Business casual is defined constructively for males and existentially for females. Examples of how to dress business casual for men and women clearly show this.[1]
Scrolling through the results of an image search for "women's business casual" vs "men's business casual" also highlight a stark difference.
This leads to unconscious bias against women. It isn't that we don't want to hire you, it's that we felt like you made a dress Faux pas that a male is never given the opportunity to make. Your skirt was slightly too high and also red, the top slightly too low cut, you wore slightly too much makeup, and even though you paired the skirt with leggings, we just felt you don't "understand" business dress.
Yes, women have a lot more choice in what they wear for business attire, whereas men have it pretty easy. Overall it doesn't really make sense to reject her for this reason when the dress code is casual for the position she was applying for. Perhaps if she was going for an executive position it might make a difference. It might be a problem is she dressed as a hooker, but that definitely doesn't seem to be the case.
"If I had been a man would it have mattered what I was wearing?"
Pretty obviously yes. One may think it's stupid but this company has a dress code and wants its employees to look put together period.
Also, based on her post I would say the company was pretty good at reading her personality. I have rarely seen someone who is yet to graduate but already has such deep feeling of entitlement. I guess her parents have told her her whole life how special and amazing she was, and she could do anything without trying. Welcome to the real world.
Male programmer denied job because of his 'unprofessional' attire
Or even:
Programmer denied job because of the 'unprofessional' attire
Or:
Person denied job because of the 'unprofessional' attire
I always try to remove any words that can bias the interpretation. Now I can read it as a person got denied a job, based on 'unprofessional' attire. Doesn't sound so patriarchal and oppressing, after all.
Thank you, I was about to say the same. I hate wearing suits, but I wear them for weddings and funerals and interviews because that is one of the clauses in the social contract.
Regarding the downvote: I'm not saying I don't think his attire is unprofessional. I'm simply saying it isn't the "standard" male business attire of shirt and tie with a suit. The point I'm making is that this woman's attire is no less professional than the CEO.
If the other programmers indeed do wear tshirts and jeans, as she reported, then I don't think it's accurate to say that the company has a dress code. Her attire is appropriate for a tshirt and jeans culture.
Perhaps. Playing devil's advocate, though: I've worked plenty of places where some individuals can get away with t-shirt and jeans but the overall business tends toward business casual, and there is still an expectation that you get dressed up for a job interview.
Personally I think that's entirely acceptable. It's not a double standard, it's simply a policy that acknowledges that there are different social contexts. A job interview might fall into a different context from your day-to-day experience. Another case in point: My colleagues and I curse quite a bit at work, but that doesn't mean any of us would consider it appropriate to curse at a job interview.
Not saying this is exactly how it played out in reality, and there's always the question of unequal enforcement of equal standards.
I always dress for an interview one step above the "norm" as a nod to the formality of the occasion.
So if everyone dresses in jeans and a t-shirt I might wear slacks and a polo or jeans and a button down shirt. If they wear business casual I'd probably wear a suit (though probably sans jacket).
Casual wear is a dress code. It is common practice to ask the HR people scheduling the interview what kind of dress code is applied at the company.
Companies will pass on someone for wearing a suit if their are expected to be dressed casually. It happens all the time at startups. Being overdressed is a non starter sometimes.
As I said: "One may think it's stupid but this company has a dress code and wants its employees to look put together period."
I don't disagree that it's idiotic, but this seems to be the company's policy, they have the right to be idiotic.
Many comments pointed out that it is customary for an applicant to ask if there is a dress code prior to showing up for the interview. This person didn't know that, that's ok, she's inexperienced, still going to school. Maybe it was her first interview, I don't know.
The thing is, a grown-up would learn from this experience and say "next time I'll ask my HR contact if there is a strong policy regarding clothing", but no, not this very special snowflake. The world has to bend over to accomodate her uniqueness.
And as I said in my reply, the way she dressed seems to match the way people were dressed at the company - as reported by her.
Companies do not have the right to be idiotic in all ways. As touched in the thread I posted, I think that we're flirting with those ways. Tshirt and skirt are usually appropriate for women where tshirt and jeans are appropriate for men, in American culture. If a company says that is not so, then I think there is potential for a gender discrimination claim. We have laws which say companies are not allowed to be arbitrarily idiotic.
I am a film producer. On a horror short in the woods [VHS 2: RIP segment] we had a PA (Production Assistant- the grunts of film) show up in a elegant black cocktail dress and some very expensive heels. She was smart, funny, and positively radiant. We had her sit around in the office until we wrapped and did not ask her back. It had everything to do with her attire and nothing to do with her gender. I will point out that when I asked her about her clothing choice (as the AD that was completely within my purview) she said, "I thought I would be working with the Director." Ridiculous.
It's basically the same as a man's suit, except that you may swap out the trousers ("pants") for a matching skirt, and no tie. As such, the blouse typically leaves the top button undone.
I hate it that in this day and age people would still be passed on a job they are qualified for and willing to do because of the way they chose to dress or ornaments they chose to use.
Having said this, the article is rage-bait. Remove the "female" from the title and it's just another Tuesday. Getting a job is hard for everyone.
>This person does seem rather entitled as well as naive. I think her post was used to continue the "fight against patriarchy" and, much like the Rolling Stone article about UVA, is rather counterproductive.
>I do feel for women in the workplace, in any vocation, in terms of dress. It is an unfair standard and attention, impolite and otherwise, is completely unavoidable. It is a tricky situation: I believe in freedom of choice, but i know fighting biology is futile. There must be some middle ground between the burkah and the bikini...
Judging a candidate by looks alone may seem like a shallow thing. But the profane FB rant demonstrates a definite lack of professional composure. The company dodged a problematic hire. I'm afraid this poor decision will haunt her.
So what? You don't have any co-workers that rant? Most programmers get respect for their skills. I've worked with all kinds. How? Professionalism. They want to wear funny hats, or a tutu, whatever. Some of them even make catty remarks about other employees clothing choices. That's pretty low, but I put up with it.
Privately yes. To your partner. Yes. To your close friends over drinks. Yes.
To a semi-private social media account that will probably become public? No. That speaks of entitlement and narcissism.
And the fact that most millennials think it is "reasonable" to whine and cry publicly when they don't get their way is the problem.
If she were professional, she would have taken the opportunity to learn from it, change her interview/work-casual appearance a bit for the next job prospect, and try again.
The fact that she ranted at all about a commonality such as dress code in business shows how unprofessional she is, and I have to agree with other comments that this probably showed through in the interview.
My general rule of thumb for my staff is do your work well, and I don't care if you wear jeans and a polo, cut out fifteen minutes early/take a few extra minutes on lunch/show up a bit late every once in a while. As long as our users are happy, work is done, and quality is high that is what matters and I will cover for you and have your back if anyone questions it.
But, I would expect a possible job applicant to show up on time, in a suit or button down/slacks. And not act like an entitled, special snow flake regardless of obvious talent and skill.
It is unfortunate she didn't get the job, but making a bullshit stink about how unfair it is publicly is just awful. Grow up.
I think the recruiters second two comments were the most valid. Being late and having a run in your stockings seems to show a lack of caring and professionalism.
The comment about "looking like she was ready to go out" was, in my opinion just a poor way of saying that she was too casual. I understand that the company may have a casual dress code, but it sounds like her appearance was "unprofessional" and not "overtly sexy". I would imagine that a guy showing up in a tattered suit would have gotten a similarly poor response.
When has a company ever described the reasons for not hiring you in such detail? I've been rejected like 50 times and not once was a reason given other than "we're searching for a candidate of another profile". Which I guess is a great way to avoid discrimination lawsuits. If this article is true, OnShift has the dumbest recruiters ever and I hope they get what's coming for them.
Interview in highly professional clothes. I'm a software engineer but I wear collar with matching pants and jacket (no tie) to interview. Work pants, hoodie+As hat once I demonstrate my value. One must bring A-game to the first meeting.
its considered acceptable for a candidate when called for an interview to ask about the required dress code. I did this many times and worked well.
You don't know who will be present at the interview, e.g. it could be upper management and therefore you should dress accordingly. Asking beforehand also helps make sure you don't overdress which could make you feel uncomfortable during the interview and have a negative impact.
"These are the reasons she cited: 1) I 'looked more like I was about to go clubbing than to an interview.' 2) I 'had a huge run in my tights' 3) I was late."
I'm going to make a giant leap of faith here and suggest that the person who denied her the job was probably a female.
I simply cannot envision a guy telling a girl he wasn't going to hire her because of a run in her tights.
There's nothing wrong with that attire. In fact, it's not worth commenting on further. The interviewers have a poor understanding of the state of the industry, if that was the actual reasoning (which is doubtful).
To boil down why her clothing was considered "unprofessional", it should be safe to say that clothing that reveals the pectoralis major muscle is not considered professional.
47 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 112 ms ] threadScrolling through the results of an image search for "women's business casual" vs "men's business casual" also highlight a stark difference.
This leads to unconscious bias against women. It isn't that we don't want to hire you, it's that we felt like you made a dress Faux pas that a male is never given the opportunity to make. Your skirt was slightly too high and also red, the top slightly too low cut, you wore slightly too much makeup, and even though you paired the skirt with leggings, we just felt you don't "understand" business dress.
[1] http://www.wikihow.com/Dress-Business-Casual
What she wore: http://cdn0.dailydot.com/uploaded/images/original/2015/4/15/...
Replace the sweater with a blazer, and it's a match.
Pretty obviously yes. One may think it's stupid but this company has a dress code and wants its employees to look put together period.
Also, based on her post I would say the company was pretty good at reading her personality. I have rarely seen someone who is yet to graduate but already has such deep feeling of entitlement. I guess her parents have told her her whole life how special and amazing she was, and she could do anything without trying. Welcome to the real world.
http://medcitynews.com/2012/02/scheduling-software-company-o... http://www.onshift.com/blog/we-have-coolest-tech-leader-clev...
Seems like they're being a bit hypocritical, as her outfit was just as professional as his.
Overall, I think they probably just have some asshat of a manager. Most companies have a few of these. She probably dodged a bullet with this one.
You mean a suit? Cause the photo definitely has him in a suit jacket.
Personally I think that's entirely acceptable. It's not a double standard, it's simply a policy that acknowledges that there are different social contexts. A job interview might fall into a different context from your day-to-day experience. Another case in point: My colleagues and I curse quite a bit at work, but that doesn't mean any of us would consider it appropriate to curse at a job interview.
Not saying this is exactly how it played out in reality, and there's always the question of unequal enforcement of equal standards.
So if everyone dresses in jeans and a t-shirt I might wear slacks and a polo or jeans and a button down shirt. If they wear business casual I'd probably wear a suit (though probably sans jacket).
Companies will pass on someone for wearing a suit if their are expected to be dressed casually. It happens all the time at startups. Being overdressed is a non starter sometimes.
I don't disagree that it's idiotic, but this seems to be the company's policy, they have the right to be idiotic.
Many comments pointed out that it is customary for an applicant to ask if there is a dress code prior to showing up for the interview. This person didn't know that, that's ok, she's inexperienced, still going to school. Maybe it was her first interview, I don't know.
The thing is, a grown-up would learn from this experience and say "next time I'll ask my HR contact if there is a strong policy regarding clothing", but no, not this very special snowflake. The world has to bend over to accomodate her uniqueness.
Companies do not have the right to be idiotic in all ways. As touched in the thread I posted, I think that we're flirting with those ways. Tshirt and skirt are usually appropriate for women where tshirt and jeans are appropriate for men, in American culture. If a company says that is not so, then I think there is potential for a gender discrimination claim. We have laws which say companies are not allowed to be arbitrarily idiotic.
It's like dating - what you wear on the first date is not what you can expect your spouse to expect/tolerate once you are living together.
It's basically the same as a man's suit, except that you may swap out the trousers ("pants") for a matching skirt, and no tie. As such, the blouse typically leaves the top button undone.
Having said this, the article is rage-bait. Remove the "female" from the title and it's just another Tuesday. Getting a job is hard for everyone.
>This person does seem rather entitled as well as naive. I think her post was used to continue the "fight against patriarchy" and, much like the Rolling Stone article about UVA, is rather counterproductive.
>I do feel for women in the workplace, in any vocation, in terms of dress. It is an unfair standard and attention, impolite and otherwise, is completely unavoidable. It is a tricky situation: I believe in freedom of choice, but i know fighting biology is futile. There must be some middle ground between the burkah and the bikini...
Yeah there must be some sort of middle ground, like a skirt and leggings, and a blouse.
To a semi-private social media account that will probably become public? No. That speaks of entitlement and narcissism.
And the fact that most millennials think it is "reasonable" to whine and cry publicly when they don't get their way is the problem.
If she were professional, she would have taken the opportunity to learn from it, change her interview/work-casual appearance a bit for the next job prospect, and try again.
The fact that she ranted at all about a commonality such as dress code in business shows how unprofessional she is, and I have to agree with other comments that this probably showed through in the interview.
My general rule of thumb for my staff is do your work well, and I don't care if you wear jeans and a polo, cut out fifteen minutes early/take a few extra minutes on lunch/show up a bit late every once in a while. As long as our users are happy, work is done, and quality is high that is what matters and I will cover for you and have your back if anyone questions it.
But, I would expect a possible job applicant to show up on time, in a suit or button down/slacks. And not act like an entitled, special snow flake regardless of obvious talent and skill.
It is unfortunate she didn't get the job, but making a bullshit stink about how unfair it is publicly is just awful. Grow up.
The comment about "looking like she was ready to go out" was, in my opinion just a poor way of saying that she was too casual. I understand that the company may have a casual dress code, but it sounds like her appearance was "unprofessional" and not "overtly sexy". I would imagine that a guy showing up in a tattered suit would have gotten a similarly poor response.
You don't know who will be present at the interview, e.g. it could be upper management and therefore you should dress accordingly. Asking beforehand also helps make sure you don't overdress which could make you feel uncomfortable during the interview and have a negative impact.
I'm going to make a giant leap of faith here and suggest that the person who denied her the job was probably a female.
I simply cannot envision a guy telling a girl he wasn't going to hire her because of a run in her tights.