Why do people not wear suits to interviews

[samus]

Originally Posted by cptjeff

The legal standard of "reasonable person" is what I'm going by here. Not necessarily whether you would know it or not, but if it can be presumed that ANY reasonable person would be perfectly aware of said standard. Not everybody gets taught about interviews. If it has to be an active process of teaching/learning that not everyone can be expected to have met, then you fail that standard.

Just becuase you were aware of something does not all can be expected to be. And the rule may have been unclear- the HR person may have told the applicants to "wear a suit", rather then "wear a suit and tie." As the sans tie look is accepted at almost all levels these days even in many clubs and resorts that used to kick people out for notch lapels on a tuxedo, you can forgive people for thinking that a tie wasn't a requirement.

Oh, please. Your reasonable person analogy fails. First of all, I never argued that because I know something, it can be assumed that all do. I argue that it is standard practice (despite changes in day-to-day business attire). If you want to make it legal, what would a reasonably prudent job seeker do? I argue that given the stakes of a job interview, and the somewhat unique power relationship that exists for that relatively short period, a person is on inquiry notice to find out exactly what the appropriate attire is. And, I also argue, the first response you'd find from any HR person, internet guide, or elsewhere would be "wear a suit [and tie]."

Until you can show me that compliance with 400 year old fashion fads is a highly reliable (in the technical sense) indicator of whether or not somebody will be a good employee, then I will continue to maintain that it's a very silly distinction.

Nice bait and switch. I haven't seen anyone arguing that "compliance with 400 year old fashion fads" makes anyone more reliable. But taking the time to ensure that one is in line with modern interview standards IS an indicator of the interviewee's common sense, or at least willingness to find out what's expected.

 

[East Oakland]

Originally Posted by Bounder

You certainly don't have to play mentor at a job interview. But if you are unwilling to assert your authority to set standards then don't complain that no one has standards anymore. Especially in a situation like this were you can make an indelible impression. Anyway, you are either hiring in a parallel universe or wildly overstating the potential downside, especially in this job market. I don't know any law firms, Fortune 500s or anyone else offering real jobs who is having any trouble recruiting. You could require applicants to win a cage match to get into the interview room and you'd still have dozens of applicants for every position. I suppose you might still have some difficulty if you want a Yale grad who's just finished a Supreme Court clerkship but these people already know to wear suits. I can just imagine someone complaining to their friends about this. INTERVIEWEE: You won't believe what just happened to me! I went for an interview at Mega Firm and the interviewer said I should have worn a suit! What a bunch of jerks! FRIEND: Dude, that sucks! [Makes mental note to borrow father's Brooks Bros. catalog and call Mega Firm about securing possible interview.]
I've been in the job market long enough to see boom cycles too. When I was interviewing in law school, I was offered interviews at more than 30 different firms. I had to strike firms from my list based on my vague impressions of their culture. I'm sure many of the assumptions I made were wrong and based on this kind of hearsay. I don't think I've complained about standards of appearance in this thread. The only standards I have to worry about are those of my firm. And I don't care about manner of dress because of what it say about the way the person will dress when they work here, I care because it's indicative of how seriously the person is taking the interview. People do dress incredibly badly in the San Francisco Bay area and perhaps it would be better if it weren't so. But there are millions and millions of people living here, and I've never felt compelled to try fix any one of them by giving them feedback in an interview. I could do more good by volunteering to do mock interviews at my alma mater (if I really cared).

 

[cptjeff]

Originally Posted by samus

Oh, please. Your reasonable person analogy fails. First of all, I never argued that because I know something, it can be assumed that all do. I argue that it is standard practice (despite changes in day-to-day business attire). If you want to make it legal, what would a reasonably prudent job seeker do? I argue that given the stakes of a job interview, and the somewhat unique power relationship that exists for that relatively short period, a person is on inquiry notice to find out exactly what the appropriate attire is. And, I also argue, the first response you'd find from any HR person, internet guide, or elsewhere would be "wear a suit [and tie]."
Not everyone has access to interview guides. Not every company and field is the same. In many these days, you would be rejected for wearing that same tie. Somebody wearing a suit sans tie could be assumed to be reasonably prudent in balancing conflicting standards. And of course, everything on the Internet is exactly right all the time. As for your "I never argued bit", that's pretty much exactly what you did. You presented your experience as an example in contrition to my statement that not everyone can be reasonably expected to know the exact standard. Don't try and weasel your way out of that.

Nice bait and switch. I haven't seen anyone arguing that "compliance with 400 year old fashion fads" makes anyone more reliable. But taking the time to ensure that one is in line with modern interview standards IS an indicator of the interviewee's common sense, or at least willingness to find out what's expected.

Try your third sentence. If you want to argue that, fine. Argue that. But present some evidence to back it up. Undefended assertions that perfectly meeting unwritten standards that vary from company to company and interviewer to interviewer is an indicator of common sense and ability as an employee are quite worthless. Also, what if they did try and find out what was expected? What if they called and the HR guy told them "Professional attire", and they showed up in a very tasteful coat and tie? You know, like one of a million pictures in the WAYWT thread in MC? The OP would be throwing out their name immediately. I think he's an idiot for doing so, and I have a host of reasons. Also, another point from your previous post I forgot to address:

I'll grant you that standard office dress codes has shifted, but the rule has never, ever been "dress for the interview as you would for the day-to-day job," which would be highly ambiguous. It's always "wear a damn suit!"

Actually, that is EXACTLY what the rule used to be. Business attire was conservative suit and tie. That's what you wore for an interview. If the rule in the 60's was equivalent to what we have today, one would have been required to wear full morning dress to a job interview, and the OP would have rejected applicants for wearing something as pedestrian as a stroller.

 

[ACACRefugee]

Originally Posted by cptjeff

Actually, that is EXACTLY what the rule used to be. Business attire was conservative suit and tie. That's what you wore for an interview. If the rule in the 60's was equivalent to what we have today, one would have been required to wear full morning dress to a job interview, and the OP would have rejected applicants for wearing something as pedestrian as a stroller.

I've worked in engineering for 30 years, and have never worked where a suit and tie were required. However, every interview has expected suit and tie. There is no correlation with day-to-day wear, only showing due respect for the gravity of interview process. Once they know you're dead serious, it's much easier to strut you knowledge.

Hell, my first job out of college involved detonating bombs in the Nevada desert, hardly public centric, and I wore a three-piece chalkstripe gray to the interview. I actually put my car title in hock to a household finance firm for the loan to buy the suit, and then cloned what the IBM engineering rep that acolyted the campus mainframe wore down to his shoes. The guy looked serious. Like a previous poster said -- nailed it.

 

[samus]

Originally Posted by ACACRefugee

I've worked in engineering for 30 years, and have never worked where a suit and tie were required. However, every interview has expected suit and tie. There is no correlation with day-to-day wear, only showing due respect for the gravity of interview process. Once they know you're dead serious, it's much easier to strut you knowledge.

Bingo. There is a lot of false association going on in this thread between ordinary work attire, or even WAYWT clothes, and JOB INTERVIEW ATTIRE. They are different beasts entirely.

 

[dirk diggler]

I was told NOT to wear a suit when I interviewed for my current job 18 months ago (and it is an director-level inhouse counsel position). Go figure.

 

[sho'nuff]

Originally Posted by cptjeff

It's just as stupid in reverse- "oh, he wore a suit and tie, he must be a perfectly competent employee!"

Judge people on their qualifications. If they're still dressed two steps above anyone else in your office, that's probably enough.


what are you, 14?. i didnt say wearing a suit would automatically qualify him to be a perfect candidate for anything. but ill still consider the guys dressed appropriately over the ones who arent when deciding after interviews. showing some respect for me still says alot about a person whether they have the qualifications or not. and that includes showing up on time for an interview, and so forth. especially in entry level positions or lower than mid level position, you are hiring the character with the person as well.

 

[uluvbs]

This is not a joke.

I applied to work in the middle office of the Private Bank at JPMorgan in New York last year. (I'd be working WITH private bankers, but not actually being a banker.)

No exaggeration, I walk in decked out in a suit and tie and the 35-40yo interviewer is wearing khakis and a button-down long-sleeve shirt. (We're not talking slacks; we're talking Dockers pants.) It was on a Monday, and I could not imagine how he could get away with wearing that to work on a Friday there.

I know I dressed correctly, but I felt almost inappropriately overdressed while with him.

 

[sfnapolifan]

the guy with suit and no tie has no excuse. the guy with slacks and a blazer i can maybe understand.

at least in investment banking here in san francisco, standards of dress depend on what will be happening on any particular day. if you are a banker or research analyst meeting with a corporate client or potential corporate client, blazer and no tie is perfectly acceptable. you don't want do overdo it since the clients you'll be meeting with are likely slobs and will probably be wearing jeans. if you're at an all-day conference or something of the sort, dress could vary from the aforementioned to suit and tie, depending on who the other attendees will be. private wealth might tend to wear suits and ties to all client meetings to look like "money people." traders vary widely in their dress--some wear three-piece suits everyday, some look like they haven't changed their clothes in days or weeks--it's down to personal preference.

depending on the formality of the interviewees' work environments, if they wear a suit and tie and don't have client meetings on the day of the interview, it sets them off as "interviewing." the guy with the suit is a fool for not wearing a tie anyway. the guy with the blazer may be justified if this fits in with his office culture (and wearing a suit would seem suspicious).

if the candidate works in a casual environment, the expectation that they wear a suit imposes a significant practical burden--either they have to take significant time off work to interview, or they have to manage the logistics of changing into the interview suit during the course of the workday, in some third location outside of their own office and your office.

of course, if the candidates are presently unemployed, there's no excuse.

 

[Hengo]

I'm a diplomat and occasionally interview for junior positions. I can't say that I care much about tie or no tie of the candidate. Pretty much anyone can learn office dress code in a week or two on the job, but the qualifications I look for in a candidate are talents that take a long time to learn (if they can at all be learned).

Sometimes I have candidates check in advance about dress codes (which I believe is a good thing to do), but I have my secretary tell them to dress in a way that they feel comfortable, and that a tie is not necessary. I believe that I would be breaking corporate policy and codes of conduct if I disqualified someone on the basis of failing to wear a tie.

I am not in the US, and perhaps that has something to do with it?

 

[SkinnyGoomba]

Originally Posted by v1100110

I use my cellphone everyday. If you only wear a suit to interviews, that's once every few years. It's much easier to justify the cost of a cell phone. For some it's hard to justify the cost of a suit. .
Well, the cell phone is going to cost you money, where the suit is required for you to start making money, or making more money. Makes sense to me that having a nice one as a go-to for interviews is just good planning. Most every man should have a suit thats appropriate for interviews, weddings and funerals so that if nothing else you're appropriately dressed for these occasions.

Originally Posted by cptjeff

No, because a reasonable person would be expected to know that. A reasonable person cannot be expected to know what your standard is. Exactly what I'm thinking. Hire this guy:

and you get somebody oblivious to style and it's rules, but you would be hiring one of the most brilliant guys on the planet today. Now, if you don't want to hire a guy who decided that he didn't want to appear way too formal in an office where formless bags of cheap cloth (aka Dockers), kennith cole and polos are the normal manner of dress, ignoring any actual ability of qualifications, then you do so to your company's detriment.
So....we know what he looks like as the owner of his own company. What this doesnt show us is how he would dress for an interview. Besides the point that an IT/Programming job has a totally different set of requirements and a very different culture in many places. These are guys who pushed for casual work environments and dress codes. It really is the ultimate form of letting your talent shine through. Still, depending on the company a suit may be the most appropriate. The reason one wears a suit is to show that you understand the culture of business and that you fit the norms, in IT it may be one reason why you wouldnt get the job, but again it depends on the company. IT at Goldman may well require a suit, where at Google I would be surprised if anyone interviews in a suit.

 

[Kentishman]

Originally Posted by Blackhood

I always see wearing a suit as a sign of respect more than an attempt to look right.
I completely agree.

Originally Posted by Murdoc

Design and art position inteviews you dont show up in a suit, unless your going for some hipster look. Wearing a suit and tie basically makes them feel like assholes (since they wont be wearing a suit to work... again unless they are the hipster whatevers) I've purposeful not hired people because they showed up in a suit once, it was weird. (again this is my experience in art fields)
I work at a design company (corporate/branding) and it makes more of a positive impression on me if interviewees wear a suit, for the reason Blackhood states. Of course, SF-type prejudice could inform that opinion to a great extent! An apocryphal tale from a friend concerns a designer turning up for an interview with his work samples in a carrier bag. He said he went on to be one of the best designers he worked with, but initial impressions would have just killed it for me. Put simply, if you can't be arsed, you just can't be arsed. I went through the interviewing process again recently and was shocked by the perceived lack of effort of the candidates. FWIW, I wore a suit to my first interview as a creative and it did me no harm.

Originally Posted by uluvbs

This is not a joke. I applied to work in the middle office of the Private Bank at JPMorgan in New York last year. (I'd be working WITH private bankers, but not actually being a banker.) No exaggeration, I walk in decked out in a suit and tie and the 35-40yo interviewer is wearing khakis and a button-down long-sleeve shirt. (We're not talking slacks; we're talking Dockers pants.) It was on a Monday, and I could not imagine how he could get away with wearing that to work on a Friday there. I know I dressed correctly, but I felt almost inappropriately overdressed while with him.
One of my first posts here concerned interview advice I was given at school – I was told that one could never be overdressed for an interview. Whilst we all know that's not technically true (white tie?), it's still good advice as far as I'm concerned. I'd rather have been the one in the suit in uluvbs' example than the one in khakis.

 

[intent]

Just once, if I ever have a throw-away interview, I'd like to show up in full morning dress with tophat (in my arms).

 

[Kentishman]

Originally Posted by intent

Just once, if I ever have a throw-away interview, I'd like to show up in full morning dress with tophat (in my arms).

Frankly, I'm disgusted that you don't already!

 

[R.O. Thornhill]

I would be very surprised if I was in the OP's shoes

Like everyone at my firm, I do a lot of entry-level interviewing - and in the past five or so years of doing this I have never had a candidate show up in anything other than a suit or tie. Some horrible examples of both - yes - but no one going tie-less, or wearing a sports coat and odd trousers.

To be fair, that is in London, and we are known to be conservative when it comes to dress - but until I read this thread I would never have considered it anything other than as expected.

On occasion, I have reproached colleagues who when interviewing on a Friday will do so in a suit, but without tie. I feel this is a discourtesy to the interviewee.