| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
I am having trouble understanding what is at the crux of the discussion, in class and in the comments on Mina's paper, about clothes and class. I see that we categorize each other according to socioeconomic status, based on our clothes. Yet, Eben observes that it is a rare law student who dresses properly for an interview (I, for instance, know next to nothing about suits, let alone the nuances of buttons and collars). So we can assume that many incorrectly attired law students are offered jobs anyway, and learn to dress properly for their respective jobs once they already have them. It follows then, that I wear will depend on what I do, and not vice versa. If I change jobs, my clothes will change. So if clothes are not a bar to raising one's socioeconomic status, but rather an indication of that status once attained, where and when does the relationship between clothes and class become important? | | | I'd like to echo the "business casual" problem. It's the equivalent of saying something is "interesting"--it's an empty, overused modifier that lacks true meaning. That said, thank God my firm is business casual this summer because I know it means I don't have to wear a suit! Skirts, hosiery, shoes, jewelry, jackets, color limitations are all still being hashed out. As far as the class connection, it's there but often inaccurate. It's one mutable quality that we continue to rely on for social cues (which makes sense to some extent), but it's also highly inaccurate. Ex. There are hipsters who spend tons of money to look like everything was purchased vintage or just-rolled-out-of-bed, while broke college students scrap to buy expensive(looking) suits to fit in at their jobs. Another question is at what point does individual preference/style come into play in this sort of discussion? I know for me, I like to at least know what the rules are so I can bend/break them intentionally.
Men, at least you don't have to wear pantyhose. I found these discussions entertaining. For your enjoyment/procrastination: Jezebel talks hosiery Wall Street Journal | |
>
> | | | | -- MiaWhite - 06 Jun 2008 | |
>
> |
Here's an interesting article I just found on Lexis about dressing the part.
http://law.lexisnexis.com/newattorney/Exploring-Career-Options/Career-Guidance/Does-dress-really-affect-your-success
Does dress really affect your success?
5/28/2008
Do the partners at your firm wear business suits every day? Every day except Friday? Or just when they meet with clients? Not even then? A number of factors can come into play: East or West Coast, clients in banking vs. technology, partners with a more traditional viewpoint or a more casual style. With these variables and more, does it matter what you wear to work? In a word: yes.
Many firms no longer require the formal business attire that was expected 20 years ago—and some even make “business casual” a part of their recruiting. While the quality of your work clearly matters more than the quality of your tailoring, your success depends on making a favorable impression with senior associates and partners—and possibly even with clients.
Find out what professionals in your firm expect. What type of dress is consistent with the firm’s brand and style? What conveys respect? What’s a practical way to meet expectations? If in doubt, ask someone you can trust who has a good reputation in your firm.
Here are some related comments from 2008 articles and blogs:
“Perhaps several years ago, with a hot economy, associates could take more liberties with their attire. But if the recession forces more layoffs, and a firm must choose between a professionally-dressed third year associate and a sloppy one, it’s not hard to predict who will keep the job: the one who’s dressed for it.”
—Carolyn Elefant on AmericanLawyer? .com Legal Blog Watch
“Well … what about the west coast where you have to interact with dot com executives that have a different take on fashion. Showing up in a suit at a tech firm may be frowned upon.”
—Fashion Police on WSJ.com Law Blog
“At our bay area office of a medium-sized national firm, even the partners wear jeans. Khakis at the most. Like Fashion Police said, you can’t just drop in at Google wearing a suit.”
—anon on WSJ.com Law Blog
“As the father of two attorneys and a businessman who sometimes needs to utilize an attorney, I offer the following perspective. Dress as you want to be perceived. Dress as who you want to become.”
—Father of Attorneys and Client of Attorneys on WSJ.com Law Blog
“Many experienced lawyers see their wardrobe as a tool to win the trust of clients, juries and judges. Legal associates who aren’t sartorially prepared may not be invited along to a new-client pitch or to take a leading role in court, regardless of the office’s stated ‘business casual’ dress code.”
—Christina Binkley, “Law Without Suits: New Hires Flout Tradition,” The Wall Street Journal Online, January 31, 2008
“I find that I work more efficiently and produce better quality work-product when dressed professionally. I think the whole suit or shirt-and-tie thing is as much about a mindset as it is about looking nice. One can express their individualism in a nice suit and tie just as easily in jeans and a wrinkled polo. Although, I must admit, it is a rule at the firm I work for that shirt-and-tie are required everyday workday except friday.”
—UB2L on WSJ.com Law Blog
“Jeans and other casual attire are common in Denver.”
—Denver Lawyer on WSJ.com Law Blog
“I believe a lot of the young associates are not necessarily in tune with the “real world.” I am an in-house attorney working for a large company, but before that I had my own practice and I worked for a mid-size firm and I think it was always helpful to ‘dress the part.’ Whether we like it or not attorneys are judged by everyone (lawyers, partners, corporations, clients, co-workers, family, friends, strangers etc) everyday based on 1st impressions, which is how you look, not your intellect ... .”
—Another Perspective on WSJ.com Law Blog
“If they cannot distinguish between proper and improper dress, what other rational skills are they lacking?”
—Anon on WSJ.com Law Blog
“Those who think that associates can wear whatever they want miss the point. Who do associates work for? Law firm associates work for the partners, not the clients. They should dress to satisfy the partner, not themselves. Satisfying the clients is the partner’s job. … It may feel silly to ask a boss how they want you to appear—particularly in the law firm culture where everyone is a know-it-all—but in my experience, bosses appreciate subordinates’ awareness of their role and willingness to play it.”
—Gotta Serve Someone on WSJ.com Law Blog
“I am a woman and consultant at a Big Law firm. I always wear a suit (or at least a jacket) and a blouse with a collar. I believe my appearance makes the partners take my work seriously and earns their respect. …As for keeping a quick change suit in the office, I know quite a few partners have suits and pressed shirts on a hook on the back of their office door.”
—Non-attorney consultant at law firm
“If you are partnership material, you dress like the partners, and you already know this.”
—PARTNER
-- JulianBaez - 06 Jun 2008 | | | |
|