Rejecting applicants based on choice of attire

[Phasmal]

Snip

You're right, clearly I wasn't being hyperbolic about the way society often expects women to be sexualised and then demonises them for it, I was suggesting this is a literal thing that happens at OP's work.

Either way, apparently she looked professional.
Personally I think this is overthinking and should not really factor into the decision.
I'd hate to think that whoever interviewed ME was placing such importance on my breasts.

 

[Phasmal]

Don't pout, I know you weren't being literal. But your hyperbole is pretty beside the point. When you're on a committee making the decision about hiring someone, it's a very serious decision. You have to do what you can to bring in the absolute best candidate you can. I've seen organizations get snarled for months because they take on someone who wasn't up to the job, but they can't just replace them right away.

Now, that's not a reason to throw good decision-making by the wayside and unethically hire someone for sexist reasons. But it's also stupid to throw away good decision-making and hire someone out of a shallow notion of social justice. One will not chisel away the wall of gender issues relating to women's bodies by hiring a woman who dresses unprofessionally.

I know it was beside the point, that was why I made a silly little hyperbolic comment about it.
But no nitpick is too small for the Escapist.

I guarantee you that if you were an applicant and I was on the hiring committee, your breasts would not be an issue unless you made them an issue by putting them in the center of attention. And I'd also hate for any applicant to my organization to place such importance on their breasts that they couldn't handle covering them up for 2 hours out of their life.

It's funny. I'd have thought a confident, competent woman wouldn't let her breasts distract from her skills and competency. Sort of like how when I apply for a job, I try to showcase my skills and abilities relevant to the job- not my really awesome calf muscles.

Part of being a professional is that you sacrifice a little bit of self-expression in order to serve the needs of your clients/customers. It's not all about you- it's about them, and that means you need to be just a little bit bland in order not to create a distraction from getting them to have what they are paying you to get for them. If an applicant can't follow the basic rules of professional dress for one single interview, how can I possibly believe they'll follow those rules on the job?

As I understand it, they were not `center of attention`, she just had a bit of cleavage (it's an issue if a little cleavage takes all your attention*). Also I don't know why you're saying she wasn't following the rules of professional dress when OP said she was dressed professionally.
She had a slight bit of cleavage, she wasn't dressed as a Las Vegas showgirl.

*Once again, slightly hyperbolic and general `you`. No nitpick too small.

Some women have already stated that it's difficult to find business shirts for the larger-breasted woman. I know a lot of busty women get shit for being `inappropriate` when really they can't help that they have big boobs.

 

[Smeatza]

Actually I wouldn't. I don't owe her a job and I'm not discriminating based on a factor that is outside her control.

Those aren't the be all and end all factors though are they.

It all comes down to presentation and perception, which is usually a deciding factor in hiring (all other things being equal). Besides, she looked professional aside from the cleavage, silly. That's the part that I questioned from the beginning.

That's all reasonable till we reach the next part.

It was too prominent to not be an intentional decision,

It can't just be part of a general fashion sense? I'm not a woman but perhaps having large breast makes it difficult to be comfortable and not show cleavage.
It seems unfair that a candidate would be denied a job because of your unhealthy fascination with her cleavage.

and if it was an intentional decision then I can say I'd prefer the other likely intentional decisions of the candidates who did not choose to have a low tops or tight shirts or whatever else.

Frankly I think you're being prudish.

 

[Eamar]

Some women have already stated that it's difficult to find business shirts for the larger-breasted woman.

I'm... skeptical. Now that's a big claim for someone who doesn't shop for women's clothing, but here where I live there are ample opportunities for women of most sizes that exist in the local population to buy shirts that button right up to the collar.

Actually a lot of the time a shirt that's buttoned right up to the collar can emphasise your large breasts more. Just ask any larger-busted woman who's ever worn a turtleneck - it looks ridiculous.

And in my experience (as someone who does shop for women's clothing), most of the clothes that would accommodate a large bust also assume that the rest of you is larger too. So a lot of the time, your options are: wear a shirt that fits the rest of you but is tight/gapes at the bust OR wear a shirt that fits your bust but makes you look like you're wearing a tent. Seriously, I used to feel miserable in my school uniform because the shirts that covered my bust made me look several clothes sizes bigger than I was.

Clothes are cut to fit the average body shape at whatever size. If your bust is one size but your body is another, you're screwed. If you want to get a proper fit you have to buy brands that are specifically designed for women with large busts, but they're considerably more expensive and offer less choice than "normal" brands.

Nowadays, I tend to choose to wear shirts that fit the rest of me, but I have to wear a matching vest top underneath to allow for the fact that they're prone to pop open/show cleavage/just not do up at the chest.

[sub]For the record, I wear UK size 8-10 (US 6-8) tops, but have a 30E (US 30DD) chest[/sub]

 

[Chemical Alia]

I'm... skeptical. Now that's a big claim for someone who doesn't shop for women's clothing, but here where I live there are ample opportunities for women of most sizes that exist in the local population to buy shirts that button right up to the collar. If in your region such shirts are not available, perhaps the problem isn't standards of professionalism, perhaps the problem is the sexist exploitation of women through local clothing sellers who don't offer sufficient choice to women of all figures.

When I last went to the US, I dealt with any number of professional women of all sizes who had no trouble not spilling out of their shirts, so obviously professional attire for large-breasted women does exist, at least in the rural midwest of the US.

"Large breasts" and "button up shirts" are two things that are seriously seldom compatible. I learned this first-hand when my boobs went from a C to a D, and that's not even that large.

Actually a lot of the time a shirt that's buttoned right up to the collar can emphasise your large breasts more. Just ask any larger-busted woman who's ever worn a turtleneck - it looks ridiculous.

And in my experience (as someone who does shop for women's clothing), most of the clothes that would accommodate a large bust also assume that the rest of you is larger too. So a lot of the time, your options are: wear a shirt that fits the rest of you but is tight/gapes at the bust OR wear a shirt that fits your bust but makes you look like you're wearing a tent. Seriously, I used to feel miserable in my school uniform because the shirts that covered my bust made me look several clothes sizes bigger than I was.

My best friend is a big girl. She has the most enormous boobs I've ever seen on a human. Shopping with her is so depressing, because 19/20 things she tries on, she can't even get into, and she's usually stuck wearing the frumpiest clothing as a result. Her boobs are so out there, that they unfortunately usually are the first thing people notice about her. When she wears a sweater or a turtleneck, it really does make the problem worse, as it turns her chest into a ridiculous boob balloon that only accentuates the problem. Just a regular blouse ends up showing a little bit of cleavage, but she looks much more natural. I feel bad for her, because she works at a bank with pretty traditional office attire. For some people, there's really no hiding them.

 

[mecegirl]

I'd have to see a woman who was dressed in a similar way to judge. The way you describe the way she was dressed OP makes things a little unclear. I've met some people (male and female) that freak over the slightest hint of cleavage. But there is cleavage(which is unavoidable with some fashions today because that's how breasts in bras work) and there is CLEAVAGE.

I know just from shopping with my female friends that some of the more basic shirt designs will show more cleavage on a girl with a larger bust-line. And when I say larger I mean a C cup, and C's are not that large, like forget it if you're bigger than a C.

Was anyone else around during the interviewing process? Next time just ask whoever else that works with you during that time these kind of questions. If more than one person really notices then you know that it is really noticeable and not just you noticing it.

 

[axlryder]

Actually I wouldn't. I don't owe her a job and I'm not discriminating based on a factor that is outside her control.

Those aren't the be all and end all factors though are they.

It all comes down to presentation and perception, which is usually a deciding factor in hiring (all other things being equal). Besides, she looked professional aside from the cleavage, silly. That's the part that I questioned from the beginning.

That's all reasonable till we reach the next part.

It was too prominent to not be an intentional decision,

It can't just be part of a general fashion sense? I'm not a woman but perhaps having large breast makes it difficult to be comfortable and not show cleavage.
It seems unfair that a candidate would be denied a job because of your unhealthy fascination with her cleavage.

and if it was an intentional decision then I can say I'd prefer the other likely intentional decisions of the candidates who did not choose to have a low tops or tight shirts or whatever else.

Frankly I think you're being prudish.

It may be part of a fashion sense. I already specified that in several other comments. I never meant intentional decision to mean anything other than "she chose the shirt and she had to have been aware that said shirt would show noticeable cleavage". Nothing more than that. If she didn't consider it beyond that, fine. That doesn't mean there aren't choices of attire that one could deem more professional worn by all other considered candidates. Also, I never specified how big her breasts were, did I? They weren't so large that it would have been difficult for her to cover them up at all. My SO almost certainly has larger breasts and she has zero issue finding professional clothes that don't show cleavage. Also, accusing me of having an, "unhealthy fascination" isn't an actual rebuttal, it's just a silly baseless comment that doesn't actually counter the idea that dressing in a way that could be perceived as revealingly is a potential pitfall that other candidates managed to consider or at least avoid. Calling me "prudish" is equally pointless and useless.

For those curious, it was probably a bit less than this. Similar attire too. I'd think she could throw on a cami secret (sp?) or something. It's not an impossible situation to surmount even if you have a limited wardrobe.

 

[Eamar]

I'm sorry, but I just have little sympathy for this. It's not like men have it any differently. I have a neck much larger than the rest of me, and it's virtually impossible to find a shirt that I can button the collar without the rest of the shirt looking like a poncho on me. Neck ties are rather uncomfortable for me, because in order to hide the fact that I've not been able to button the collar I have to make the tie tighter than normal. But for a professional interview, I do it anyway. It's unfortunate, but it's part of the expectation, and part of being a professional is recognizing that it's not all about your comfort, but rather it's about making the customer/client comfortable. I don't go into an interview with the goal of looking perfect, I go in with the goal of showing the interviewers that I can keep up with the standards of professional dress, then moving on to show them my skills and competencies, the real reasons they should hire me. I see no reason women can't follow the same standard.

Because turning up wearing a shirt that was two sizes too big would look really professional, right?

Besides, I never said larger breasted women shouldn't or can't look professional (I told you how I get around the issue in my post). I simply took exception to you doubting that it was more difficult to find suitable attire:

Some women have already stated that it's difficult to find business shirts for the larger-breasted woman.

I'm... skeptical.

 

[shootthebandit]

Clothes are cut to fit the average body shape at whatever size. If your bust is one size but your body is another, you're screwed. If you want to get a proper fit you have to buy brands that are specifically designed for women with large busts, but they're considerably more expensive and offer less choice than "normal" brands.

Nowadays, I tend to choose to wear shirts that fit the rest of me, but I have to wear a matching vest top underneath to allow for the fact that they're prone to pop open/show cleavage/just not do up at the chest.

[sub]For the record, I wear UK size 8-10 (US 6-8) tops, but have a 30E (US 30DD) chest[/sub]

I dont mean to sound like a creep or anything but you seem pretty top-heavy and I can see how this would be a problem however I find its always best to get one set of clothes made to measure that you use solely for interviews and formal events. I dont know how expensive this can be for a female (as it can be expensive for a male) and I can fully understand someone not paying so much for something they will only use a couple of times. I personally see it as an investment as a tailored suit (or female equivalent) can make all the difference when it comes to an interview

 

[Eamar]

I dont mean to sound like a creep or anything but you seem pretty top-heavy and I can see how this would be a problem however I find its always best to get one set of clothes made to measure that you use solely for interviews and formal events. I dont know how expensive this can be for a female (as it can be expensive for a male) and I can fully understand someone not paying so much for something they will only use a couple of times. I personally see it as an investment as a tailored suit (or female equivalent) can make all the difference when it comes to an interview

I fully intend to do just that once I'm no longer a cash-strapped student. There's absolutely no way I could afford it now though

It's looking quite likely that I might end up going into law, so owning a smart, well-fitting suit is going to be an absolute must. To be honest, I'd want a tailored suit even if I had a more "normal" body shape, because no one 100% fits off the rail clothes.

 

[shootthebandit]

I dont mean to sound like a creep or anything but you seem pretty top-heavy and I can see how this would be a problem however I find its always best to get one set of clothes made to measure that you use solely for interviews and formal events. I dont know how expensive this can be for a female (as it can be expensive for a male) and I can fully understand someone not paying so much for something they will only use a couple of times. I personally see it as an investment as a tailored suit (or female equivalent) can make all the difference when it comes to an interview

I fully intend to do just that once I'm no longer a cash-strapped student. There's absolutely no way I could afford it now though

It's looking quite likely that I might end up going into law, so owning a smart, well-fitting suit is going to be an absolute must. To be honest, I'd want a tailored suit even if I had a more "normal" body shape, because no one 100% fits off the rail clothes.

You will notice the difference, Im a fairly normal sized bloke (a bit on the skinny side) Its not difficult for me to get clothes to fit from most shops. However a fitted suit is a massive difference and ive sure for women it makes even more of a difference. Plus these places so much better than your average shops. Last place I went to the guy had a beer cooler and provided free beer while I was getting fitted

Its also a confidence thing. You put on your suit and you instantly feel ready to take on the interview

Going into law it'll probably be something you have to wear every day which will be really pricey having to buy a suit for every day of the week (plus dry-cleaning). Im blessed that I work a manual job and just wear a £2.50 t-shirt under my coveralls but I still like to have on good suit for interviews and formal occasions.

 

[Smeatza]

It may be part of a fashion sense. I already specified that in several other comments. I never meant intentional decision to mean anything other than "she chose the shirt and she had to have been aware that said shirt would show noticeable cleavage". Nothing more than that. If she didn't consider it beyond that, fine. That doesn't mean there aren't choices of attire that one could deem more professional worn by all other considered candidates.

Well then it boils down to the question "Is showing cleavage unprofessional, or less professional than no showing clevage?"
I would say no. As long as it's not excessive I wouldn't say it's unprofessional, and what you've described doesn't sound excessive.

Also, I never specified how big her breasts were, did I? They weren't so large that it would have been difficult for her to cover them up at all. My SO almost certainly has larger breasts and she has zero issue finding professional clothes that don't show cleavage.

It was just one example of why such clothing might be necessary for one's comfort or some equally innocuous reason.

Also, accusing me of having an, "unhealthy fascination" isn't an actual rebuttal, it's just a silly baseless comment that doesn't actually counter the idea that dressing in a way that could be perceived as revealingly is a potential pitfall that other candidates managed to consider or at least avoid. Calling me "prudish" is equally pointless and useless.

I felt it was a rather apt if hyperbolic summary for how I feel about your position.
I would consider inexcessive cleavage a complete non-factor for a candidate, and I can't see why you would.

 

[Bertylicious]

Generally it depends on how up tight the interviewer is. It's not worth changing the way you look because if you like the way you look then would you want to work at a place where you have to lie about who you are? I mean really it is on a par with rejecting someone because they are too fat or too skinny or too black because you are making a decision based on assumptions rather than facts.

All that said; the reality is that most interviewers will put a lot of stock in how you look and will be put off if you aren't wearing your smartest clothes, don't own a special device to make your clothes flatter and turn up in blackface.

 

[axlryder]

Well then it boils down to the question "Is showing cleavage unprofessional, or less professional than no showing clevage?"
I would say no. As long as it's not excessive I wouldn't say it's unprofessional, and what you've described doesn't sound excessive.

It's fine if you say no. I'd agree that a hint of cleavage or a small amount could be tasteful. What the girl had, I'd say, is too much to alleviate my other concerns. In retrospect, I consider what she had, honestly, excessive.

It was just one example of why such clothing might be necessary for one's comfort or some equally innocuous reason.

Well it's not an applicable example and I've yet to hear a hypothetical that sounds reasonable and negates my initial concerns.

I felt it was a rather apt if hyperbolic summary for how I feel about your position.
I would consider inexcessive cleavage a complete non-factor for a candidate, and I can't see why you would.

you deeming it apt doesn't somehow constitute a sound argument, it just makes you sound biased in the opposite direction. I already explained how it could be a factor and I don't think her cleavage was minute enough to fall under the radar.

 

[Smeatza]

It's fine if you say no. I'd agree that a hint of cleavage or a small amount could be tasteful. What the girl had, I'd say, is too much to alleviate my other concerns. In retrospect, I consider what she had, honestly, excessive.

Then we're agreed, it's just a case of line drawing.

Well it's not an applicable example and I've yet to hear a hypothetical that sounds reasonable and negates my initial concerns.

Considering other people in this thread have said they know or are women who struggle to be physically comfortable and not show cleavage I don't think it's so far off.
And like I say, that's just one example, I don't have breasts so my knowledge in the area is pretty limited.

you deeming it apt doesn't somehow constitute a sound argument, it just makes you sound biased in the opposite direction.

That's because it was a summary, and like I said a pretty dramatic one at that.

I already explained how it could be a factor and I don't think her cleavage was minute enough to fall under the radar.

You explained it was a factor, but not why it was a factor.
But that was before we were saying the cleavage was excessive.
Cleavage is a non-factor in an interview, in the same way the candidates trousers being flared or not is a non-factor.
Excessive cleavage is a factor, in the same way the candidate wearing parachute pants is a factor.