Why Americans dress so casually(washingtonpost.com)
washingtonpost.com
Why Americans dress so casually
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/09/08/why-americans-dress-so-casually/
95 comments
I think your perception of what dressing casually is will be dramatically skewed by where you are in the US -- as will what you deem to look slovenly. I think that the two are relative -- dressing casual for your location is doing something to distinguish yourself from the lazier crowd.
I also think that using lookbook models as examples of casual dress is going to be excessive outside of fashion hubs. Their clothes are tailored well, layered appropriately with appealing, seasonally appropriate color schemes -- outside of a well curated closet, these aren't going to be looks that you'll pull out every day. And if your wardrobe is well selected, you probably are dressing a little more than casually.
Also, I would say that skinny jeans are a pretty gender agnostic article of clothing now. And again, I think location comes into play. You're going to see a disproportionate number of women wearing sundresses/skirts in the south etc. I do think that in larger cities this is much less of a thing.
I also think that using lookbook models as examples of casual dress is going to be excessive outside of fashion hubs. Their clothes are tailored well, layered appropriately with appealing, seasonally appropriate color schemes -- outside of a well curated closet, these aren't going to be looks that you'll pull out every day. And if your wardrobe is well selected, you probably are dressing a little more than casually.
Also, I would say that skinny jeans are a pretty gender agnostic article of clothing now. And again, I think location comes into play. You're going to see a disproportionate number of women wearing sundresses/skirts in the south etc. I do think that in larger cities this is much less of a thing.
Maybe this is a telling indication on myself, but the pictures in your first link look significantly stranger and off than the picture in the onion article, text aside.
Formal wear has basically evolved into a costume that is used for specific events (weddings, funerals, and the like). It's hard to imagine someone dressing like that every day, with the complicated layers of nonfunctional and expensive items. Maybe that was the point.
Casual wear has largely evolved into clothing easier to mass produce and fit close-enough off a shelf. Paired with a general decrease in cost and clothing is less of an investment than it once was.
Formal wear has basically evolved into a costume that is used for specific events (weddings, funerals, and the like). It's hard to imagine someone dressing like that every day, with the complicated layers of nonfunctional and expensive items. Maybe that was the point.
Casual wear has largely evolved into clothing easier to mass produce and fit close-enough off a shelf. Paired with a general decrease in cost and clothing is less of an investment than it once was.
She claims that Americans dress more casually than anywhere else, and I don't doubt that the US has played a massive role in promoting more casual dress (also the cowboy esthetic, rock and roll, etc), but I'm not so sure the US is really more casual than every other country out there.
When I hear Americans talk about business casual, it's generally khakis and button down shirts, except when you're in Silicon Valley. But in Netherland, jeans, t-shirt and sneakers (or army boots, in my case) are totally normal in the office. This was the case when I worked in small software companies, but currently I work at a major bank, and it's no different (except sandals, flip-flops and shorts do seem to be a step too far). The business side is a bit more formal, but the IT side is completely casual. Probably because everybody is looking at Silicon Valley.
When I hear Americans talk about business casual, it's generally khakis and button down shirts, except when you're in Silicon Valley. But in Netherland, jeans, t-shirt and sneakers (or army boots, in my case) are totally normal in the office. This was the case when I worked in small software companies, but currently I work at a major bank, and it's no different (except sandals, flip-flops and shorts do seem to be a step too far). The business side is a bit more formal, but the IT side is completely casual. Probably because everybody is looking at Silicon Valley.
You've activated my pet peeve! A shirt with buttons, cuffs, and a collar is called a "shirt" without modifiers, or a "dress shirt" if you are in an aggressively casual-dressing context where someone thinks it means "t-shirt" (which is really properly referred to as a "t-shirt"). "Button down" is a type of collar that can be buttoned down (hence the name), not a type of shirt. A "button down shirt" would logically be a shirt with a collar that buttons down, which is really a less-formal variant (it's a convenience for the physically active).
Everyone calls them button downs. Whether it's correct or not it's what most people say. The retailer I order most of my clothes from has sections for dress shirts and casual button downs.
Casual button downs can be wire tucked or untucked IMHO while dress shirts need to be tucked usually.
Casual button downs can be wire tucked or untucked IMHO while dress shirts need to be tucked usually.
I say 'button ups' for dress shirts, since button downs refers to buttoning down the collar.
Wondering how you would react to 'button ups'
Wondering how you would react to 'button ups'
I'm just using that description because the article did. In Dutch, shirt and t-shirt are synonymous, while a shirt with buttons is called "overhemd" or "bloes"/"blouse".
I suspect that literally speaking, "hemd" would be the Dutch translation of "shirt".
I suspect that literally speaking, "hemd" would be the Dutch translation of "shirt".
You're right about the button down.
Technically a dress shirt is the more formal type of shirt that is designed to be worn tucked in and with a tie, therefore it has longer tails and comes in various collar sizes.
Technically a dress shirt is the more formal type of shirt that is designed to be worn tucked in and with a tie, therefore it has longer tails and comes in various collar sizes.
A "polo shirt" is one where the collar points button to the shirt. Named for polo players whom had an aversion to their collars flying up while playing.
That's not a polo shirt. A polo shirt is a cotton t shirt, with a collar, and a button up neck. The collar is soft and un-boned and is not button down.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polo_shirt
EDIT: although you're right that button down collars did start in polo.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polo_shirt
EDIT: although you're right that button down collars did start in polo.
I don't know about the business side (Though i'm not sure that your data is widely representative), but as far as everyday life it's a big difference. I go between the Netherlands and the US for a few weeks about 6-7 times a year. In everyday life it's just a lot less common to see someone on the streets in, say, Leiden or Amsterdam who's putzing around in an old T-shirt and jeans or (god help us all) sweatpants.
Less common to see someone in t-shirt and jeans on the street? I'd be surprised to see a street where nobody wore t-shirt and jeans. They're a lot more common than suits.
Sweatpants are indeed a lot less common here. My (very sporty) sister wore mostly sweatpants during her teens and student days, but she's an exception, and she switched to nicer clothes (including jeans) when she got married.
Sweatpants are indeed a lot less common here. My (very sporty) sister wore mostly sweatpants during her teens and student days, but she's an exception, and she switched to nicer clothes (including jeans) when she got married.
I mean... vs a nice shirt and khakis or something. My worldview allows for nice clothes that aren't suits, which seem to only be ubiquitous in Tokyo. 8^)
I can attest to the fact that people from the US does not dress more casual than people from the Southern Cone of South America (Argentinians/Chileans/Uruguayans).
> . But in Netherland, jeans, t-shirt and sneakers (or army boots, in my case) are totally normal in the office.
Same here, I'm also the one with army boots (Danish model as they are a bit more causual looking although when winter arrives it is clear they are Danish, -hard soles makes them almost slippery compared to the "native" boots around here it seems.)
Same here, I'm also the one with army boots (Danish model as they are a bit more causual looking although when winter arrives it is clear they are Danish, -hard soles makes them almost slippery compared to the "native" boots around here it seems.)
Do you find that managers dress up a little more than jeans in your bank?
Not the person to whom you're replying, but in my last certifiably "corporate" job, everyone's dress was pretty much dictated by the role you had. It was bizarre, but it was a large company (IT department alone was ~800) so there was a lot of institutional inertia.
The employees wore chinos and a polo or sport shirts most days. Fridays was jeans instead of chinos but still a collared shirt.
Managers wore slacks and dress shirts every day. Directors/VPs and up wore a suit every day but would dress down to slacks and dress shirts on Fridays sometimes.
I swear somebody had to have been sending emails about it. I never saw some VPs in suits and some not, everyone seemed to dress down to the same level on the same day.
The employees wore chinos and a polo or sport shirts most days. Fridays was jeans instead of chinos but still a collared shirt.
Managers wore slacks and dress shirts every day. Directors/VPs and up wore a suit every day but would dress down to slacks and dress shirts on Fridays sometimes.
I swear somebody had to have been sending emails about it. I never saw some VPs in suits and some not, everyone seemed to dress down to the same level on the same day.
My manager usually wears a dress shirt and corresponding pants, but no tie or jacket. But maybe he puts those on when he meets higher ups. I think I've also seen him in jeans, but not often.
But at a different department, the manager of the same level always wears a hoodie, and probably either jeans or cargo pants. I can't really imagine him in anything else.
But at a different department, the manager of the same level always wears a hoodie, and probably either jeans or cargo pants. I can't really imagine him in anything else.
This is easy to explain. You want to wear something close to what your manager and his peers wear in case you get called into a meeting.
The CEO/MDs wear suits and it goes down from there.
The CEO/MDs wear suits and it goes down from there.
I would have no problem entering such a meeting in my jeans and t-shirt. I do try to wear nice jeans and a nice t-shirt, though.
Oh! The accursed "USA Business Casual".... the absolutely rigid uniform of khaki pants and a blue button down shirt. Cringetastic!
Casually? To me, it seems that americans really like to overdress. People still tell me (please, feel free to correct me — I'm not living in US, so my information may be outdated) that they would get strange looks if they wore flip-flops and shirts to the office, regardless of how hot it is outside, and how dangerous for health it might be to wear pants that don't allow the proper ventilation.
When I look at pictures of NYC, I always see people walking in suits down the streets. It's bizzare.
When I look at pictures of NYC, I always see people walking in suits down the streets. It's bizzare.
It's also important to note where in the US you're talking about. Where I'm from, Atlanta, one of the largest business cities in the south eastern U.S., what you've said is absolutely true. If you're going to work, for the majority of jobs there you're definitely not going to wear flip-flops/t-shirts. A polo would probably be the closest acceptable article of clothing to a t-shirt for most jobs. I've had a coworker get sent home for wearing shorts on casual Friday. However, moving to the west coast, the culture is completely different. I work in the tech hub of downtown Seattle, and most people are dressed in sneakers/t-shirts/hoodies etc., with unkempt looking hair.
My fiancee, who is from the West Coast, jokes that if you're wearing a suit in the South, you probably have an important job -- if you're wearing a suit in Seattle, you probably work at the mall.
My fiancee, who is from the West Coast, jokes that if you're wearing a suit in the South, you probably have an important job -- if you're wearing a suit in Seattle, you probably work at the mall.
"if you're wearing a suit in Seattle, you probably work at the mall."
There's a socioeconomic U-shape to the clothing curve for employed people where lower status jobs have dress codes to indicate their lack of individuality and ease of replaceability and interchangeability, and general lack of humanity or humane treatment via strict and formal uniforms. Then it declines into "cubical land" where a local minima is probably the "jeans friday". Then the curve goes back up where there are strong labor markets (programmers in SV, former Apple CEOs who like turtlenecks, etc) and slovenly attire is a very public display of how difficult replacement would be.
Something else to keep in mind is the unemployment rate (the real labor force participation rate, not the made up propaganda figures) is about half. And labor saving home appliances mean the half who are not working are no longer standing at a sink doing dishes or hand washing laundry. And a minimal level of social transfer payments mean the unemployed have some money and therefore something to be seen doing. In "the bad old days" the bums down by the river were not well dressed, but they were unseen. Now a days you will be seeing the unemployed half of the population, and they have not necessarily begun to dress up. This has certain trend setting issues. Given "people of walmart" photos I don't feel the need to dress up when I torture myself by shopping at walmart, and that caving in, applied to a very large scale, ends up with very few people dressing up to shop at walmart.
There's a socioeconomic U-shape to the clothing curve for employed people where lower status jobs have dress codes to indicate their lack of individuality and ease of replaceability and interchangeability, and general lack of humanity or humane treatment via strict and formal uniforms. Then it declines into "cubical land" where a local minima is probably the "jeans friday". Then the curve goes back up where there are strong labor markets (programmers in SV, former Apple CEOs who like turtlenecks, etc) and slovenly attire is a very public display of how difficult replacement would be.
Something else to keep in mind is the unemployment rate (the real labor force participation rate, not the made up propaganda figures) is about half. And labor saving home appliances mean the half who are not working are no longer standing at a sink doing dishes or hand washing laundry. And a minimal level of social transfer payments mean the unemployed have some money and therefore something to be seen doing. In "the bad old days" the bums down by the river were not well dressed, but they were unseen. Now a days you will be seeing the unemployed half of the population, and they have not necessarily begun to dress up. This has certain trend setting issues. Given "people of walmart" photos I don't feel the need to dress up when I torture myself by shopping at walmart, and that caving in, applied to a very large scale, ends up with very few people dressing up to shop at walmart.
Casual Friday seems like an absurd concept to me. Either you're capable of getting the job done in denim, or you're not. If you cannot, why would you be allowed to wear them on Friday? If you can, why wouldn't you be able to wear them on Monday through Thursday?
I can control what you wear down to the weirdest detail, and you'll cooperate.
I'm a computer programmer. The computer does not care what I wear. (If I had customer contact, what I wear would matter.)
If you're my boss, and you turn into that kind of a control freak, I may cooperate for the moment, but my resume will be on the street by this evening.
If you're my boss, and you turn into that kind of a control freak, I may cooperate for the moment, but my resume will be on the street by this evening.
It's always possible that some business visitor, maybe representing a big customer, gets a tour of the office and gets to see where the programmers are working.
Personally I'd think that visit would be more effective if he sees that the programmers are not dressy business people but people hired for their brains, but clearly some disagree.
Personally I'd think that visit would be more effective if he sees that the programmers are not dressy business people but people hired for their brains, but clearly some disagree.
> I'm a computer programmer. The computer does not care what I wear.
Amazingly, the computer doesn't care whether you code it in an office, in a café, or at home in your PJs.
Other people tend to care though.
Amazingly, the computer doesn't care whether you code it in an office, in a café, or at home in your PJs.
Other people tend to care though.
[deleted]
I think it comes from tradition that you have a lot of official meetings throughout the week, but not on Fridays
Really? My impression (also from abroad) is that Americans generally underdress and really like their loose shirts, hats, sport shoes and other informal wear. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it's quite different from what I saw on the streets while living in France for a while...
Sounds like your impression is that Americans underdress compared to France, and golergka's impression is that Americans overdress compared to some other culture.
Israel.
A lot of people moving here from France lately. They really stand out in their clothing habits :)
A lot of people moving here from France lately. They really stand out in their clothing habits :)
Also Israel being very hot is probably much more lenient on flip-flops (and shorts)
Having worked in a similar hot place (but probably not as dry) I can say the tolerance is smaller on 'mild temperature' places
Having worked in a similar hot place (but probably not as dry) I can say the tolerance is smaller on 'mild temperature' places
Israel (to be exact, the strip along the mediterranean beach where all the offices and IT companies are) is incredibly humid, in fact — that what makes the heat unbearable. But the stories I heard were from California, and I assume it's just as hot over there.
In general, in California the hot parts are not particularly humid, and the humid parts are not particularly hot.
That sounds like a really pleasant mix. On the rare days that it gets really hot in Netherland, it's usually also humid.
I would say weather, obesity and technology also play major roles, possibly more than "fashion" or maybe creating fashion.
Weather: During the 20th century Americans have increasingly moved west and south to warmer climates (go back 100 years and most Americans lived in the cooler climates in the north east). Loose khakis, t-shirt and sandals is much more comfortable in warm weather.
Obesity: Very few were obese back when suits were common. It's not comfortable anymore to tuck your shirt in the pants once the belly pushes outwards (personal experience).
Technology: Washers and dryers became common throughout the 20th century. Washing clothes used to be time consuming but the washer and dryer meant that it's now easy to wash your jeans and t-shirts. Meanwhile it's still a hassle to have your suit dry cleaned and your shirts pressed or ironed.
Weather: During the 20th century Americans have increasingly moved west and south to warmer climates (go back 100 years and most Americans lived in the cooler climates in the north east). Loose khakis, t-shirt and sandals is much more comfortable in warm weather.
Obesity: Very few were obese back when suits were common. It's not comfortable anymore to tuck your shirt in the pants once the belly pushes outwards (personal experience).
Technology: Washers and dryers became common throughout the 20th century. Washing clothes used to be time consuming but the washer and dryer meant that it's now easy to wash your jeans and t-shirts. Meanwhile it's still a hassle to have your suit dry cleaned and your shirts pressed or ironed.
I understand the advantages of dressing casually, but when I watch a video from the mid 20th century the first thing that strikes me (in a positive way) is that ordinary people took pride in their personal appearance. Nowadays it feels like people just don't care about their looks.
part of that appearance was being fit, you see very few obese in older pictures and the very obese were confined to carnival shows.
Working around some BMI 40+ and its not like there is much choice for professional looking clothing that looks good. Get to the 50+ and it just gets worse.
I just am amazed at how far back they traced the change in attitudes. Still I remember that day when IBM (contracting) announced its change in dress code and suddenly jeans were in. I think this was 95 or 96?
Working around some BMI 40+ and its not like there is much choice for professional looking clothing that looks good. Get to the 50+ and it just gets worse.
I just am amazed at how far back they traced the change in attitudes. Still I remember that day when IBM (contracting) announced its change in dress code and suddenly jeans were in. I think this was 95 or 96?
If Google is right (I'm using this for reference: http://weight.optyourlife.com/i03784mages/bmi_40.jpg), almost no kind of clothes will make you look good at BMI 50.
I dress casually in the office, but take pride in how I look. I always wear clean, well fitting clothes, and make an effort to keep my colours well thought out. You might find me dressed in shorts and a tee shirt with a pair of vans, but it's not because I don't care about my appearance.
Did they take pride in it, or did they just feel pressured to look like they took pride in it?
[deleted]
Selection bias. Of course the people being filmed are more likely to have been well dressed.
I don't think so, there're a lot of videos from the streets and almost everyone is dressed well. Sure, as a man you didn't have much of a choice back then when it comes to clothes, but nevertheless everyone looked much better than nowadays in my opinion.
"Nowadays it feels like people just don't care about their looks."
Do you think that is a bad thing?
Do you think that is a bad thing?
I'm aware most people in tech don't care about their appearance, so I probably will get downovted, but I feel much better at work around nicely dressed people - just as I prefer to work in a cozy office rather than an old hole with devastated walls, torn carpet and ugly desks. And yes, how you dress tells a lot about you.
Caring about dressing nicely is a Moneyball thing to me.
If you care about how someone dresses when you hire them, odds are you're using bad criteria for your decisions. That's not to say that you can't get great people, but you're probably paying over the odds for them, if "dresses nicely" is one of your factors for selection.
I think I will hire better if I dont care about dress code - I think odds are better that I will find a good hire if one of my criteria is not "do they own a suit or a dress".
If you care about how someone dresses when you hire them, odds are you're using bad criteria for your decisions. That's not to say that you can't get great people, but you're probably paying over the odds for them, if "dresses nicely" is one of your factors for selection.
I think I will hire better if I dont care about dress code - I think odds are better that I will find a good hire if one of my criteria is not "do they own a suit or a dress".
> If you care about how someone dresses when you hire them
Funnily enough, all the programmers I know who "don't care about dress" also will say that they have negative perceptions of people turning up in a suit for a programming job.
They care about dress, they just want people to conform to a very casual dress code. Which would be fine, if they admitted to it. Instead, they say they "don't care about dress".
Funnily enough, all the programmers I know who "don't care about dress" also will say that they have negative perceptions of people turning up in a suit for a programming job.
They care about dress, they just want people to conform to a very casual dress code. Which would be fine, if they admitted to it. Instead, they say they "don't care about dress".
They don't care about dress. They care a lot about being around people that care about dress, and turning up in a suit is a very reliable indicator that a person cares about dress.
That said, it's a very reliable indicator on almost all situations, the most important exception being during an employment interview; it's extremely noisy then.
That said, it's a very reliable indicator on almost all situations, the most important exception being during an employment interview; it's extremely noisy then.
> They care a lot about being around people that care about dress, and turning up in a suit is a very reliable indicator that a person cares about dress.
I disagree with this.
Showing up in "a suit", in most cases, isn't caring about dress, it's thinking that a required formality of dress is necessary. People that care about clothes, and are fashion enthusiasts, will show up in Thom Browne, CdG, Engineered Garments, etc. - or even just basic Club Monaco-type stuff if they're don't have a giant amount of disposable income.
While adherence to arbitrary fashion formality levels may be an indicator of unawareness, an interest in fashion seems incredibly unrelated to programming skill, unless the programmer is expected to be solely interested in programming - in which case, they should also rule out runners, rock climbers, guitarists, etc.
I disagree with this.
Showing up in "a suit", in most cases, isn't caring about dress, it's thinking that a required formality of dress is necessary. People that care about clothes, and are fashion enthusiasts, will show up in Thom Browne, CdG, Engineered Garments, etc. - or even just basic Club Monaco-type stuff if they're don't have a giant amount of disposable income.
While adherence to arbitrary fashion formality levels may be an indicator of unawareness, an interest in fashion seems incredibly unrelated to programming skill, unless the programmer is expected to be solely interested in programming - in which case, they should also rule out runners, rock climbers, guitarists, etc.
By "care about dress" I don't mean people that care about how they are dressed. Those don't bother anybody.
It's people that care about how others are dressed that are the problem. What you call "thinking that a formality of dress is necessary". We disagree on terminology.
It's people that care about how others are dressed that are the problem. What you call "thinking that a formality of dress is necessary". We disagree on terminology.
> turning up in a suit is a very reliable indicator that a person cares about dress.
or that they expect to be around people who (act as if they) care about dress.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abilene_paradox
or that they expect to be around people who (act as if they) care about dress.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abilene_paradox
True. The pressure to look the part is everywhere. Looking the part for programmers is very different than for business people, but it's still a thing. Someone in suit and tie does not look like a programmer in this Silicon Valley/hacker culture-inspired world. But there is of course no reason why someone who likes to wear suit and tie can't be an excellent programmer.
"Looking the part" can be a lot worse than just clothes, though. Because most programmers are young white men, HR people, even women, even when they care about hiring more women and minorities, still tend to hire people who look the part, meaning more young white men.
Maybe getting rid of all pressure and expectations to "look the part" would be necessary to finally get rid of these subtler, subconscious forms of sexism and discrimination.
"Looking the part" can be a lot worse than just clothes, though. Because most programmers are young white men, HR people, even women, even when they care about hiring more women and minorities, still tend to hire people who look the part, meaning more young white men.
Maybe getting rid of all pressure and expectations to "look the part" would be necessary to finally get rid of these subtler, subconscious forms of sexism and discrimination.
Maybe part of the reason people treat software developers as oversized children is because when we are asked to wear the same kind of clothing as other professionals, we whine like a small child who has to wear a decent shirt to their grandma's funeral.
Also, we demand hipster beer to be delivered to our desks on Friday afternoon.
Also, we demand hipster beer to be delivered to our desks on Friday afternoon.
When I interview, one of the factors for selection I have is "put some effort into preparing for this interview". One of the indicators for that is how they dress. Clean is better than dirty, presentable is better than slobby, ironed is better than spent the last week crumpled into a ball, shirt with buttons is better than t-shirt, and so on. Basically, show me that you actually want this job enough to put some thought and preparation into how you look.
I'm aware most people in tech don't care about their appearance
In my experience, that's not true. Many do care, but a significant part of it is caring about giving the impression that they don't care, coupled with the need to not stray outside the uniform. many places say they don't have a dress code, but that's usually short-hand for "you need to look like us to work here".
In my experience, that's not true. Many do care, but a significant part of it is caring about giving the impression that they don't care, coupled with the need to not stray outside the uniform. many places say they don't have a dress code, but that's usually short-hand for "you need to look like us to work here".
I must admit that I really don't care in slightest how colleagues dress - looking around I can see people who are very smart (because they like to - not because it is required) and others that are very casual.
I really don't care.
Edit: I'm sitting in a very nice office!
I really don't care.
Edit: I'm sitting in a very nice office!
Being dressed appropriately and neatly (not necessarily fashionably or expensively) is a sign of paying attention to details, good judgement and taste.
All of which you need as a software developer.
All of which you need as a software developer.
Do you need to have those an attention to detail, good judgment and taste, or do you need to merely display signs of having them to others?
And is there any evidence that having "attention to detail, good judgment and taste" for personal appearance carries across to having those for software development.
I've never seen any correlation.
I've never seen any correlation.
[deleted]
It's okay to prefer that people wear button up shirts and slacks (or a suit, or whatever), but theres no reason to act as if those clothing items are objectively "nicer".
I think this article has it backwards. I usually gauge what the company culture is by the dress code. If everyone in the office is wearing a suit and looks down on me for not doing so, I don't want to work there. If they judge someone for not wearing a suit I don't want to work there. If they care about good results and as long as you dress appropriately for any customers you may face, that is probably a good culture.
I agree with you. I also think this way. However, keep in mind though that the unemployment for software engineers in the Bay Area is nearly zero. I've rejected more companies than the other way around. So for people like us, we tend to collectively get a lot of say over company culture, or else we leave and find a better place to work. This isn't true of most other industries though.
The consensus here seems to be that it is a comfort thing and the US is generally warmer. There is truth in that, but I would argue there is a bigger cultural divide at play.
I was just sitting in a restaurant in France the other day and an american was present one table over sporting a baseball cap indoors. I realise it's my issue, but this really bothered me for some reason.
I was just sitting in a restaurant in France the other day and an american was present one table over sporting a baseball cap indoors. I realise it's my issue, but this really bothered me for some reason.
The etiquette certainly used to be that you take your hat off indoors. Men at least; women maybe not, for some reason.
I'm in the US and worked for a bank and remember getting pulled aside by my manager because his boss was upset that my dress shoes did not match dress pants. Keep in mind that I was a lowly programmer, had to wear a tie, and when he had investors come through we were literally told to hide.
I now work for the bank that bought out that bank and work from home currently in jeans and a hoodie, much more befitting my status.
I now work for the bank that bought out that bank and work from home currently in jeans and a hoodie, much more befitting my status.
I've worked in Chicago and London , in different kind of companies.
Chicago was extremely casual (sandals with white socks), ere In London we have to do smart casual every day but allowed to wear denims on friday.
I've never been to NY but i feel that could be close to what London is like?
One thing I found working in London (1999-2000ish) was that even when everybody was 'forced' to wear a suit, many people gave zero fucks about how that suit looked. It permanently cured me of any belief that just wearing suit amounted in any way dressing well.
Sandals with white socks? Oh the humanity!!!
> His prediction was that everyone would dress in uniforms. But that’s the complete opposite of what has happened. And I don’t think people will be dressing in uniforms anytime soon.
OK, here's a potential prediction that could bring about "uniforms"...
If we end up with some kind of ubiquitous augmented reality, we may end up styling ourselves like you would a game avatar, and even "themeing" everyone around us. In that world, it might make more sense to just all wear comfy grey onezies all day.
Of course all predictions like this are hilariously off... it'll probably be more like the entire earth bizarrely becomes a comfortable 23C and everyone just walks around in socks.
OK, here's a potential prediction that could bring about "uniforms"...
If we end up with some kind of ubiquitous augmented reality, we may end up styling ourselves like you would a game avatar, and even "themeing" everyone around us. In that world, it might make more sense to just all wear comfy grey onezies all day.
Of course all predictions like this are hilariously off... it'll probably be more like the entire earth bizarrely becomes a comfortable 23C and everyone just walks around in socks.
Last weekend there was a man in a green onesie with a yellow unicorn tusk at a bar, so it may be a continuation of the theme. Certainly stood out, but not only because of the outfit; Self-cleaning clothing can't arrive soon enough.
I see no mention of climate (the U.S. is mostly hotter than Europe) and shifting demographics towards the Southwest (where it's hotter).
Even in these comments, there are observations contrasting more formal NYC with more casual southern and west coast cities. Makes sense to me. Even in slightly more formal southern towns like Dallas and Atlanta, there is a lot of new growth and new transplants from the north and east.
Even in these comments, there are observations contrasting more formal NYC with more casual southern and west coast cities. Makes sense to me. Even in slightly more formal southern towns like Dallas and Atlanta, there is a lot of new growth and new transplants from the north and east.
Has the dress code just changed to 'casual'? This may not be some fundamental shift in people and what they care about. Its just a change in the details of current fashion.
Who the hell wants to get gussied up in non-functional, expensive, uncomfortable clothes, if it is not necessary? Give me cheap, durable, and comfortable any day of the week.
Thankfully, I can wear my steel-toe boots, Carharts and flannel to work, and nobody cares. Why would they? I'm a programmer that sits in my office most of the time, and, except for trade-shows, any interactions I have with customers are on the phone or email.
Thankfully, I can wear my steel-toe boots, Carharts and flannel to work, and nobody cares. Why would they? I'm a programmer that sits in my office most of the time, and, except for trade-shows, any interactions I have with customers are on the phone or email.
Who the hell wants to get gussied up in non-functional, expensive, uncomfortable clothes, if it is not necessary?
No one. But lots of people like getting "gussied" up in non-functional, expensive, _comfortable_ clothes, even if it is not necessary? It may be stupid and superficial and is no doubt a serious character flaw on my part, but looking good makes me feel good, and feeling good makes me happy and productive.
No one. But lots of people like getting "gussied" up in non-functional, expensive, _comfortable_ clothes, even if it is not necessary? It may be stupid and superficial and is no doubt a serious character flaw on my part, but looking good makes me feel good, and feeling good makes me happy and productive.
And many of your co-workers _do_ appreciate you not looking like a slob.
why do you need steel-toed boots in an office? the only time i've seen that is at construction or engineering firms where office workers occasionally have to go into the field/job site.
They are very comfortable, with good ankle support. Also well insulated, for the five months out of the year when it is below freezing or snowy.
I also don't see the point in spending the money on another pair of "fancy" boots, which are generally not very well constructed, or fitted to my feet, when I have these[1], which are tough-as-nails and reasonably good-looking if you keep them clean and use a little polish once in a while.
Yeah, they are kevlar-lined chainsaw boots - I actually use a chainsaw on a regular basis, and having a real pair of safety boots is pretty much the absolute minimum level of safety equipment. Even if you know what you are doing and are careful, you can fetch up on something and the saw can kick back. Chainsaw cuts are extremely nasty.
[1] http://www.labonville.com/Labonville-Kevlar-1-Low-Heel-Chain...
I also don't see the point in spending the money on another pair of "fancy" boots, which are generally not very well constructed, or fitted to my feet, when I have these[1], which are tough-as-nails and reasonably good-looking if you keep them clean and use a little polish once in a while.
Yeah, they are kevlar-lined chainsaw boots - I actually use a chainsaw on a regular basis, and having a real pair of safety boots is pretty much the absolute minimum level of safety equipment. Even if you know what you are doing and are careful, you can fetch up on something and the saw can kick back. Chainsaw cuts are extremely nasty.
[1] http://www.labonville.com/Labonville-Kevlar-1-Low-Heel-Chain...
I don't need them, but I do need something on my feet, and these are comfortable and durable, and I think they look better than the sports shoes many other people prefer to wear. (Of course they wear those sports shoes, despite not working out at the office, because they think those are more comfortable.)
Just a little comment. America is not only USA.
Most of the world goes by the definition that "America" means "USA" in this context. There may be other definitions of "America," but they are not the most popular across the world in this context.
> The only thing I will say is that there's still a bit of a gender hangover, where women are singled out for wearing clothing normally associated with men.
Wait, what? This is the opposite of how it is. It was a big deal when that celebrity kid wore a dress[3]. Women wearing denim, an oxford shirt, or sneakers is not even something people would notice as "off". Black jeans are practically a uniform for women in NYC.
> I don’t know if it will happen, let alone sometime soon, but self-cleaning fabrics, I think that will be a thing.
Not exactly self-cleaning, but merino and synthetic technical fabric is very hype currently.
[1]: https://www.google.com/search?site=&tbm=isch&q=apc+lookbook [2]: http://www.theonion.com/article/iowa-fashion-week-begins-315... [3]: http://www.etonline.com/news/165398_jaden_smith_wears_dress_...