Kilt Shop Employee Not Allowed to Wear Kilt to Work

[Bugbear]

I'm not a Scot, but my take on it (after seeing many such conversations and weighing a lot of the evidence) is that Scots are proud of the kilt. But they're also a little embarrassed by the way the world has treated it.

They seem to cringe a little (and rightly so) at cartoonish, Brigadoonish uses of their historical garb. And so, rather than embracing it for daily wear at the risk of furthering the stereotype, they hold it in reserve for special occasions.

The same seems to be happening with this kilt shop. The jokers down the street are making a mockery of the kilt with their "tartan tat" displays and such. Respectable kilt-makers do not want to risk being associated with that level of ridiculousness, and so they hold the wearing of the kilt in reserve. They have a reputation to maintain, and would rather be seen as respectable businessmen rather than the caricatures seen down the street.

It's a sad state of affairs, but it makes perfect sense. It's not that Scots want to necessarily limit the wearing of the kilt or its availability. They just would rather not wear it if it's going to be associated with ridiculous stereotypes. I can't say I blame them.

I suppose I can understand that. Keep the important things in your life close and private; protected from others because others probably won't have the same sense of importance.

[GG]

It's not that Scots want to necessarily limit the wearing of the kilt or its availability. They just would rather not wear it if it's going to be associated with ridiculous stereotypes.

To me this does not make sense. By not wearing the kilt, its existence is threatened. Like it is the case with all product markets with little and even decreasing sales and potential.

How many kilt makers should long term be able to earn their living by selling one kilt to say 1% of the Scottish manly population? A kilt which is hardly used, because it is reserved for very special and rare occasions, and which is therefore expected to be handed down for generations?

Had it not been for you Americans, who will often own more kilts and wear out them and repurchase them, the kilt might soon become as seldom as the Greek Fustanella.

Just my opinion.

[Tobus]

I don't think this is a decision that the Scottish people sat down and contemplated based on business models. It is more of a cultural mindset, and is not controlled by any one person. It is a cultural backlash against the revolting displays of the tartan tat merchants who are trying to make tourists shell out every last dime for an icon of Scotland, and making everything kilt- or tartan-related seem foolish.

For a reputable kiltmaker to engage in behaviour (and dress) that would associate him with that sort of business model would be disastrous to his reputation. This is not to say that having shop employees wearing a kilt would necessarily destroy the reputation in and of itself, but again, it's more of an overall mindset. Were it not for the tartan tat clowns, I would bet that local kiltmakers would have no problem with their employees wearing kilts to work.

That's just my take on it, anyway. I could be wrong. But even if I'm right, it doesn't necessarily have to be logical. Cultural backlashes seldom are.

[oldscubaguy]

The one that owns the shop makes the rules, this is their priveledge. That being said:
I just want to live in a place where I can wear a kilt every day!
Apparently Scotland is no longer that place. - (guess I was born too late)

[davidg]

Were it not for the tartan tat clowns, I would bet that local kiltmakers would have no problem with their employees wearing kilts to work.

I suspect it's more a matter of economics. A tat shop has cheap kilts which, by definition, have little value if you have your staff wearing them. Quality kilts cost far more and may be uneconomic to give to staff

That doesn't account for banning the wearing of a kilt but it would explain why they are not issued. High Street (or Princes Street) stores are expensive to run, profit margins are not high, and we always seem to be in a recession with times economically hard. Can the store owners afford quality kilts for all their staff?

And staff left to their own devices are more likely to go with pants anyway, kilt ban or no kilt ban

[McClef]

Sounds like a mentality of diminishing returns.

Staff not given kilts because it's not seen as economic.

So no sales are generated by customers seeing staff in kilts.

So as sales decrease then less staff are needed.

But it can all be blamed on the tat shop round the corner.

But the shop owners can feel all morally superior for upholding the finest traditions etc. etc.

Meanwhile the discharged staff end up wearing kilts at the tat shops...

[GG]

Sounds like a mentality of diminishing returns.

But it can all be blamed on the tat shop round the corner.

No, it cannot. Everyone operating in a market place does what he feels is necessary to increase sales, to win market shares, to do everything bringing him forward, even if it is a tad shop.

If a seller does not find it relevant to his business that his employees are showing off his produce, it is his decision and his alone.

I, as a buyer, should, on the other hand, avoid buying from him. And that would be my decision. I suppose we talk Geoffrey Tailor?

[freddie]

This sounds totally abserd to me. What sort of message does it give to their potential customers ?

[Downunder Kilt]

I'm not a Scot, but my take on it (after seeing many such conversations and weighing a lot of the evidence) is that Scots are proud of the kilt. But they're also a little embarrassed by the way the world has treated it.

Tobus, you have put into words my thoughts exactly. not just answering the OP's statement but a myriad of other questions that are raised on this forum. I would also add frustrated by the way the world has treated ithe kilt
Cheers to you Sir.

[artificer]

Tobus, you have put into words my thoughts exactly. not just answering the OP's statement but a myriad of other questions that are raised on this forum. I would also add frustrated by the way the world has treated ithe kilt
Cheers to you Sir.

Perhaps this is the "American" in me speaking, but I think the thing to do is for the Scots to NOT shy away from the kilt, but MAKE it their own again.

IF they don't like how the world has treated it, then wear the blasted thing. SHOW the world that it's Scottish, and that THIS is how to do it.

By relegating it to weddings, graduations and rental houses, they're sucking all the life out of the very thing they so badly wish to protect.

There is a phrase common here in the US, and perhaps elsewhere- "Use it of lose it".

If you DON'T make it your own, you'll eventually lose control of it and someone ELSE will dictate how it's perceived.

It's not a threat, but a reality.

ith: