fear of being different."
And Fiona Allison, head of design at tailors Jermyn Street Design, says the suit has something we jettison at our peril. "What's good about the suit is you get the uniformity of everyone looking smart. And if you look professional you act professional. I think it's a shame more people are going to work in what they wear at the weekend."
Some of her clients have asked for suits that tone down the formality but are still smart. So for a mobile phone operator she designed a smart suit to go with a polo shirt, while staff at a new boutique hotel wear a suit, trainers, and no tie.
Informality is not a given though. The influence of uber-stylish Mad Men, set in a 1960s New York advertising firm, has prompted a nostalgia for a time when men and women dressed smart and sassy.
Women's work wear has definitely got smarter while men's suits - when they choose to wear them - are getting sharper, she says. "We find our clients asking for women to be in a dress rather than shirt and skirt. It's more feminine because it shows off their figure. And men are getting more fussy about suits - nowadays it's normally slimcut like in Mad Men."
Dressing down is the easy option but we risk losing something precious, argues Alex Bilmes, editor of Esquire magazine. And too many workers are mixing up the idea of casual with sloppy, he warns.
"The downside is that everyone dresses scruffy now as if they're about to pop out to Superdrug. People are taking 'relaxed' too far to include wearing baggie jeans and track suit bottoms."
Some professions like waiters, policemen and lawyers still understand the value of looking the part, he says.
"They're not stuck in the past, they know it's reassuring to people to look smart. If you needed a lawyer, went down to chambers to find one wearing shorts, a T-shirt with a logo and battered trainers, are you going to choose him?"
It's not all doom and gloom though. After a malaise in the 80s and 90s, formal styles are back in vogue with a "real buzz" around the traditional tailoring of Savile Row and Jermyn Street, he says. Men hoping to climb the career ladder would be wise to go back to classic English tailoring, he says.
"If you put on a tailored suit and pressed shirt you are putting on a suit of armour. You will walk a bit straighter and taller and people will take you more seriously."

[J B]

I'm interested in topics like these, noting the general decline in formality over time. I posted this on another board:

Well look who's talking; I haven't worn an actual suit in over a year, a black suit on a cruise ship and at evenings, but this is a mode of dress that I find very respectable for office-type jobs. It's kind of sad to witness the decline of the suit in business settings, but at least they're still present. Something's got to be done to make suits seem more approachable and casual. I don't think fashion models are doing enough for that, if anything they may be turning people away from the style, whether it is due to their messy hairstyles or their too-tight dark suits, almost always black or dark grey. Then there's another thing, it seems that for most dress codes that do require suits, they are to be the standard charcoal grey, or black ones. It certainly is conservative, and I consider myself a conservative person, but I think many people may think suits are "boring" for that reason. Why not allow brown, tan, olive, lighter than dark navy blue, or lighter grey colored suits? A charcoal or black suit can still look sharp, and well put together, but I would like to see dress codes, instead of going just business casual like everyone else, allow for suit/sport coat color variety.

The subject of the tie on other hand, I can see why people might hate them, but why not allow loosely tied neckties as well? Sure, it may be unkempt looking, but it can seem cool if done right. I have a theory that if we're ever to see a massive, large-scale return of the business suit and necktie at the work-place again, variety will likely have to be allowed to make wearing them seem attractive, cool, hip, and whatever else individuals may identify them as. Right now, suits and ties mainly project an overly serious, uninteresting, or boring look, I'm assuming, as they are on the decline.

So what do you think? I'm basically saying that some companies should do this; if they require suits and ties, permit the more casual suit varieties. I doubt that many employees enjoy wearing dark suits all the time. We need more people to actually enjoy wearing 'em for any real comeback to happen, even if it includes what may be considered fashion suits.

[ortega76]

I think the reason that so many businesses don't allow the casual suit varieties is that Americans take a mile if given an inch when it comes to dress codes. When I ran a small office, my dress code went from a few sentences to being 3 pages. Seriously. I had to specifically enumerate what was "business casual". I was dealing with many young employees from what is popularly called an "urban" area so they dressed like they were going to the club. Logos over everything. I had to cut out denim entirely since they didn't grasp the differences between a pair of simple, clean dark wash jeans and some Ed Hardy pants with tigers embroidered on the butt.

I also think that places where a casual suit would be appropriate have gone uber-casual. They are polo shirt and khaki offices, so a "casual" suit would put the wearer out of place. It's a pity, because the casual suit does need a comeback. I had hoped the shirt jackets of the 1990's would be the return of the casual suit but that didn't materialize.

[Blackthorn]

I remember in the 70's when everyone thought the suit was on its way out. Then everyone was buying "leisure suits." But when all was said and done class came back into style.

I don't doubt that at some point suits will disappear out of the work place as societies evolve, but I don't think it'll be in my lifetime.