The High Heels Debate – Deconstructing the Sexist Dress Code

This week MPs debated a momentous, life-changing issue. No, not Brexit (which rolls on relentlessly like the Terminator 2 of politics) but workplace dress codes – in particular, women’s shoes.

MPs investigated the legalities of whether workplaces can demand women wear high heels. This debate began when a London woman was sent home without pay after she refused to buy heels for a temp job. Nicola Thorp’s online petition got 152,420 signatures, pushing it to parliament for debate.

This wasn’t just about high heels. The dress code (which has since been changed) at Portico, the agency she was temping for, had an incredible number of demands. Almost all of them were, surprise surprise, aimed at women. The expectations were extraordinary; so unbelievable, in fact, that they have to be seen to be believed.

 

Compulsory Make-Up

The minimum make-up demanded was foundation, powder, light blusher, mascara, eyeshadow, and either lipstick or tinted lipgloss (which had to be regularly reapplied). Women were only excused from wearing make-up if they had a medical reason.

Nail varnish

Colours had to comply with certain guidelines. A colour chart was provided.

Tights

Tights had to be “nude”. Not skin-colour, mind you, but pale, beige tights. A black employee was told to change her dark tights for ones that were “skin-coloured”. Apparently only white skin-colour was acceptable.

Shoes

Shoes had to be heeled, with heels measuring 2-4 inches.

Anyone refusing to meet the dress code risked losing her job.

The examples brought to light during the investigation were even worse. And they were not just from Portico employees. Some women were forced to wear high heels throughout pregnancy while others were asked to dye their hair blonde. Some were even told they couldn’t apply make-up on the commute; they had to wear it from the moment they left home.

Apart from revealing the ridiculous expectations of employers, this debate brings up the age-old question of what’s an acceptable work outfit. Just this week

a woman was told mid-interview that her appearance was unacceptable and sent home, even though no dress code had been stipulated. Sure, if she’d turned up in a onesie we might reasonably question her outlook and professionalism but she was in a well-covered shirt and skirt combo.

It’s not just clothing. How many times have we heard that tattoos or piercings negatively affect our job opportunities? Isn’t it time these discussions and conventions got a make-over?  As one MP pointed out, these expectations would be more at home in the 1850s, never mind the 1950s.

Of course, a level of professionalism is always required. No one’s asking to do away with smart clothes but there has to be some level of leniency. It seems to be okay for the leader of the free world to sellotape his tie together but for a woman to be considered “professional” she has to wear make-up, damaging footwear and racist hosiery.

Time for the Government and employers to step up – in whatever shoes they damn well please.

The post The High Heels Debate – Deconstructing the Sexist Dress Code appeared first on Felix Magazine.