What's the point of having a dress code stricter than business casual?

[russ_watters]

1. The story mentions, that the person was trying to "fit in" through his choice of clothing. Gesture of good faith because he actively thought about his clothing choice to make his peers comfortable with him.

Fair enough. I would consider that just meeting an expectation ("good faith" I see as being above and beyond expectations/requirements), but I see your point.

2. Poster used the word "upset" to describe those informing management of the new additions clothing. Pretty strong word, IMO to describe ones disposition.

Agreed...I guess that's what you meant by being less than "content". I was connecting the word "content" to the action, not the feeling. I don't think people have much control over their own feelings and none over the feelings of others. But they do have control over how they act in response to those feelings -- and I thought the action was appropriate.

Can you tell when somebody has or hasn't?

Ooooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhh, yeah. Unfortunately I had to have that conversation with a subordinate...multiple times.

How does anyone else specify/police/prove it better?

Exactly how it's being presented in this thread: it's largely complaint-based. I can't define a shower/deodorant frequency, but if it is insufficient, I notice, other people notice and complain to me, and I have to respond. Other than saying "have good personal hygiene" -- which is obviously quite vague -- I don't know how to write that in a personnel manual and there's certainly no way to specify or prove an actual frequency.

Fashion/dress codes can be more prescriptive, but there is also more variability. I see local or even national news stories almost weekly (why is this a big issue?) over school dress code problems.

 

[random_soldier]

Ooooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhh, yeah. Unfortunately I had to have that conversation with a subordinate...multiple times.

Well clearly my standards are too high for people. I assume they would smell their own arm pits or something sooner or later and figure it out.

Exactly how it's being presented in this thread: it's largely complaint-based. I can't define a shower/deodorant frequency, but if it is insufficient, I notice, other people notice and complain to me, and I have to respond. Other than saying "have good personal hygiene" -- which is obviously quite vague -- I don't know how to write that in a personnel manual and there's certainly no way to specify or prove an actual frequency.

Fashion/dress codes can be more prescriptive, but there is also more variability. I see local or even national news stories almost weekly (why is this a big issue?) over school dress code problems.

I just don't see why you can't flat out write it down instead of things needing to come to complaints. For somethings it's hard but for things like men wearing short shorts, it seems straightforward. So why not just say no man should be wearing shorts that go above the knees in said organization? It avoids ambiguity and there being a lot more complaints than needed.

 

[symbolipoint]

So much effort to arguing about dress codes and cultural standards of dressing and grooming.

I would guess that one kind of "business casual" may be buttoned dress-shirt with collar; "dress" pants (slacks?) which would usually go with 'suite & tie' but without the 'suite & tie'; solid-color socks; "nice" shoes such as whatever would go well with a suite&tie OR neat-looking work shoes. No necktie!

 

[berkeman]

You were quizzing so I took a stab.

Oh, I get it now. No, in general you should get new running shoes about every 6 months or every few hundred miles, because they lose some of their cushioning effect. The whole reason for wearing running shoes on your runs instead of simple "sneakers" is for the specialized support and cushioning for your feet. Keeps your feet much happier!

https://www.fleetfeet.com/blog/how-long-do-running-shoes-last