Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Should bosses be allowed to tell their employees to cut their hair and shave?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by MikeH View Post
    I once got sent home from the supermarket I worked at as an evening/weekend job when I was at school to get my hair cut. True story.

    Still got paid for the time I missed.


    Awesome! Did that encourage you to grow your hair long again?
    Is it me, or is MOBIUS a horrible person?

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Zevico View Post
      Thank you Kuci, but your explanation is in another castle.

      "Justice, desert and fairness" (or whatever order it was in) doesn't make sense. Is KH stringing together a bunch of words, one of which (desert) is nonsense, or is he making a point, albeit without any clarity?

      Watch out, Zevico! The Genius Clique will jump on you if you criticize KH. Get ready to be called a ******.
      "Flutie was better than Kelly, Elway, Esiason and Cunningham." - Ben Kenobi
      "I have nothing against Wilson, but he's nowhere near the same calibre of QB as Flutie. Flutie threw for 5k+ yards in the CFL." -Ben Kenobi

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Boris Godunov View Post
        Should? No, but that's not the question. I can't say whether a company should or shouldn't enforce any particular dress code--that's the company's call, and who am I to say otherwise?

        They certainly *can* enforce a dress code, just like a private school can require a uniform. They can also specify other grooming and hygiene standards. Just so long as they don't run afoul of civil rights laws in either case, it's fine.
        Boris, why isn't the question SHOULD? That's what the thread title asks.
        "Flutie was better than Kelly, Elway, Esiason and Cunningham." - Ben Kenobi
        "I have nothing against Wilson, but he's nowhere near the same calibre of QB as Flutie. Flutie threw for 5k+ yards in the CFL." -Ben Kenobi

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Zevico View Post
          Thank you Kuci, but your explanation is in another castle.

          "Justice, desert and fairness" (or whatever order it was in) doesn't make sense. Is KH stringing together a bunch of words, one of which (desert) is nonsense, or is he making a point, albeit without any clarity?
          Are you a moron? The 3 concepts are deeply related in moral philosophy.
          12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
          Stadtluft Macht Frei
          Killing it is the new killing it
          Ultima Ratio Regum

          Comment


          • #50
            If you want to get a basic introduction to the relationship, visit the Wikipedia entry on justice
            12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
            Stadtluft Macht Frei
            Killing it is the new killing it
            Ultima Ratio Regum

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Al B. Sure! View Post
              Boris, why isn't the question SHOULD? That's what the thread title asks.
              You really suck at reading comprehension. And you're a pedant. That's just not a good combination.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Kuciwalker View Post
                Dress codes (rigid or lax) are just a signaling mechanism. It's not clear to me that they are or aren't efficient choices for one.
                Not sure what you mean in this context, but I see it as an issue of image branding and culture management.
                One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.

                Comment


                • #53
                  I smoke weed and I refuse to shave. Should a sharply dressed and immaculately groomed Republican be allowed to tell me to "GET A JOB!"
                  John Brown did nothing wrong.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    For example, there's a pre-existing belief that dressing up for an interview improves your chances of getting the job because (among other things) it shows that you take the job seriously - alternatively, it shows that you aren't so apathetic about the job that you aren't willing to expend the minor effort to dress nicely. Given that, it is actually rational behavior for employers to prefer such candidates. And then it becomes perfectly rational for the candidates to dress up for the interviews as a way to signal their professionalism - and so on.

                    (I'm sure you knew all of that before - I'm just clarifying what my post was about.)

                    xpost

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      And it's not clear to me that using dress as a signal is even inefficient, despite the seeming capriciousness - willingness to comply with rules that appear illogical or pointless (within reason) is probably a useful trait.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        I wear my blood-soaked overalls and hockey mask to signal "Leave me alone" on the subway.
                        “As a lifelong member of the Columbia Business School community, I adhere to the principles of truth, integrity, and respect. I will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do.”
                        "Capitalism ho!"

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Kuciwalker View Post
                          For example, there's a pre-existing belief that dressing up for an interview improves your chances of getting the job because (among other things) it shows that you take the job seriously - alternatively, it shows that you aren't so apathetic about the job that you aren't willing to expend the minor effort to dress nicely. Given that, it is actually rational behavior for employers to prefer such candidates. And then it becomes perfectly rational for the candidates to dress up for the interviews as a way to signal their professionalism - and so on.

                          (I'm sure you knew all of that before - I'm just clarifying what my post was about.)

                          xpost
                          OK. That is as an argument for not requiring a dress code -everyone may already choose to follow an unwritten dress code for the purpose of self-advancement or because of the cultural mores of [the] business.
                          One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Dauphin View Post
                            OK. That is as an argument for not requiring a dress code -everyone may already choose to follow an unwritten dress code for the purpose of self-advancement or because of the cultural mores of [the] business.
                            Does it then matter? At least having the code in place would give an easy excuse to fire the idiot who doesn't follow the cultural mores/takes the effort/cares about his self-advancement.
                            "Flutie was better than Kelly, Elway, Esiason and Cunningham." - Ben Kenobi
                            "I have nothing against Wilson, but he's nowhere near the same calibre of QB as Flutie. Flutie threw for 5k+ yards in the CFL." -Ben Kenobi

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Yes it is still required as it is about the culture cultivation and branding image of the business.
                              One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Dauphin View Post
                                OK. That is as an argument for not requiring a dress code -everyone may already choose to follow an unwritten dress code for the purpose of self-advancement or because of the cultural mores of [the] business.
                                Hm? I'm addressing the broader (and more interesting, IMO) question of whether employer discrimination based on dress is a good idea, whether explicit or implicit.

                                Of course, this actually requires addressing several related but distinct questions, e.g.

                                1. If you were arranging society on a blank slate, without accommodation for pre-existing (and presumably arbitrary) norms, would you choose to have employer discrimination based on dress (or something equivalent)?

                                2. Within our society, would it be good if employer discrimination based on dress (and the associated norms) were reduced or eliminated, through legal means or just the general evolution of norms?

                                3. Within our society, is it acceptable for any individual employer to discriminate based on dress, even if the answer to 2 is yes, because its business would be impaired otherwise?

                                3a. What degree of impairment is necessary to justify such discrimination?

                                We address these questions frequently wrt other forms of discrimination. For example, it is generally illegal to exclude women from a job purely on the basis of sex - but if you are hiring an actor for a movie, we consider it perfectly acceptable to do so.

                                The question of "should employers have an explicit dress code, and how strict should it be" is probably a fairly boring empirical endeavor once the above questions have been addressed.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X