Suit Up Or Ship Out? 816
ilovestuff wrote to us with a disscussion starter from ZDNet Australia about the changes in dress code at IT jobs. How much is everyone else going through?
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Suit Up Or Ship Out?
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
Beware of Programmers who carry screwdrivers. -- Leonard Brandwein
Slippers & pyjamas... (Score:4, Funny)
I turned down a well paying job at Walgreens (Score:5, Interesting)
Additionally, they worked wierd for IT hours, of only 8:00-4:30. They do not work overtime, weekends,or anything else. I didn't want to be in a programming department that was that regimented. It is a creative process, and if I wanted to work late to figure out a problem, they didn't want that.
Re:I turned down a well paying job at Walgreens (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I turned down a well paying job at Walgreens (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, the most challenging software engineering jobs I know of are purely "9 to 5" (or whatever regular hours) jobs. These are CMM level 5 shops, and work on little simple programs like the Space Shuttle guidance and control software.
That's not to say that "wear a suit" is a requirement at those shops, but the idea is that leadership and cohesiveness are vastly important to reliable software. In other words, the space shuttle isn't going up guided by code that a guy wrote late last night :-).
Re:I turned down a well paying job at Walgreens (Score:3, Insightful)
Your job is your job. Working until 1 AM off the clock only proves that you are an ass.
Maybe by having to regiment yourself, you'd actually pay attention and DESIGN things, instead of cobbling together some spaghetti shit that you wrote half asleep.
Re:I turned down a well paying job at Walgreens (Score:3, Interesting)
One of my previous employers was a start-up, which is a whole different ball game. We were under-staffed because we were under-funded which lead to the occasional crunch time to meet a deadline. I didn't mind as my co-workers were very cool, the CEO payed for our dinner if we stayed extra hours, and often payed for a car service home, rather than have us take the subway/PATH/bus to get home, which saved me like 40 minutes on my commute.
Re:I turned down a well paying job at Walgreens (Score:4, Insightful)
I think you'll find that the work habits you develop now will either stick are create an expectation from your employers that you continue to work at such a pace.
Maybe you don't find it crappy to work like that now, but when you lose a relationship, miss your kids growing up or wake up one day and realize that you existance consists of work and sleep you might feel differently.
Re:I turned down a well paying job at Walgreens (Score:5, Funny)
Holy shit, that's a sweet deal. I love computers and programming but horror stories from already-graduated friends working long, late hours is enough to make me want to change my major. I'd gladly put on a suit if it meant that my evenings and my weekends were mine. Hell, I'd wear a big-ass Santa suit to work if an potential employer offered me that kind of a schedule.
Steve
Re:I turned down a well paying job at Walgreens (Score:4, Insightful)
You have validated so many negative stereotypes of IT folks in one post. Lets see, we have the Slob, the Arteest, the Lone Coder. I even detect a whiff of the BOFL in there somewhere.
Also, a question. If the Walgreen's people were such button down types, why did they offer you a job? Perhaps you were wearing a suit to your interview? Or maybe they didn't offer you the job because of your appearance and attitude, and now you are bitter?
Re:I turned down a well paying job at Walgreens (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I turned down a well paying job at Walgreens (Score:3, Interesting)
I remember my dad turning down a job from IBM ~25 years ago because *he* didn't want to wear a suit and tie to work. Maybe it just runs in the family...
Re:I turned down a well paying job at Walgreens (Score:4, Informative)
How about a post from the inside at Walgreens? <hint of sarcasm> "Well paying job" is not something I have ever heard of around here for people just hired. </hint> Your pay does increase quickly though. Second, about 4 times a year, someone asks about the changing the dress code, and each time it is shot down. They even reference articles of companies switching back to business attire. I think the whole deal is that if you look professional, you are more likely to think and act professionally. It has some merit ("If you look good; you feel good")
Also, for the programmer's, night and weekends do happen, but only when it is critical to get whatever back to the way it should be. If you want to work more, you can. They won't pay you for it. But most IT groups are willing to let you work very flexible hours, as long as a good portion overlap normal business hours.
For the Seattle poster, sorry, Walgreen HQ is in Deerfield, IL. About 30-45 minutes outside of downtown Chicago.
And for those looking for a job, there are about 10 open [walgreens.com] today.
Suit and Tie do not make the programmer. (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh my! Heaven forbid!!!
Have you ever had to wear a suit and tie to work everyday? It is one royal pain in the ass, getting stuff presses at the cleaners, scratchy collars, wool suits in the summer. I did it for 5 years at EDS (they were very strict, you couldn't leave their cube without your suit coat on, that and they are based in Texas, can you say 100 degree summers). Suffice to say requireing programmer/engineer types to wear suits is gonna do NOTHING for the good, buissness casual is about the limit. Requiring suits just makes the execs feel better.
Which group of programmers would you hire, a room full of suit wearing 9-5r's or a room full of cheesy-poof eating coffee drinking work around the clock for 3 days straight types (wearing god knows what). Sure you wouldn't want to show the second group to investers, but I bet you would have better code and happier employees (who will stay with you) then the first group.
Re:Suit and Tie do not make the programmer. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Suit and Tie do not make the programmer. (Score:3, Insightful)
Why on earth not? That's just as stupid as the manager demanding everyone clean up their desks and looks sharp because the CEO is visiting the department. Execs and stockholders are not incredible neat freaks who will have a stroke at the sight of an untidy workplace with casually-dressed employees in it.
Re:Suit and Tie do not make the programmer. (Score:3, Interesting)
Agreed, but I know of plenty of places where it seems the goal of management isn't so much turning out a good product but making sure everyone conforms. Casual dress, leaving papers on your desk when you leave at night, and (OH MY GOD!) personal effects tacked to the wall of the cubicle. In some dinosaur-brained managers' minds, these are all things that indicate a breakdown in management's authority and must be squashed. Not that there's indication that they're a detriment to employee's productivity.
A department of a former employer actually purchased a laser printer for every employee's desk. The justification? If employees were required to get up and walk down the aisle to pick up a printout, they'd just stop and talk to coworkers. And you know you just can't have that happening. Thank goodness I didn't work for that department. The money that manager blew just to keep the employees under management's thumb was just disgusting.
Re:Suit and Tie do not make the programmer. (Score:5, Insightful)
Neither. I know from personal experience that when you try and work x days straight (actually, typically more than 10 hours in a day) you go from being productive, to making as many mistakes as actual code - to negative productivity where you introduce more bugs than actual working code and break existing functionality.
It is a myth that you'll get more work done by simply working more overtime. It's something our department learned the hard way. We were WAY more productive once we had a manager who refused to schedule work that would lead to overtime. We'd do MUCH more in a 40-hour work week than an 80-hour work week for many reasons: people were more alert, people were happier (they got to see their families and do their own thing).
Re:Suit and Tie do not make the programmer. (Score:4, Interesting)
I eat cheesy-poofs. I drink an unhealthy amount of coffee. Hopefully my code is pretty good. My suit in no way reflects on this.
Son, are you on drugs? (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyone else moderately confused about that?
Re:Son, are you on drugs? (Score:5, Insightful)
From that quote you gave, it's almost a paradox. It says the productivity increase also increases cost. It also says the increased productivity takes away from work (the key focus). D-uh waaah?
Re:Son, are you on drugs? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a control issue. Dress codes are all about subsuming the will of the individual to the will of the organization. This is well-known across a wide swath of social relationships, most obviously in the military.
I'm sure there's a healthy dose of revenge in there too. After years of kissing geek ass and frantically throwing nerf-guns, free sodas, razor scooters and other cube-toys at their infantile hired help, while smiling tightly through the clenched teeth of their barely-contained contempt, I imagine the alpha males in management are rather relishing sticking it to the propeller-heads in ways large and small.
Fucking cunts.
I'm glad I have the office to myself at night. I can wear whatever I want.
Re:Son, are you on drugs? (Score:5, Insightful)
First off, as a group, we I.T. people sort of took advantage of these folks. We had everything from brand new graduates demanding ridiculous salaries because they could write a little C, to cookie cutter MCSE's negotiating company cars and stock options just because they were able to stay awake during their MS boot camp. You reap what you sew.
Finally, regarding the issue of control... duh. You will find as you work your way through the corporate structure, that in any group somebody has to be in charge. It's just that simple. For the most part, things work better when there is a leader; and that leader has to do just that... lead. He/She has to be in charge and exercise control.
That's not to say that some don't take advantage of it from time to time; but by and large, they're just doing what we do, trying to satisfy their own bosses. You will find eventually that you're not much different than they are when you move to their rank. You will do what is necessary to get good marks from your boss; because making the house payment and putting food in your kids' mouths is actually more important than placating the spoiled little turd who thinks you're the devil because you took his foosball table away.
Re:Son, are you on drugs? (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't have a problem with that. Re-read my posts.
First off, as a group, we I.T. people sort of took advantage of these folks. We had everything from brand new graduates demanding ridiculous salaries because they could write a little C, to cookie cutter MCSE's negotiating company cars and stock options just because they were able to stay awake during their MS boot camp. You reap what you sew.
Yes. Supply and (artificially-inflated) demand meant employers were casting very wide nets in the job market in hopes of catching some gifted fish.
Finally, regarding the issue of control... duh. You will find as you work your way through the corporate structure, that in any group somebody has to be in charge. It's just that simple. For the most part, things work better when there is a leader; and that leader has to do just that... lead. He/She has to be in charge and exercise control.
Again, Re-read my posts. I do not have problems with control, nor with answering to authority on the job. What I dislike is the pointless psychological exercise of forcing people to wear uniforms in order to reinforce that notion of control on a stupid, symbolic level. It's humiliating.
In a way it's almost more a lament about human minds in general than anything else.
And don't lecture me about what I'll encounter on the way up the corporate ladder - I'm pushing forty.
Pendantry (Score:3, Funny)
You rip what you sew, you reap what you sow.
Re:Son, are you on drugs? (Score:4, Informative)
It's called "Organization Man." Here's an excerpt from the chapter "The Fight Against Genius" [upenn.edu]
Re:Son, are you on drugs? (Score:4, Insightful)
Another Quote from the article:
Either the guy writing the interview is period-and-comma challenged, or that Paul Rush guy really deserve his name.OK, the subject of the article is interesting, but the rest is just pure marketing-recruitment-nazi shitload. </RANT_MODE>
Unless I really do have to find a bill-paying job, I _AVOID_ at all costs a company where your dressing style is more important than your skills. In those shops, the message is clear: the appearance is more important that what is beyond the surface.
It's just not me, period !
Re:Son, are you on drugs? (Score:3, Insightful)
As for dress code, my current job requires business casual (ie, khakis, no t-shirts, no sneakers, or if you want, suit). My last job was recreational casual (wear whatever you want as long as it's decent), even though the dress code actually was business casual. Then they decided to enforce the dress code. For some reason, people got upset at that. By that time, though, I knew I was going to be finding another job, so I took the dress code to the extreme and wore shirt&tie and slacks every day. To be honest, it felt better to be wearing the shirt&tie combo than shorts and a t-shirt. The only reason I can think for that, is that I felt like I was at _work_ instead of working at a hobby. Oh yeah, I also found my productivity went up because I felt like I was at work and felt that I had to do work.
Now I'm happy I did change my dress style at my old job because now corporate dress codes don't bother me in the least. If a company wants me to wear a three-piece suit every day of the week, then they just need to be willing to pay me enough to maintain a wardrobe that contains enough three-piece suits.
The moral: Don't judge a dress code until you've tried it.
That said, if you've tried working in a suit and find you don't like it, then *shrug* that's cool. Just don't complain about dress codes.
Deteriorating... (Score:5, Funny)
Be an individual! (Score:5, Insightful)
"He's our tech-geek, so that's okay"
I think I'd actually have *less* credibility if I wore a shirt and tie...
Re:Be an individual! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Be an individual! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Be an individual! (Score:3, Funny)
The really bizarre thing was that occasionally I had to go visit a pissed-off customer to help with some tech problem that had gotten out of hand. The sales and project people would then often *plead* with me to wear jeans and t-shirt, apparently customers just would not believe they were getting the real genuine tech otherwise
Theres a limit here (Score:5, Informative)
However outside the City its always been much more smart casual, which generally means no jeans or t-shirts, I can live with that.
Re:Theres a limit here (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm also in the City, and what I'm seeing is that people are now gradually dressing back up, perfectly voluntarily. I suppose some of it might be due to fears about looking casual when jobs are being cut, but I suspect there's more to it than that. Personally, I like dressing for work, and changing into jeans and a t-shirt when I get home, it draws a nice line between work and the rest of my time. Like many people for a while my job was my life, but now even tho' I do enjoy my job, I do it to pay for my life.
An observation: most people who claim that suits are "uncomfortable" formed their opinion at a time when they could only afford cheap suits. A good suit is far more comfortable even than very casual clothes, it's made of high quality material and it can easily be modified to fit you exactly, rather than a generic "Size X" that casual clothes come on. People look good in suits; tailors have literally centuries of experience starting with military uniforms at making clothes that people look good in. Suits have plenty of pockets for stuff. Suits are versatile, you can go fully formal or in shirt sleeves.
Another possible reason is that humans are very status-oriented. If you've been to grad school and earn $$$, do you really want to dress like a mail room clerk? It sounds terribly snobbish, but I think it's a good explanation.
Re:Theres a limit here (Score:3, Insightful)
In an earlier posting, someone pointed out the absurd impracticalities of suits in a Texas environment. That's not the half of it.
Then there's the additional cost - not only of the suits, but the maintenance - dry cleaning (which uses some heinously unfriendly to the environment chemicals, by the way), and extra trips to drop off
I have no argument with demanding a professional appearance in the workplace - especially when there's face to face contact with customers. But that does not have to mean a suit. Business Casual should be good enough.
In fact, there have been many occasions where showing up in a suit actually hurts a technical person's credibility. You look at a guy in jeans and a t-shirt, and you know that that person has their job because they know their shit, their employer can't afford to impose a dress code, because they're so valued for their technical prowess - I'd rather have a person like that working on my system. If they're wearing a suit - you can assume they're just another charleton trying to "look professional" and shmooze their way through life.
Does it matter what I wear? (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't care what they make me wear, it's better than the McDonald's prison uniform I wore before I came here.
In fact, I'd rather they were dicking around with the dress code, if it kept their minds off dicking around with my pension. Too late.
pajamas and a tshirt... (Score:3, Funny)
Gah, no thanks... (Score:5, Informative)
If there is a dress code, I'll pack up and leave, or not work there in the first place.
Re:Gah, no thanks... (Score:4, Insightful)
You silly little boy. More jobs for the rest of us, I guess.
Here's a clue for you:
A tie is a badge which (when flashed in the visual field of a subset of the set of business drones) means "I have some role in the smooth running of this operation", unless combined with a white shirt or any colour shirt with wrinkles which signals "I am the lowest foot-soldier in this operation, and my opinions should be treated like dingo turds".
Personally, I don't care whether or not the people I'm dealing with wear ties, but there is a recognisable business species which will not respect your opinions unless you send the correct set of signals. Unless you send these signals, your opinions will not be respected.
The business community was recently confused when a new species, the techhead, arrived on the scene, with a unique form of dress. Initially the new species was accepted, but since the tech crash their uniform now signals "I have a lot of weird ideas, most of which will lose you money, drive down your stock price and possibly destroy your business".
You don't need to apologise, explain, or correct this new response. Sure you could try, but it's unnecessary. Wear the new badge, and blend into the background!
It's a cliche, I know, but the time has come to deal with it! This is a side effect of dealing with the business world, and an insignificant side effect when compared to things like mismanagement, strict work hours ("you must start work at 9", "you must stop work by 6") and co-workers who have trouble with high-tech concepts more complex than door-handles.
Re:Gah, no thanks... (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, that's your problem, not theirs. You are making just as much a clothing-based judgement about them as you think they are making about you.
I don't see why people are so down on ties. A tie is really the anti-uniform, the majority of suits you will see are a variation on the two classic colors of navy blue and charcoal grey, but your tie can be almost any color and pattern you want, even in the most conservative of surroundings. Self-proclaimed creative people should be the tie's biggest fans, not the opposite.
Re:Gah, no thanks... (Score:3, Interesting)
Is that really the impression you're trying to present? Because it's the one you are...
Re:Gah, no thanks... (Score:5, Funny)
The buttons are there to close the shirt.
The shirt has to be closed because we don't have adequately stretch fabrics.
Oh wait, we do.
The T-shirt is high-tech. It solves all of the problems that the old mode of dress is built around. But no, somehow, the formal thing to do is to wear an unnecessary tie to hide unnecessary buttons.
And don't even start on collars, which are there to hide the stitching which we don't need because mankind has since discovered frickin' cotton.
--G
Nothing here so far (Score:5, Funny)
Not too long ago, my manager came into the server room and declared, "everyone needs to start wearing slacks and button down shirts. Ties aren't necessary but we need to present a better image to the customer."
Me, "That's fine, I quit."
Him, quickly, "Except you, [John]."
[John]
Depends on Visibility (Score:5, Insightful)
In the past, however, a lot of companies let things slide since having a disheveled programmer that the customer only talked to once in a while was better than no programmer at all. Places like consulting firms won't put up with it at all anymore since everyone there has some chance of customer interaction.
Re:Depends on Expected Visibility (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Depends on Expected Visibility (Score:4, Funny)
How exactly do you people keep changing from casual to smart clothing every time you need to go visit a client? Does your office have a changing room, or something?
Phone booths.
-- MarkusQ
Re:Depends on Visibility (Score:3, Insightful)
The article was talking about IT "dot-com" types, not managers or salespeople. That being said, I agree that anyone coming in contact with customers should cleanly represent the company, IF that is their focus (i.e. a cable installer on a telephone pole can wear jeans, as long as he has the company shirt logo on.. (and in fact, jeans are safer on the pole than slacks)).
However, MOST of the IT "dot-com" technologists are developers, coders, hackers, and people who you want 25 hours a day, focusing on CODE, the core thing that makes your business or product successful. Sticking them in front of customers is not only going to probably confuse and anger your customers, but will slash productivity by half, since the coder is no longer CODING.
The point is moot, as a developer, we'll just take our skills elsewhere, or we'll just start our own business with our own products, and compete with yours.
Self-contradicting? (Score:4, Funny)
The increase in productivity is not worth the extra cost and it takes away from the key focus, which has to be work
Last time i checked, there was no extra cost imposed on an employer when employees didn't wear suits.
And if it takes focus away from work, it can hardly be considered an increase in productivity, can it?
Or... If it is an increase in productivity, it can't be taking focus from work?
What did i miss?
Re:Self-contradicting? (Score:4, Funny)
T-Shirt and Jeans all the way. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:T-Shirt and Jeans all the way. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:T-Shirt and Jeans all the way. (Score:3, Insightful)
So instead of me getting away from programming tasks and other real work, we have some $12/hour wire monkey crawling under tables and racks.
Not only do I have to wear a suit now (Score:4, Funny)
Not (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Not (Score:3, Funny)
Change in my dress code. (Score:4, Funny)
They make me wear shoes now. It wasn't so much a change in the IT dress code, as it was a result of the complaints from other employees. IT dress code, on the other hand, now includes those propeller-hats, so that the other departments can easily identify us...
Wow! Communicating with others?! (Score:5, Insightful)
Of all the nerve, to expect computer guys to communicate with other people in the business, to work with them, to adopt the same dress code, and generally become good corporate citizens instead of that grumpy guy sitting over in the corner who won't talk to anyone.
I for one am outraged. I should be able to not be a team player, to dress slovenly, and be totally grumpy and non-communicative with my co-workers, just because my skills are with computers, instead of, say, accounting or HR.
Boy, of all the nerve.
Re:Wow! Communicating with others?! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Wow! Communicating with others?! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Wow! Communicating with others?! (Score:4, Insightful)
We have a great culture going here, many techs are allowed to dress the way they like. Why do you want to take that away from us and conform us to some stupid corporate tradition? Nobody will work harder because they wear a tie.
Re:Wow! Communicating with others?! (Score:4, Insightful)
At the start of the year, I had to go to a client site for a meeting. I had been advised that they had a dress code, so I wore shoes, suit trousers and a shirt and tied my hair back (it was long then), rather than my normal boots, jeans and T-shirt.
The meeting went fine, everyone seemed happy, until I got back to the office. A few hours later, the project manager approached me rather apologetically, and told me that there had been a complaint about the dress standard of those of us who went to the meeting. Basically, they objected to us not wearing ties.
Funnily enough, my not wearing a tie didn't seem to affect my ability to get their project done on time, despite both the timescale and the budget being woefully under-estimated. Of course, I'm sure that they'd still rather it went over time and budget, but that we all looked the part.
Bottom line is, it's not the clothes that are doing the programming, it's me. If you want it done right, there are a few things I need, and one of them is to be relaxed and happy. Force me into uncomfortable clothes, and I'll be distracted, and so make more mistakes and take longer over my work.
Re:Wow! Communicating with others?! (Score:4, Insightful)
Here is a question for you, and answer it seriously in your own mind: If you work with someone, does their fashion make a difference in your *professional* opinion of them? If you say yes, then you are probably in some type of managment/sales/marketing role. Those people work off of image, technical people work off of knowledge. That is the way it works. If you are telling me that I have to dress up to make the marketing folks happy, then you are full of crap and need to think about your priorities. Now if you are saying that I need to dress up because I will be working with customers directly, then you may have a point. And I find it pretty naive of you to think that all technical people are slovenly, grumpy, and non-communicative. Hey, I know, let's make them dress uncomfortably, that will improve their demeanor! Maybe we need another mission statement, or Hawaiian shirt day! Quick, someone think of a catchy acronym that outlines our business paridigm initiative.
These are precisely why technical people snicker at the business folks.
Re:Wow! Communicating with others?! (Score:4, Insightful)
I have no sympathy for people that will now have to present a mature appearence and attitude, like most of the rest of the world in the workplace. Asking IT people to wear a tie or to show appropriate communication skills does not bring them in line with a road sweeper. It just makes the ones with an unprofessional attitude adopt a more mature style of behavior and a more professional style of dress.
Personally, in my company, as long as it looks decent, I even allow jeans and sandles (if the jeans are torn or too faded, they're out), but I ALWAYS expect good communication and people skills. I've worked with a few coders who may have been great coders, but their lack of communication skills have made it impossible to get them to listen or produce the product that was necessary. None of them are working for me now. If you want to wear jeans and sandles and listen to Metallica while you code, fine, that's why God invented headphones, but when it comes to interacting with the rest of the staff, I expect these people who claim to be so much more intelligent than the rest of the world to use that intelligence to figure out how to interact. I also expect common courtesy, something I've noticed a significant portion of coders I've dealt with (not a majority, but enough to notice) don't show. There's just no excuse for not knowing how to show common courtesy.
Been there done that it doesn't work well (Score:5, Insightful)
All changing the rules does is screw the loyal people a company, since come the next economic boom the company will have to slacken its requirements, offer increases pay to new employees etc etc, leaving the existing hard working loyal types in the preverbal lurch. Oh well those corporate MF's will never learn (too much time binge drinking in college I guess).
I do think a little buissness casual is good, cause if there is no dress code I am coming in wearing my old Metallica t-shirt (metal up your ass), some ripped jeans and combat boots.
Re:Been there done that it doesn't work well (Score:3, Funny)
I do think a little buissness casual is good, cause if there is no dress code I am coming in wearing my old Metallica t-shirt (metal up your ass), some ripped jeans and combat boots.
That's fine - just remember to iron that t-shirt if you're meeting with a customer :)
I've yet to hear an explanation (Score:4, Interesting)
Its not just the dress code.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Traditionally, your average IT guy, lived and breathed computers, he was not master of one, he was jack of all trades and (normally) master of one particular area. YOu couldn't just go into uni and be taught everything you needed to know to go out and do computing, you had to live and breath it at a young age.
The times have changed, now every man and his dog does IT degrees and the market is being flooded with well presented, sociable creatures who dont actually understand what they are doing, they don't understand what teh computer is doing, they have not LEARNT the computer, they have LEARNT the program.
The traditional IT workers who can't dress to save there lives and have little social skills are finding it alot harder to compete with these socially adept creatures, and thus the attitude of the workers and the employees has changed
My theory anyway
Re:Its not just the dress code.. (Score:5, Interesting)
It's a result of the technology maturing. For example, in the old days if fsck failed, you might have to go in there with fsdb and fix it yourself. And back in the day, SunOS 1.x admins thought fsdb was newfangled nonsense. Nowadays, on a modern journalled filesystem you never have to do that, and on a modern storage array if a disk goes bad you don't have to recover what you can from it, you just hotswap it and throw it away.
The times have changed, now every man and his dog does IT degrees and the market is being flooded with well presented, sociable creatures who dont actually understand what they are doing, they don't understand what teh computer is doing, they have not LEARNT the computer, they have LEARNT the program.
It's the same in every industry. How many people know how their TVs work, or their cars, or their cellphones? Back in the day, the only people who had these things were engineers, now everyone has them. Eventually, the pure-IT people will be like garage mechanics.
The traditional IT workers who can't dress to save there lives and have little social skills are finding it alot harder to compete with these socially adept creatures, and thus the attitude of the workers and the employees has changed
In a mature technology, the problem is not "how to do it", but rather "what should we do". IT always used to be about the former, but now it is about the latter. It is so easy with modern tools to build bread-and-butter applications that it is more important to work out what applications should be built - the complexity is no longer in the technology, but in the application of the technology, how it represents and manipulates data in the "real world". To answer those questions, you need to have good communication and social skills so you can find out what the people paying your salary actually want do, then you need to work out how to use computers to do that.
That's not a bad thing; you can't outsource it to India, it relies on the IT people being right there in the thick of things. People who can't adapt to the new way are going to find themselves in an increasingly precarious position in the job market.
A Swedish Perspective (Score:3, Insightful)
It all Depends.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Then the far opposite, where Dockers and polo shirts were overdress...
I think it really all depends on what industry you work in. You dont wear a 3 piece suit in a automotive plant, but dont forget your tie in an attorneys office..
Solution (Score:5, Interesting)
This would stop most of this nonsense, if enough people left their jobs to do real IT work. Not content with the crass stupidity at paying
salaries at early 90s levels, they want to
also want the workforce to wear suits?
Interestingly enough, I have some questions to employers, and government:
(This is not a comprehensive list btw)
Re:Solution (Score:3, Informative)
Probably because for the most part and until recently, I.T. people were treated well. Unions form when working conditions become unbearable for the workers. Interestingly, this may be a good ploy for disgruntled employees whos jobs are teetering. Get all those employees together and start talking Union. I wonder how quickly conditions would improve at work since employers absolutely hate to hear union talk. But there's little they can do about about it because it's illegal to fire workers for attempting to form a union.
"* Why is the current practice of laying off your IT staff, then "re-employing" them as contractors (at a lower rate) not illegal?"
Probably because I.T. workers haven't organized to oppose this (see answer to first question, which probably answers all the rest). Having seen and heard how unions operate, though, I'm not sure which is worse: Union, or no Union.
Re:Solution (Score:4, Insightful)
Why is there no Union for IT workers?
I would answer that with a question. Are there unions of other white collar sallaried professionals? If so, look to why they created a union.
Why is the current practice of laying off your IT staff, then "re-employing" them as contractors (at a lower rate) not illegal?
Because they are not employeed under contractual agreement.
Why is most of the programming work done overseas, where you have to ridiculously overspecify the project to get maintainable/extendable code?
I don't know what being overseas has to do with this question but unless the project scope is very clearly defined, it is difficult to develop and maintain code for it. The example you are thinking of was probably burned on this before and decided to do (in my opinion) the right thing.
Why are our governments allowing Visas for people to do IT work, when there are IT people available for work in their own country?
Availability of IT workers isn't the issue. This is around the cost and quality of the IT workers. They can get them better and cheaper from places like Pakistan, India, and China. They work longer hours for less pay and generally have a higher level of experience and education. The US has a history (hundreds of years) of indentured servatude. That's how my family got here from Europe.
Why do employers/government wish to abuse our human rights read our email, and look at the websites we read?
Access to email and websites is not a basic human right recognized by any government. Besides, the company owns the computer and networks you are using for your own personal interest. They have the right to know how they are used when they are responsible for them and while they are paying for them. Sorry, they own the computers and what occurs on them, not you.
Why does this kind of article make me sick?
Dress codes are a symptom of authority and order. It would appear to me by your questions that you have issues with both. I would ask your parents or your therapist why you have problems with them.
Re:Solution (Score:3, Interesting)
We've never needed one, but I wonder. There's a lot of bad stuff going down in the tech world lately. Bad laws especially, but also good-to-honest corruption in the government (Microsoft political pressure etc). And of course you have shady working practices now, which wasn't always the case.
I wonder what would happen if we did organize a union. Most big unions ensure their members are happy through the threat of strike. Well, that wouldn't work too well for the IT industry, as there tend not to be many of us in most companies, perhaps some sys admins and some programmers. And like I said, the issues tend to be more ones that affect us all as an industry, as opposed to single organizations.
Just imagine if the US govt passed whichever mad law it is that would outlaw Linux (CCTPDA??). If I remember correctly, Europe has an equivalent in the works. I think most of us, even those who didn't use Linux, would be pretty pissed. What would happen to the Western economy if parts of the net were sort of shut down for a few days? I think they'd get the picture.
Right now of course this is just paranoid speculation, but in the future, who knows. We may suddenly find we need to start standing up for the tech industry.
I am a sysadmin (Score:3, Interesting)
They actually understood it would be quite uncomfortable to force me to wear a S&T in order to perform such a speleological work
Respect (Score:4, Insightful)
It does make it clean and more professional looking.
Wearing outlandish shirts, or ripped jeans shows or suggests that you don't care about your appearance.
Wearing some nice pants, or jeans and a polo shirt (what I wear) can have you neat, somewhat professional looking and still be comfortable. Actually I find polo shirts more comfortable because the nice ones tend to be higher quality.
Wearing a suit for a suits sake isn't good, I've seen some nasty suits where they would have been better off without it.
By looking as though you take your job seriously, and make an effort to appear neat, clean and professional. People do react differently depending on your appearance.
Keep the geeks away from the customers! (Score:3, Informative)
One time my boss was out sick so they sent me in to represent our department at a large meeting with the customers. I think I was picked because I happened to be wearing slacks and a button-down shirt (even though it wasn't mandatory). The customer was upset because the product was late and was demanding to know why. I told the customer what I thought the real due date for the product would be (about 4 times what he had been told by management). After that I didn't get invited to any more meetings with the customers.
This depends on you and your values. (Score:3, Insightful)
Let's just avoid this whole "corporate america is screwing us" rhetoric and remember that you can always quit and look for a job that will let you wear jeans IF its worth that much to you.
Mathematical Relationship (Score:4, Funny)
suit up or ship out (my email to the editors) (Score:4, Informative)
I'm no slob. I dress in clean jeans every day, I iron my t-shirts, and I buy and use deodorant, as well as soap and shampoo.
But I'll be buggered if I'm going to work for a company that thinks that professionalism has anything to do with the clothes you wear.
Trends like this have nothing to do with the collapse of dotcom culture, and everything to do with office managers grasping at the straws of job justification in an economy where things are not so stable, and their jobs could easily fly out the window like anyone else's.
I work for Yahoo! Australia & NZ, and I'm happy to say that I could wear a sleeveless hunting shirt with military boots, dread-locks and 15 year old cargo pants with more holes in them than I have centimeters around my waist. No one would even blink. Why? because they all know that I'm 100% capable of doing my job on any given day, no matter what I'm wearing.
Any employer that treats me differently -- or believes differently -- shows an immense lack of trust in me, and therefore cannot be trusted by me. A company less interested in its employee's happiness and more interested in its image will die a slow, painful death, and management will wonder why none of their employees will go the extra mile the whole way down.
So here I am, taking your bait and replying. At work, at midnight, in my jeans and my ironed t-shirt. Why? My employer goes the extra mile for me, which means I do the same for them.
jeremiah johnson.
Work vs NightClub (Score:3, Funny)
I think it's just fear of layoffs (Score:5, Interesting)
... at least where I work (IBM).
Over the last decade IBM has shifted from a serious suit-and-tie kind of place to pretty much anything goes, except in front of customers, of course. After the last couple of rounds of layoffs, however, I've noticed a distinct shift in dress among the survivors, and it's not because of anything management has said.
IBM still dresses casually but I've noticed in my part of the company that dockers have largely replaced jeans and button-down shirts or turtlenecks have pretty much eradicated t-shirts. Sports coats and nice shoes are even seen on the upwardly mobile.
Management hasn't said anything, and there are very few employees around from "the old days", so it isn't that people are reverting back. I'm convinced that it's just basic caution; after seeing a bunch of others tossed on the street, everyone wants to go the extra mile in looking and acting like a professional, a valuable employee who must be retained -- just in case layoffs strike again.
My theory is that we'll see dress shift subtly up and down the scale in inverse proportion to the stock price.
Stock up == times good == dress irrelevant.
Stock down == times bad == better look good in every way you can.
Of course, for me, like many IBMers, this only matters when we actually go into the office. Large portions of IBM work from home these days, an experiment prompted by dot-boom but retained because it works well and saves on real estate costs. Again, though, when the stock is down face time with your boss becomes important...
This is so silly. (Score:4, Insightful)
One of the first things my present boss told me... (Score:5, Funny)
1. Those so low down on the ladder no one cares what they wear.
2. People in the middle who wear nice clothes to make themselves appear professional.
3. Those so high up on the ladder no one cares what they wear.
Which one are you?
no new suits (Score:3, Interesting)
-- Thoreau
Comfortable Suits (Score:4, Insightful)
I think one of the problems a lot of people have with suits is that they've only worn one or two suits for graduation and interviews. These were probably three times or more expensive than their casual wear even if they bought the cheapest suit available and they didn't even think about buying the next more expensive suit.
You can find more comfortable suits if you are willing to pay a bit more. Suits don't even have to be dry clean only. My Tilley [tilley.com] jacket is comfortable, has ten working pockets, and the cleaning instruction tag says "Give it hell!"
So who foots the bill? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yah, I know there are comfortable suits out there... my current suit is lightweight, good quality, and really not a bother to wear at all. I have only that one suit, though, used for weddings and funerals (and other special occaisions). So, if I accept a position where suits are required business attire, I am now in a situation where I can expect to shell out:
This comes to ~$4000 in the first year of employment; ~3000/year afterward (presuming I pick up an extra suit or two to replace worn ones, new styles, new ties, etc.)
This is roughly the same as taking a $6000/year pay cut from the offered salary.
So, really, this is no different from a company saying "Well, if you want to work here, you'll have to make your own parking arrangements - we don't cover that" or "Well, if you want to work here, you'll have to find your own vision care package - we don't cover that." The company is trying to take something that benefits them (not paying for parking, not payiung for vision coverage, presenting a professional image) and shift the cost of that onto the individual employee.
That's why I treat working attire the same way I treat medical coverage, paid parking downtown, and other benefits. Yes, I will consider a job working somewhere where suit and tie is required attire... but working there will cost me money, and I expect my salary to reflect that added expense. Conversely, if I accept a job somewhere else where attire is casual or buisness casual, I can live with a lower salary, because I avoid the bother of having to wear a uniform to work.
In other words... if my wearing professional attire on the job benefits the company, I expect to be compensated for that effort on my part, the same way I am compensated for my other efforts as an employee. If the company is unwilling to pay me for doing something that benefits the company, then they really shouldn't be surprised when I say "No".
Can I expense my clothing bill? (Score:4, Insightful)
The thing about this and any management-mandate is, if you are not replaceable and management realizes this, (and not being able to replace you means failure of the department, division, or company) then you have virtually unlimited bargaining power.
Otherwise, you need to toe the line. It's that simple.
I call bulls**t on that (Score:3, Interesting)
Apparently this guy has never worked at a dot.com startup. I've worked for two, and worked my butt off at both, rarely working less than 80+ hours/week. The reason I worked so hard wasn't because of the paycheck, the stock options or some suit/PHB telling me to, it was because I was personally invested in seeing the companies and their products/services succeed. This is not to say that people outside of the dot.coms don't also work hard -- they do. It's just simplistic (and inaccurate) to portray dot.commies as slackers.
The notion that a suit looks more professional or mature is also crap. First of all, I know a lot of suits who are neither professional nor mature (and utterly incapable of communication). And secondly, I seem to remember a time not too long ago when women and people of color were considered to be less "professional" than white men, and thus unworthy of higher-ranking positions. Please tell me we're not headed back in that direction!
Wearing a suit is an act of submission (Score:4, Insightful)
And make no mistake, a suit is a uniform. It may not your name on the collar, but it serves the same purpose. You are indistiguishable, you are part of the team. Your identity does not matter so much as the persona you present. It says to your client "I'm willing to go to great expense to impress you". It says to your boss "I'm willing to go to great effort to kiss your ass".
Every time you go to the dry cleaners, every time you spend a day's pay on the next day's clothes, every time your spill your drink and curse the waste that is forced upon you, you are submitting your will to the superficial whims of those effete do-nothings who nonetheless lord over you in the social hierarchy.
Nothing says "I'm your bitch" like wearing a suit. Remember that.
Bean Counters and Hall Monitors (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:first post (Score:4, Funny)
Dressing Well (Score:3, Funny)
Having people dress acceptably for work is a sign of respect. It also weeds out the morons. Save the occasional odd genius (which, if you are reading this, you are not), requiring a clean appearance with matching colors weeds out the multitude of borderline retarded MCSE / Visual Basic developers wandering aimlessly in the world, writing crappy code.
If people aren't able to dress with some semblance of style, they should go work somewhere else, somewhere less demanding (would you like fries with that?).
Re:Dressing Well (Score:3, Insightful)
I wear what's comfortable, but also have proper hygene. Also, it's much more space/cost efficient to only have one wardrobe instead of two.
Re:Dressing Well (Score:3, Insightful)
How ridiculous. 148.
If people aren't able to dress with some semblance of style, they should go work somewhere else, somewhere less demanding (would you like fries with that?).
I've worked as a systems/network admin for stock exchanges to top tier law firms. Each of these companies allowed lax dress codes.
Ever worked an average of 14 hours a day, 6-7 days a week in a suit? Ever crawled under desks, floors, above ceilings, behind racks and between walls tracing cables? Ever worked out of hours when the air-con is typically off?
I once worked 27 hours straight on a weekend trying to find undocumented button addresses for new 'unsupported' digital handsets on an NEC NEAX PABX. I had a bunch of new handsets dropped on me by the NEAX 'expert' who was on a short contract (from overseas) to design the roll-out of these new units (D-Term V's), who incidentally NEVER actually attended the site in question to find out that our PABX did not support them at all, according to NEC and Telstra. So I find this out after removing everyones phone, their old 4 wire digital cards, and patching then replacing with new phones, 2 wire digital cards and patching and then.... the programming.... which didn't work. I was faced with undoing all this work or trying to first figure out if I could indeed make these units work fully. So eventually I did figure out all the addressing required, literally through manual brute-force trial and error. There was no way this mission critical dept could be without phones come Monday. After 27 hours, they were all completely working, to the shock of my IT work mates and NEC. How would you like to work 27 hours straight, without air-con, living off McDonalds, in a bloody suit?
Being a contractor, I was being paid hourly, so I wasn't a chump as some here might think.
Sorry to feed the troll, but... (Score:3, Informative)
They can be, and they can be PhD+ whizzkids wearing $1000 dollar suits. They can also be the same whizzkids in jeans and a T-shirt, or spoilt brat rich kids in a snazzy suit that daddy bought who have yet to discover the word "shower". I'm not sure there's any great corrollation between what they wear and what they can do.
And what if their idea of style is different to yours, and vice versa?
I'm lucky enough to have recently moved to a new job in a very nice office. The company is doing better than most in the current climate, and the staff know their stuff. We have an informal dress code (and, wherever possible, a pretty informal policy on everything else, too). I have a postgraduate qualification, and I'm among the least academically qualified people there; everyone else on my immediate team has at least a PhD from a respected university. This is not an office full of morons... And yet, most people wear smart cas or jeans+T to work. The only person who regularly wears a tie is our MD, and since he owns the place, that's obviously his choice.
Personally, I'm sometimes more comfortable wearing a shirt and tie to work. I find it helps me to put my "professional" face on, and I like to look reasonably smart when I'm working. I also find that changing back when I get home helps me to let go of that "professional" face and go back to my regular persona. OTOH, I have no problem with the office "dress code" at my new place, and I certainly don't judge my colleagues by their ability to tie their tie in five different ways. I'm far more impressed by the quality of the products they produce.
I'd draw the line at poor personal hygiene, but personally, I'd see an office that let its staff dress comfortably (whatever that means to them) as the one showing respect. There are obviously times when a "professional" image is in order -- visiting client sites, sales people, etc. -- but as a general rule, I fail to see why it's necessary, or what companies hope to gain by taking away what is essentially a free perk.
It gets better! (Score:5, Insightful)
How does a lax dress code cause 'additional expenditure'?? If the current policy states a more lenient dress code, then it seems changing the dress code policy to something more strict would not only require more money spent in HR's time to transmit this statement to the employees, but also more time wasted in the management chain dealing with delinquent employees!
Now I'm not one to be completely for walking into work in jeans and a ripped T-shirt, but I just think this idiot they got for the interview is just... well, an idiot!
Re:im there already (Score:5, Funny)
Re:You know everyone, dockers won't kill you (Score:3, Interesting)
The photos you see are the photos that NASA management of the time wanted you to see. Said management, of course, were 1950's and 1940's aerospace engineers who had climbed the management ladder, and they were indeed buzzcut-tie-cigarette types. But they weren't the ones doing the real engineering work any more. The ones who actually sent men to the moon, the ones who were crunching the numbers and getting the rockets off the ground, were hippies. Long hair, joint, and tattered work shirt were their uniform. And there were ferocious culture clashes between them and the older guys, but they got the job done.
How do I know this? Because my Dad was one of those hippie engineers
Re:In this case leave (Score:3, Funny)