Acceptable Cleavage and Other Impossibilities

There was discussion in this morning's staff meeting about negotiations slated for soon among Those Who Make The Decisions regarding certain aspects of our company dress code as published. Note that this has no bearing and bears no resemblance to our company dress code as actually practiced.

This is a clear indicator to me that warm weather has arrived because we have this same pronouncement every year at about this time. We may couch it in whatever terms we like, whether they be, 'dress code update', 're-evaluation of grooming standards', or 'policy review', but those who have worked here long enough (more than ten minutes) can pretty neatly slice through the semantics and see the real issues:

a)Are naked legs OK? The dress code states a need for stockings. Conversely, it stipulates no tights. Nobody bats an eyelash when tights appear throughout the year (although I very thankfully haven't gone near a pair since the third grade) but the minute the naked legs turn up -- as they do every year at this time, generally in the form of a particularly attractive salesperson whose nickname is 'Legs' for a reason, the debate opens. As if naked legs were horrible. As if they led to all types of evil when in fact they generally only lead to strappy open-toed shoes and those are only really a safety hazard in certain departments.

But because we are an organization and because dissussing, creating, revising, and mandating absurd policies is what organizations do, a decision must be made. Hence the discussions upcoming.

By the time any resolve is reached, I'm confident the warm weather will be long over and very little leg will remain to be seen, naked or not. Therefore, we should police ourselves by our own discretion. Ask yourself a simple question when getting dressed for work: Are your legs naked-worthy? If yes, feel free. If not, cover up. Ever on the fence personally about this issue, I generally compromise and wear thigh high stockings. Not as constricting as nylons but really only a semi-naked approach.

b) The sleevless shirt remains a hot topic. As if it truly matters whether your arms are bare for those scant few minutes you're in your office with the door partially closed and make a move so bold as to remove your jacket. Because jackets are an unalterable MUST. Must be worn at all times when in a public area. Always. I've worked in this industry so long I often wear the jacket with no blouse underneath, not seeing the point, frankly, of the wasted second item of clothing. Removing my jacket to go to bed at night, I've even felt vaguely guilty.

Yet jackets pale in significance when discussed next to Plunging Necklines and Acceptable Cleavage. This too, is revisited each year and I have yet to see a universally applicable standard of acceptable cleavage devised. Speaking personally, I'll accept any kind of cleavage I can pull together because it doesn't come that easily to me. I have several colleagues who have invested a lot of time and even more money into creating their own and I look at it this way: If I put five grand into granite countertops (which I would before I'd put it elsewhere but that's just me), I sure as heck wouldn't cover them up so nobody could see their full impact. And honestly -- I may be going out on a limb here-- but any man who tells you he doesn't want to look at cleavage or scantily-clad breasts is just lying to you.

Bottom line, it's hot outside, we're very busy and running around inside and we should all be conscious of the need to keep as many clothes on as possible while in the workplace.

I'm confident that by December a policy will be drafted to that effect. I am not either holding my breath or worrying too much about it, not having a tendency to under-dress except when going to my condo's pool. Which is fine until you consider that the pool is three buildings to the north and accessed by walking through the center courtyard. I try to remind myself that if I must make the trip in just a towel (the swimsuit doesn't have enough fabric to count as an actual item of clothing) it should be a beach towel and not a skimpy bath towel. All I'm concerned with on my own time is that I'm comfortable. I worry enough about what I'm wearing during the work week that on my own time it's not so much on my radar, if at all. So I have to remind myself that even in situations where there is no dress code you should maintain the semblance of one and even if, being a woman, you intuitively know how to remove your bra without removing your shirt when the day is finally over and you're stuck in traffic, it's probably not the best idea to actually do so.

All that said, I will await the unveiling of our revised dress code, my favorite existing clause being, "No un-natural hair colors" because I can't think of one woman here over the age of thirty who's not in violation of the literal translation on that one. "Natural" does not cost $120 and four hours in a salon every six weeks. Likewise the enforcement of an 'acceptable nail length and color," and 'hair conservatively styled'. That's ambiguous and confusing. I don't know whether to switch to a Republican hairstylist or default to a coiled bun forever.

I'm quite convinced this revision of policies will not happen overnight. Not for those areas petaining to females.

The men's section has been in place for years and I can see no changes needed. While we receive a multi-chapter manual, their dress code is imprinted on a tie tack and simply reads, "Tuck your shirt in and get back to work."