New York Lawyer
May 19, 2005

Q:
Two questions responding to my earlier columns about dress in law firms excoriate women in particular and younger lawyers in general:

Q. Why do female lawyers who claim to want to be appreciated only for their brains continually wear tank tops or other sleeveless or otherwise casual tops to the office--and even when they wear a business blouse it is, without fail, with the top 3 or 4 (!!!), not just 1 or 2, buttons undone? Must be nice to get to be that comfortable at work. I have to choke myself everyday with a tie that rubs on my clean-shaven neck and a shirt that is buttoned to the top. Don't tell me about pantyhose either. Women can wear pants suits for a break and nobody knows whether they are wearing pantyhose. I have to shave my neck and wear a tie every day. Even in business casual offices, men have all but the top button buttoned, which is moderately uncomfortable, as opposed to having the top 3 buttons unbuttoned, allowing for maximum comfort. -- Bitter Man Lawyer

Q. I formerly worked at a business-attire-only firm, a large one, where the male associates donned suits, of course, yet the female associates were able to get away with form-fitting sweaters, V-neck sweaters, stretch pants and the like. I'm not Gianni Versace but I think female associates should know the difference between "business attire" and "casual business attire." Business attire for women should mean female versions of men's suits, period. Memos were regularly sent out pointing out the dress policy, but to no avail, and I sincerely doubt the firm ever had the nerve to single people out on their dress for fear of litigation.

My question today is that, in general, it seems younger associates, male or female, have not a clue about what to wear in my current business casual firm. I see these kids, and I call them kids because that�s how they act, coming in with Banana Republic booksacks strewn across their shoulders as if they're hiking from Conlaw I into some other class. Female or male, it just seems that younger associates have not a clue what business casual means. This is a law firm, not a Kinko's, not an episode of "Friends," not a Starbucks. Please school these younger associates on what business casual is. God forbid these kids should wear a blazer now and again! I refuse to take anyone seriously who had the (relative) intelligence to get a job here but hasn't a clue about how their appearance causes senior guys like me to snicker.

Submit Your Question

Find More Answers

A:

Okay, you two, calm down. The world will keep revolving even if women lawyers let their necklines plunge a little and young lawyers sport a campus-casual look. But how we dress does have symbolic significance, so let�s take apart some of these complaints and evaluate them.

One theme I often hear is a complaint linking women who look sexual (buttons undone, etc.) with being overly casual. (The remark people make is "they won�t be taken seriously.") Sometimes this can just be an over-reaction to women�s mere presence in the workplace, and a discomfort with any display of female sexuality as being sort of at odds with the overwhelmingly masculine world of work. If you think about it, rarely if ever would a man be criticized for looking too sexual (and certainly not for looking too masculine, while women sometimes are cautioned to tone down feminine touches), so there�s some kind of disconnect going on in this regard. As we become more comfortable with women in the workplace, a process that is still in a transitional phase, I think these complaints will lessen.

More broadly, the point is often made that young lawyers dress too casually, looking as if they don�t particularly care how they come across, male or female. This represents the ongoing debate about formal vs. casual in the workplace, which reached its nadir in the late 90�s when everyone, it seemed, was schlumping around looking like they had just rolled out of bed. We�ve recovered from that phase, but we continue to have questions about how we should dress when the rules remain in flux.

The best way to analyze this is to keep in mind the aims of the firm and the interests of the clients. If the way people dress has little impact on their work or the firm�s prospects, and the clients don�t seem to care, it may be a non-issue. (There is sometimes a tactical or comfort advantage in dressing down a little with casually dressed clients, or in a highly charged situation where looking like a big arrogant lawyer can backfire.) If, by contrast, clients seem taken aback by too much informality, it can signal a problem. (Some definitely think, "I�m paying hundreds of dollars an hour and you look like you�re going golfing?") Additionally, if the powers that be within a firm desire a formal culture, and younger lawyers aren�t going along, eventually this factor may be one of many that can hold them back when it comes to advancement.

In general, older lawyers generally prefer that people "look like lawyers," usually meaning that everyone wears a suit. As one said, "If you dress like a clown, people will treat you like a clown." That�s a little harsh, but it is probably appropriate to take a look around and see what attire is the norm in your workplace and abide by it if you want to get ahead.

Sincerely,
Holly English