Starting this September, all Macy’s employees will be required to wear black clothes to work. The dress code, which is designed to help customers identify apparently-elusive sales associates, is already in effect in east coast stores, but will be expanded to the 113 stores composing the midwest division. While consumer behavior specialists rave about the change, union officials have filed a grievance against Macy’s for requiring workers to purchase new clothes. Do employee uniforms improve your shopping experience? Tell us after the jump.
Macy’s workers grieve in black [Business Courier]
(AP Photo/David Zalubowski)
More From Consumerist
-
Most Macy’s Stores Will Stay Open For The 48 Hours Leading Up To Christmas Day
-
Man With Semiautomatic Rifle Kills 2 And Injures 6 At Mall, Then Kills Himself
-
JCPenney Admits “There’s No Assurance” It’ll Be Able To Turn Things Around
-
Macy’s Knows They Double-Charged Me, No One Has The Power To Fix It
-
Martha Stewart Testifies In JCPenney Vs. Macy’s Dispute: The More Deals The Merrier, Right?
In Indiana the bureau of mother vehicles employee’s have to wear khaki pants, blue shirts and I think they can wear a little red for accent…and their ID badges are on red lanyards. I’m used to seeing retail people in uniforms but the BMV? I never understood that.
Ok, lets play the “Clarify the Details” game
From what the article says, it’s a dresscode, not a uniform. The difference is you get to wear whatever you want within the code’s rules, as opposed to a specific garment everyone wears the same.
Black. Ok. Who truely has a problem wearing black? Its the simplest color since everything goes with it. A black skirt or pants, black shirt or jacket/blazer/sweater. Not very difficult. Yes some of the employees may not have both a top and a bottom in Black, and may have to purchase one. Not the company’s problem. And talk of union complaints? Why the fuck are poor-wage retail monkies unionized? Gotta stand up for your rights to take a smoke break, or do you just want union dues to garnish an already piss-poor wage? Or is it a safety thing, since your family could be devastated should a jacket fall off the shelf and render you crippled.
As mentioned, it isn’t a uniform, and the company isn’t obligated, morally or legally, to reimburse you for the financial hardship for one pair of pants and a black dress shirt.
Back in my retail days (at a now-defunct kitchen supply chain store) we had to wear black pants or skirts and white button down shirts. We had to buy them ourselves and we weren’t compensated or reimbursed in any way. And I know we made a little less than the large department store employees did.
This was a bit of a financial drain for those of us who relied solely on our income from the store, instead of our husbands or a “real” day job. I remember having to wear the same exact outfit several days in a row – carefully hand-washing it in the bathtub each night and hanging it to dry for the next day.
Those were the days . . . If anything, it just served to motivate me to find a better job.
I worked for Wal-Mart back in the smock-or-vest days, and never in my life have I felt uglier. The smock’s flattering on no one, and because my hometown isn’t that big and everyone comes into the one Wal-Mart at least twice a week, I was soon recognized in or out of uniform and never had a peaceful shopping experience there again. People came up to me on my lunch breaks, regular breaks, and ordinary pee breaks and asked for help. Lordy, I hate that place.
I don’t think the Macy’s dress code is so bad by itself, though I think it would probably be more effective to have a common element in it (aside from the color) to distinguish employees from black-wearing customers. But after my experience wearing The Smock, I haven’t the first idea what. This is what we get for abandoning meaning in apparel habits, though. Egalitarian, yes, and also confusing. I’ll take it; I’m just saying.
@Snakeophelia:
Ewww — that reminds me of the bad old days, when I was a hostess at the Olive Garden. All host staff (male and female) had to wear khaki pants or skirts, white button-down long sleeved shirts, burgundy neckties, and brown shoes. Yuck. Didn’t help that I went home reeking of garlic every night.
And on a separate note, it doesn’t matter if the Home Depot people wear bright orange aprons — it’s still hard to find them when they’re *hiding* from customers.
I was a manager at Macy’s for years, and almost always wore black, just because it made it very easy to put an outfit together in the morning when I was groggy and half asleep. I used to be teased, in fact, for doing this. And now? Ha! I was a trendsetter and didn’t even know it!
Shirts with “Macy’s” in brightly colored LED’s. If that doesn’t get your attention, I don’t know what will.
Wear black, white whatever.
But they should wear shirts that say
I WORK HERE,CAN I HELP YOU??
It is a toss up here in NYC whether the Post office on 33rd & 8th or Macys on 34th & 7th employs they absolutely most inept,rude,ill mannered,stupidest people they can find.
In fact it seems they must go out of their way to find these workers.
It is sad because my Grandmother worked there in the 1950′s, & 60′s and would take me to work with her sometimes and it seemed like a well run place but in the 70′s she quit because of the people they began to hire e.g. as she put it “high school droputs and future criminals”
I think Macy’s employees shouldn’t be restricted to black. Macy’s sells mostly clothing, and their employees should be seen by customers as examples of how to dress trendy and in style. I have worked at clothing stores, and like a few comments above, we were expected to dress in season (for retail, which is one ahead) and to current trend.
Currently, I work in a store that sells only home accessories and furniture, with some jewelry. We have a dress code which restricts us to certain colors, but we are encouraged to wear the accessories, such as the sarongs and shawls, as long as it’s done appropriately.
Perhaps Macy’s should work on their customer service so customers don’t have to FIND them.
Boo fucking hoo. I had to buy a whole new wardrobe for my Wal-Mart job where I’m only making 6.95 an hour with only a discount package for benefits. Get over it, most companies do this anyway.
I used to work for Macy’s many years ago. I did visual effects (putting up signs and decorations and stuff). For a while there we were forced to wear these ridiculous red jackets.
They were the cheapest, most miserable things you could imagine. Picture a Wal-Mart smock with long sleeves, in fire engine red. Mine had the added benefit of not being long enough so that I looked like Frankenstein.
This did not last long however, and I think just about everyone in the store somehow ‘lost’ theirs at about the same time.
@roothorick: Most companies don’t. And Wal-Mart should treat you better, so you don’t go in a public forum all bitter and nasty, and indulge in putting down people who are also treated unfairly.
Just fyi this policy applies only to associates that work in the store. Call center agents only have to dress business casual starting September 4, per Citibank.
Also, this is no different then working at a fast food restaurant. You wear uniforms…who gives a flying fuck.
Working at retail store, I can tell you, one of the most annoying questions is “Do you work here?” The obvious answer is, “No, I just like to dress like someone who works here and wear a name tag.” Even while on my lunch break people at restaurants ask me if I work there, even though the store I work at is very prominent on my clothing. People really don’t notice uniforms. If they want someone, they’ll find them.
And call center agents get paid 2x more than the frontline store associates…Can’t complain really
If a company is requiring a specific uniform, they need to provide it for you, or pay for it. Period. Not everyone making minimum wage can afford 4-5 pairs of new pants and shirts. Fast food and other companies provide their uniforms to their employees. Why should Macy’s be any different?
This is silly. A nametag or corsage is more than adequate. So now these folks have to buy multiple black outfits or do laundry daily. And I suspect most Macy’s employees aren’t in a position to itemize their income tax deductions, so they couldn’t get a tax benefit for the cost of their clothing. In any case, even if Macy’s employees wore red clown noses it wouldn’t solve the problem of finding one when you need one, since the corporate policy is apparently to have one or two people cover an entire floor.
Considering half the people I see in stores and malls wear Black, I’ll have to say no. But I voted “I don’t care” since I never have a problem finding one. Nametags never fail, though…
I was just at Macy’s yesterday, and everyone WAS wearing black, strangely enough.
I wish amazon.com would do the same, can’t ever find their employees for assistance.
1 size fits all (men) = 1 size fits no one (esp women). You always have to buy clothes for work, I’d rather get stuff I’ll wear again.
I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I’ve worked in a retail clothing store where we had to purchase and wear a new outfit weekly (on minimum wage) to help promote the latest fashions. While I’m absolutely against that kind of dress code, the all-black thing is different. Most people have black pants/tops/dresses in their wardrobe already, so it’s not a big deal.
On the other hand, having employees dress a certain way can still cause confusion with customers. As everyone knows, Target employees wear red shirts and khaki pants. I was once wearing a red shirt and BLACK pants while shopping at a Target. I had a shopping cart with merchandise and my purse in it, and was comparing features on their blenders when another customer approached me and asked if I worked there. Even after telling him I didn’t and going back to my blender shopping, he proceeded to yell at me because he needed help with something.
Yes, the guy was a moron and he simply wouldn’t believe that I didn’t work there. But my point is, there are enough people in the world who wear all black, even ocassionally, that it would still be difficult to find an employee when you need one.
I really don’t think enforcing this kind of dresscode will make that big of a difference. People don’t have a hard time finding employees because of the way they’re dressed; they have a hard time because they are hiding, probably in a break room somewhere.
If they do come up with this stupid idea, I can only hope that more and more people come in dressed as Darth Vader, Emperor Palpatine, or the TIE Fighter pilots. It would fit the policy, but would also make things more interesting, as black dressed employees of a store seems too snobbish to me, when they don’t even sell Hugo Boss, Armani, or Rock N’ Republic in those stores. Well, at least, not in my region.
Maybe some ninjas at macy’s would make them more noticable, yet there is something that I should note…
Black can make you LESS noticeable! Hmm… maybe if we gave them uniforms that are woodland or tigerstripe design, yet with florescent colors (Think early 90s), with patrol caps that have a blinking red star on it. Would that make them more noticeable?
If nothing else, it would help the majority of arrogant effeminate men that took over the men’s section of Kaufmann’s (Once my favorite department store, now reduced to queer eye for the men’s section.)
Absurd.
I, along with tons of other NYC women, wear all black a lot.
I don’t want to be mistaken for a Macy’s employee.
@speedwell: That’s an amazing leap for you to assume that all fat people are on welfare
@sleze69: Oh, you’re a funny guy. It’s called sarcasm; borrow a dictionary and look it up.
I don’t think it’s wrong for a business to require employees to wear certain clothes however I do think that if they are going to institute a rule like that then employees should be provided. I had a friend who was a waiter and was required to wear a white collared dress shirt and tie with the restaurant vest over it. Well, he wasn’t provided with the dress shirts or the ties. he ruined a good number of shirts and ties because of it.
Pretty much if you wear khakis and a polo and go into any store someone will ask you if you work there. It doesn’t matter whether you do or not, or if the dress code is anything like what you’re wearing.
I voted no, if only because I haven’t had an issue finding an associate at Macy’s. I would be more inclined to agree if Macy’s does discount the black clothing or offer some sort of credit towards buying these clothes.
Wal-Mart just went to a similar policy for their managers, they have to wear some kind of khaki colored pants and certain shades of blue dress shirts. Of course they offered no such credit for the clothes, which sucked for my ex. Hope he saved his receipt so he can take a tax deduction.
I voted yes: If their customers are having trouble finding the people who work there it is appropriate for them to institute a dress code or uniform.
I do think that they ought to pay for a couple of black shirts and pants but I also think that “all black” is too vauge. Make them wear name tags too. I doubt many customers will come in wearing a name tag.
I love it when a company has a dress code (which most retail stores do), and once the employees have built a work wardrobe which meets the requirements, the company up and changes it. How about kicking the employees some free clothes from the racks to help transition into the new rules, Macy’s! Or better yet, supply the mandatory uniform.
please. almost every job has a dress code. its not like the macy’s employees could wear whatever they wanted too before – they weren’t showing up in jeans an a t-shirt. i think its harder to find a job that doesn’t have a dress code than one that does.
Dont want to be confused with a macy’s employee because you wear all black a lot? well, there are more people who *dont* wear all black than do, so actually they are minimizing the amount of confusion. currently, anyone who looks 1/2 way decent could be confused as a Macy’s employee.
personally – i like macys because i liked hudsons, which turned into marshall fields, which is now macys – but is essentially the same store as it was 10 years ago when it was hudsons.
Maybe I’m missing something, but this is just a dress code. I have a dress code where I work, and it’s business attire. Did I expect my company to reimburse me for the costs to buy suits, ties, etc? Absolutely not. I don’t see why this is any different.
Also, having the ability to quickly identify employees is a great thing. You go to Target, and you know (with 99% accuracy) that the guy wearing the khakis and red polo works there. It’s useful, it’s practical, and it’s great for the customer.
Certainly this is better than the Ralph Lauren stores that force their retail employees to buy the current season’s wardrobe twice a year and wear it to work.
However, as a man, when I’m buying a suit, I generally expect that the salesman is also going to be wearing a suit. Seriously, who’s going to get fitted for a suit by a guy wearing a black turtleneck and black slacks (and I say this as a guy who frequently wears that Eurotrash uniform)?
As pointed out above, Macy’s is just taking a cue from Bloomingdale’s. They think the all-black dress code will make the place look more upscale and fashionable.
2% of the population is faceblind, meaning they are unable (due to a brain disorder) to recognize people by their faces. They have to identify people by other means, like clothes.
Imagine you are faceblind, and an employee at Macys. This dress code would be a nightmare for you.
And for a face blind customer, now unable to distinguish their sales person from all the others, it would be one more difficulty in an already difficult enough life.
Yes, I’m faceblind, and if I was a Macys customer, I would stop shopping there over this.
OH, and Enmar, I think you’re overlooking that this is a sudden and arbitrary CHANGE in an existing dress code. Wopuldn’t you complain if your boss suddenly required you to purchase a whole new wardrobe to meet his sudden changes? Especially if he required you to purchase it from HIM?
As soon as my husband’s tech company starts buying suits will I agree that Macy’s should provide these people with uniforms. Come on, we all have dress requirements. We should either make a rule that all companies require clothes or just be done with it.
The only exception to this rule I will make is for people that work in hospitals/firehouses/police. There stuff need to be supplied by their respective employers, as the items need to be sent to industrial laundries.
@Candyman:
So, are you saying that people at Macy’s should have something on their face to indentify them? Maybe a tattoo that says “Property Of Macy’s”?
My point is that a person’s face isn’t what any of us use to identify a salesperson. We use outfits and nametags.
Macy’s should start with requiring its employees to assist customers. Maybe then they can worry about the cosmetic issues.
@Karmakin:
@OlsonsTwin:
@allthatsevil:
This happened to me just the other day. I was in Home Depot and two men (separately) came up to me looking for help (finding a sales associate was nigh impossible.) Now, I am dressed business casual, not in khakis or anything remotely resembling the neon orange Home Depot dress code. One guy got so incredibly rude when I told him I didn’t work there. He demanded that I find someone who could help him. I was so flabbergasted that I didn’t even tell him off.
Required uniforms should be supplied by the employer.
A LOT of retail jobs require an actual uniform, as well as most fast food/restaurant jobs (I’m talking ugly polyester that’s been worn by god knows who else). Why should Macy’s be different in instituting a dress code/uniform? As a customer, yes, I think it would help me find employees, and as a former retail store worker, I think they’re getting off easy by just having the color stipulated.
No, visible badges or smocks are enough. Barring hideous colors that I don’t want to see, there will always be someone else in the store wearing the same color.
Those who still can’t figure out who works at that store are irredeemable.
for what it’s worth (as a Chicagoan who will never really get over the Marshall Field’s–>Macy’s changeover) Field’s used to make its employees wear buttondowns in their distinctive green stripey pattern. I’m pretty sure they all wore black pants too, but it may have been black pants or khakis.
anyways, I do agree that all-black could lead to some unnecessary confusion in terms of who’s an employee & who’s not, but at least in Chicago the employees aren’t being subjected to an unprecedented level of wardrobe control.
Why the sudden uproar about a company forcing employees to wear a uniform? If you want a job where you can wear what you want, go out and earn it (college, training, pounding the pavement).
HOW ABOUT MAKING THEIR EMPLOYEES WEAR A SMILE, or a THINKING CAP? I’d happily shop at Macy’s if I knew there were pleasant, helpful staff there. I try to shop at the flagship DT Minneapolis store on my lunch breaks and it’s such a nightmare. It is absolutely packed at lunchtime and there are no sales people anywhere except in makeup and shoes — the areas that pay commission.
@vladthepaler: It is not a uniform, it’s a dress code, and it is not the employer’s job to provide clothing to staff.
@missdona: Sorry I forgot that you are better than most of the world since you’re from New York.
Go die in another plane attack.
@The Unicorn:
“buttondowns in their distinctive green stripey pattern”
“but at least in Chicago the employees aren’t being subjected to an unprecedented level of wardrobe control.”
You just contradicted what you were saying….
I worked for Macy’s, Inc. back when it was Federated with Bloomingdale’s.
On the East Coast, Bloomingdale’s launched the black dress code in their SoHo store and received such positive feedback, they expanded the practice.
Although it felt as if I was going to a funeral every day, it was easier to identify the employees at a glance, and it was easier to prepare for work. (What am I wearing today? Oh, right. Black. Done.)
Employees were given an extra 20% discount on top of the 20% employee discount proper on all black clothing items, including socks, shoes, stockings, even coats. It was a pretty sweet deal overall, which is why I cannot grasp why the Union is up in arms over it.
It got even sweeter during designated sales where ANOTHER 20% discount was added. I believe those sales were designed to aid in the employee purchasing of the black dress code.