Am I just old fashioned when it comes to dress code?

[beffers]

Because the aptitude test is just a preliminary to sort out the candidates the company is genuinely interested in and would like to meet formally to discuss the job. The candidates will (or should be) judged totally on how they perform in the exam and their clothes have nothing to do with the process.

That may be how it works in theory, but not in practice. People from the HR/Personnel Dept will be there checking people in and out and administering the aptitude test itself. Trust me, they notice those who show up in suits/business casual dress versus those in shorts, torn jeans and flip flops. The stated dress code may tell you to dress for comfort, but they are looking out for people who have the kop on to be able to read between the lines and know the difference between showing up relatively well dressed, versus showing up looking like a Britney Spears/Wayne Rooney wannabe. In the job seeking process, being judged by your abilities alone is a wonderful utopian idea of idealism, but at the beginning of the process, appearances count for A LOT imo.

 

[Boyd]

Most companies won't allow runners and t-shirts even on casual Friday. People don't know where to draw the line. I have seen people turn up in football tops. And I have seen girls dress like hookers.....

If you cant wear runners/t-shirt, what the heck is casual Friday then? Thats what I wear every day of the week!

It doesn't have to be client facing. Most companies have outside clients/customers/visitors come into the building for various meetings. They shouldn't have to see lads wearing their celtic tops and girls dressing like Britney Spears. Especially when they look nothing like her.

I dont know about most companies, but the two I have worked for (8 years in total) have no problem with runners and t-shirts. I have seen football tops too. Obviously if people are meeting clients they do dress in suits, but clients often get shown around the floor to see us working, in our usual attire. It does vary a little in that some people wear slacks and a shirt but they look overdressed usually.

Im sure it happens that some HR people would write you off for what you wear, I guess its down to each individual office, perhaps even down to the HR person's mood on the day. I wore suit to last interview I did and interviewer was in runner, jeans and polo shirt so that pretty much set the tone

 

[Complainer]

But everything to do with a job application is about judging people. Would you hire someone that followed one particular fashion and turned up in their pajamas because they were comfy

I'd hire them based on their ability to do the job, not based on how they look.

The stated dress code may tell you to dress for comfort, but they are looking out for people who have the kop on to be able to read between the lines and know the difference between showing up relatively well dressed, versus showing up looking like a Britney Spears/Wayne Rooney wannabe.

Who would want to work for an organisation that plays these kind of head-wrecking games of saying one thing when they actually mean another?

 

[z107]

I dont know about most companies, but the two I have worked for (8 years in total) have no problem with runners and t-shirts. I have seen football tops too. Obviously if people are meeting clients they do dress in suits, but clients often get shown around the floor to see us working, in our usual attire. It does vary a little in that some people wear slacks and a shirt but they look overdressed usually.

Some finance houses and banks are (were?) pretty strict on 'causal' Friday. I remember getting an email saying which clothes were not allowed.
In some companies, dressing 'down' is far from it. Dressing 'down' for some trendy IT companies can involve designer gear that's more expensive then a suit. Look at the way Steve Jobs dresses for instance.

Far prefer the suit. I have enough other stuff to be thinking about.

Who would want to work for an organisation that plays these kind of head-wrecking games of saying one thing when they actually mean another?

I didn't mind. I was paid well, and that's the main thing.

 

[Sunny]

I'd hire them based on their ability to do the job, not based on how they look.

Good for you but unfortunately most people look at the entire package when looking to hire someone. If your child was going for an interview for a office job and she wanted to wear her pajamas, would you say 'No problem. If they don't hire you because of the way you are dressed, you don't want to be working for them anyway?'

Would you hire someone that sent in a CV with a load of spelling mistakes even if was just for a job making burgers and didn't impact on their ability to do the job?

Interviews (and apptitude tests are part of the process) are all about impressions as much as abilities. The company needs to decide between similar candidates with similar cv's and abilities. One made the effort to look professional but the other one didn't. Who would more than likely get the job?

 

[Boyd]

Interviews (and apptitude tests are part of the process) are all about impressions as much as abilities. The company needs to decide between similar candidates with similar cv's and abilities. One made the effort to look professional but the other one didn't. Who would more than likely get the job?

Probably the one who had the most rapport with the interviewer I would say.

 

[csirl]

If you cant wear runners/t-shirt, what the heck is casual Friday then? Thats what I wear every day of the week!



I dont know about most companies, but the two I have worked for (8 years in total) have no problem with runners and t-shirts. I have seen football tops too. Obviously if people are meeting clients they do dress in suits, but clients often get shown around the floor to see us working, in our usual attire. It does vary a little in that some people wear slacks and a shirt but they look overdressed usually.

Im sure it happens that some HR people would write you off for what you wear, I guess its down to each individual office, perhaps even down to the HR person's mood on the day. I wore suit to last interview I did and interviewer was in runner, jeans and polo shirt so that pretty much set the tone

It can depend on the job. There is a big difference in dress code between professionals working in an office block and people working on a factory production line.

As a general rule, if you are meeting a company for an interview/apptitude test or even for an entirely different reason, you should dress at least as well as if you were working for the company i.e. if you go into an office block where everyone wears a suit, you always wear a suit.

My job has no such thing as 'dress down fridays' or casual days. It is written in my employment contract that I must dress appropriately i.e. wear a suit. Have to do this even if I am not due to be meet anyone that day. No big deal to be honest - means you dont have to worry about what to wear from day to day - just throw on suit/shirt/tie etc. As one of my colleagues says - they're just 'office overalls'.

 

[Firefly]

I'd hire them based on their ability to do the job, not based on how they look.

It's quite difficult to determine someone's ability to do the job in most cases. Aptitude tests may help as well as the interview process, but they are not conclusive. Given a choice I would take someone who has gone to the bother and groomed themselves well above a similiar candidate who didn't, all things being equal.

 

[liaconn]

That may be how it works in theory, but not in practice. People from the HR/Personnel Dept will be there checking people in and out and administering the aptitude test itself. Trust me, they notice those who show up in suits/business casual dress versus those in shorts, torn jeans and flip flops. The stated dress code may tell you to dress for comfort, but they are looking out for people who have the kop on to be able to read between the lines and know the difference between showing up relatively well dressed, versus showing up looking like a Britney Spears/Wayne Rooney wannabe. In the job seeking process, being judged by your abilities alone is a wonderful utopian idea of idealism, but at the beginning of the process, appearances count for A LOT imo.

Are you saying that people are told they're coming in for an aptitude test but, if the supervisors don't like their dress, they will mark them down or call a less able candidate for interview??

 

[Complainer]

It's quite difficult to determine someone's ability to do the job in most cases. Aptitude tests may help as well as the interview process, but they are not conclusive.

True.

Interviews (and apptitude tests are part of the process) are all about impressions as much as abilities. The company needs to decide between similar candidates with similar cv's and abilities. One made the effort to look professional but the other one didn't. Who would more than likely get the job?

Given a choice I would take someone who has gone to the bother and groomed themselves well above a similiar candidate who didn't, all things being equal.

Under normal circumstances, I might agree with you. However, if there had been an explicit instruction given to 'dress comfortable', I would not give priority to the suits. Indeed, I might penalise them for failing to follow a clear instruction!

Good for you but unfortunately most people look at the entire package when looking to hire someone. If your child was going for an interview for a office job and she wanted to wear her pajamas, would you say 'No problem. If they don't hire you because of the way you are dressed, you don't want to be working for them anyway?'

No, I wouldn't. If someone was going for an office job, I'd encourage them to dress appropriately for that environment, and if in doubt, err on the side of 'more formal', not less.

Would you hire someone that sent in a CV with a load of spelling mistakes even if was just for a job making burgers and didn't impact on their ability to do the job?

Funnily enough, I might hire the person with the spelling mistakes for burger flipping. There are a couple of issues going on here. First of all, there is a risk of hiring an over-qualified person, who may well get bored or get a better job. You are better off hiring a person who will be well suited to the position. Alternatively, I might think that many people with dyslexia have proven themselves to be very talented in lots of ways, and are as deserving of getting a job as others.

To be honest, I probably wouldn't have looked for a CV for a burger flipping job, as it is not really intended for such roles.

 

[Sunny]

Are you saying that people are told they're coming in for an aptitude test but, if the supervisors don't like their dress, they will mark them down or call a less able candidate for interview??

We are not talking about someone wearing a dress from last season. We are talking about one candidate turning up in t-shirt and shorts and the other in a belly top.

 

[truthseeker]

I tend to make a kind of work uniform, I buy similar black/grey trousers, and a variety of long sleeved similar tops - and just wear combinations of the above each day. I hate having to think about what to wear to work. I used to work in a job that had a uniform and I LOVED it.

For an interview or an aptitude test I would dress appropriately, never jeans, never trainers, but for an aptitude test I would be less formal than for an interview.

We had casual fridays in work too and I found myself assigning a casual uniform for it, so each friday I was in one casual outfit, the following friday I was in a different one, and then back to the 1st one again the next week - Im not that interested in clothes, beyond being neat and tidy for work I wouldnt bother with accessories, make up, etc... Im very functional about how I dress in work. Some people have a lot of flair and even in ordinary working clothes can add a scarf or a necklace and suddenly look the way Id like to look when I get dressed up for an evening out, but sadly Ive never had that kind of casual elegance!!

 

[Firefly]

Under normal circumstances, I might agree with you. However, if there had been an explicit instruction given to 'dress comfortable', I would not give priority to the suits. Indeed, I might penalise them for failing to follow a clear instruction!

I agree if the instruction was to 'dress comfortable' , wearing a suit might look a bit off (or desperate), but according to the OP it was "Public facing job so appearance would matter". This would rule out jeans a T shirt for me.

 

[liaconn]

We are not talking about someone wearing a dress from last season. We are talking about one candidate turning up in t-shirt and shorts and the other in a belly top.

But the question still stands.

Surely if they did well in the test you would call them for interview and at that stage make a decision about their judgment, decorum etc.

 

[Sunny]

But the question still stands.

Surely if they did well in the test you would call them for interview and at that stage make a decision about their judgment, decorum etc.

To be honest, I wouldn't. Most people make an effort to look presentable if they are going out to meet close friends for dinner. If you can't be bothered to make an effort to look somewhat professional when coming into a business environment for whatever reason, I don't want to know. It shows a lack of cop on and respect.

 

[Complainer]

I agree if the instruction was to 'dress comfortable' , wearing a suit might look a bit off (or desperate), but according to the OP it was "Public facing job so appearance would matter". This would rule out jeans a T shirt for me.

But not a public facing aptitude test.

To be honest, I wouldn't. Most people make an effort to look presentable if they are going out to meet close friends for dinner. If you can't be bothered to make an effort to look somewhat professional when coming into a business environment for whatever reason, I don't want to know. It shows a lack of cop on and respect.

What you call 'lack of cop on' could also be described as 'knowing how we do things round here'. There are lots of reasons why someone might not be familiar with traditions or conventions in particular workplaces. This could happen with people who just haven't worked before, or people with disabilities who find it difficult to find work, or people from other countries who might have different traditions and convention.

If you have a dress code, communicate the dress code. If people can't comply with it, they don't get the job. But don't exclude potentially excellent employees because they don't know your little ways and traditions.

 

[callybags]

I see this issue has been raised again regarding the dress code (or lack of) in The Dail.

I fully agree that there should be a policy of at least "neat dress". It shows respect for your coleagues and employers- the public.

It was discussed on Newstalk this morning and Chris Donoghue tried to put forward the argument that it is one's actions that are important, and not the way you dress. This to me is a ridiculous argument, as they are not exclusive. One can dress well AND do or say the right thing.

It was then pointed out ti Chris that he was wearing a suit for a radio programme, and he had no answer, just some bluster about "It's what I'm comfortable with".

 

[Sunny]

What you call 'lack of cop on' could also be described as 'knowing how we do things round here'. There are lots of reasons why someone might not be familiar with traditions or conventions in particular workplaces. This could happen with people who just haven't worked before, or people with disabilities who find it difficult to find work, or people from other countries who might have different traditions and convention.

If you have a dress code, communicate the dress code. If people can't comply with it, they don't get the job. But don't exclude potentially excellent employees because they don't know your little ways and traditions.

That has to be be the most condescending post I have read in a very long time. Disabled people and foreigners don't know that they should make an effort to look presentable when entering a potential employers workplace? Seriously?

 

[elefantfresh]

giz a shirt and tie and out the door anyday

You people are crazy - a shirt and tie is less effort than tshirt and jeans? It would drive me mad having to wear a suit to work - thats for weddings/churchy functions and interviews only.
Oh, and maybe court - hehe!

 

[Latrade]

If you have a dress code, communicate the dress code. If people can't comply with it, they don't get the job. But don't exclude potentially excellent employees because they don't know your little ways and traditions.

Complete other way round for me, if people can't take the time to research me as a potential employer and make simple queries or investigations as to who I am, what I do and any cultural aspects, then that's a bad mark in my book.

In the same way that Google has no dress code and to some extent frown upon business attire, if I went for a job there and hadn't done any work to prepare myself for what Google expects, then that's my problem.

the ICT sector is more casual, largely due to the generation behind starting up and developing that sector, other sectors are far more formal. A quick internet search or even phone call can clear everything up.

As to the aptitude test, same thing I'd at least make a phone call to check. If I can't be bothered to make any effort to enquire and just turn up not only casual, but possibly inapproriately, that has to reflect on my aptitude test along with the formal testing procedure.