The Reminder is making its archives back to 2003 available on our website. Please note that, due to technical limitations, archive articles are presented without the usual formatting.
Dressing for Respect A number of years ago, management consultant John Molloy penned "Dress For Success" which quickly became the standard for what to wear for men who want to be successful in their business or job. Molloy, praised by Time Magazine as "America's first wardrobe engineer" counseled companies such as General Motors, U.S. Steel, and Merril-Lynch had at that time 15 years of research with 15,000 executives and professionals for which his fee was $600 per day. Molloy's research was unique and dealt mainly with the attitudes of others towards the way men dress and the clothes they wear. One fascinating example dealt with beige or black raincoats. Apparently beige is the colour of the successful upper middle class and black the colour of the lower class. He found that high-end stores sold 80 per cent more beige than black raincoats with lower-end stores the reverse. Molloy then hired college students to count the number of people wearing the two colours and do field tests recording the attitudes of people such as waiters, clerks, etc. plus a survey of 1,300 people. His conclusions were that of all dark coloured raincoats only dark blue is acceptable. Molloy explains a number of his carefully researched examples of what to wear and when and why dress codes are necessary. He is careful to point out that clothes affect the attitudes and impressions of others, far more than they do for those wearing the clothing. He emphasizes that although companies can mandate dress codes for male employees they should only state that women should be "neat, clean and properly attired with dress codes general and ambiguous." By the way a very recent statistic in the U.S. is that 30 per cent of all female employees have been reprimanded at some time for wearing improper or unacceptable clothing. Even today, most businesses dictate some type of dress code although these have changed dramatically since the "hippie revolution". In one Winnipeg accounting firm suits, ties and dress shirts are the rule except on Fridays when more casual dress is allowed. Even criminals on trial dress to impress judges and juries (on the advice of their lawyer of course) The way students and teachers dress in public school classrooms is now considerably different than in the past. An end of March story out of Louis Riel School Division caused a feeding frenzy among the media and brought a lot of unwanted attention to the school. A first-year principal had suspended two 12 year-old girls for wearing pajama pants to school. The uproar was caused by the parents ? criticized for looking for their "15 minutes of fame", who demanded that the girls be allowed to wear what they like and insisted they return to school and refuse to leave. The School Division retreated slightly but officials claimed the parents were way out of line. What they have done is doomed the girls to a reputation as troublemakers which will stay with them for some time. This writer's opinion is that the principal should have handled it differently, making sure the parents knew the dress code, and why, and obtaining support from other parents. Perhaps a discussion with the parents prior to the suspensions would have been in order. In one high school I ran we had an anti-hat policy as students could wear hats to school but not to class. It was based on student attitude, and was supported by the parent council and student council. One parent objected, telling the vice-principal that no one could remove the hat from her 14 year-old son. We told her to find another school and the school board told her the same thing. Her son came to school without his hat. It is all a matter of attitude and dressing for respect. The problem in Louis Riel was followed up by excellent social issues writer Lindor Reynolds who supported the school principal and castigated the parents for this negative distraction. Ms. Reynolds did question teacher dress in the classroom, observing that on some schools it is difficult to tell the younger teachers from the students. Her point that "When a teacher dresses to distinguish herself from the students, custodial staff or visiting parents, she's indicating that she has a respect for her job and its importance" is right on! Why has this deterioration in teacher dress happened? Supporters of casual dress claim that they need to be "pals of their students," ignoring Bob Hope's comment: "I don't want some 40 year-old to be a pal of my kid." They claim that teacher dress does not matter. Research says otherwise. John Molloy's first research project was the effects of teacher dress on learning in the classroom. At that time he was a poorly paid young English teacher, conducting the research to supplement his income. He set up a series of experiments in Connecticut schools with teachers teaching the same class but dressing differently ? one conservatively dressed in suit/tie while the other dressed casually. Molloy concluded that the students worked harder for the traditionally dressed teachers, and that his studies proved clothing worn by teachers affects the attitude of students. He is right, it is all a matter of dressing for respect.
