Got in trouble for being kilted at work

[TexasMommy]

A kilt is "culturally related" attire. No different than "African" shirts or other an Arab tunic. It is not legal in the US to discriminate based on culture, and if the OP has had positive performance reviews in the past, the manager would be very foolish to start problems now. If a kilt is not against dress code, then it's not against dress code, no matter what the manager says. If other employees can wear "cultural" based clothing, then all employees can as long as it falls within the bounds of the rules. End of story.

Many people's "African heritage" is 150 years old, but because of their skin tone no one argues with their clothing choice if they choose to wear those garments. You do NOT have to be from Scotland, nor have any relative there in recent memory, if you identify something of yourself in Scottish culture then you have the right to wear the appropriate clothing.

I'm soooo tired of the "some people have rights (but a white male doesn't)" stuff.

I agree completely. Since when is it ok to discriminate against anyone? No matter who it is, it is very unfair, and the local store manager has nothing to say if corporate approved it.

Fact is here in the US this same situation could lead to a lawsuit.

As I already stated my law professor said he would definitely take on a case like this when he was practicing.

[AFS1970]

Although it is largely a moot point, it seems that we are actually arguing two different and somewhat opposite points.

While I don't think that a kilt is outside of most dress codes, this is probably not by intention but simply because the kilt was not on the mind of whoever wrote that dress code. However when faced with a situation like this where one is told not to wear the kilt, and choosing to fight, it helps to be coming at this from one position not two.

If the kilt is a Scottish (or even Celtic) garment and is worn because of culture or heritage, then by all means pursue this from the obvious discrimination angle.

If the kilt is simply an article of clothing that can be worn by anyone at any time regardless of culture or heritage, then pursue it from a strictly procedural argument about the dress code not actually forbidding it.

But to argue that it is a birthright to wear the kilt but those that lack that birthright also have the right to wear it, seems to me to be self defeating. I understand that the kilt has expanded way beyond it's original area or both geography and use, but in a workplace case like this it seems best to pick a battle and fight it, but stick to a single battlefront.

[TexasMommy]

Our company has an "aware line" that is set up for issues such as this or problems in the working environment. It can be completely anonymous (obviously not in my situation). But i did make a call to this line and talked to them i was told i was correct and was within dress code also the hr person on the other side of the line interpreted the managers comments as threatening (the comments about next time i wear it and such). Hr told me they were going to have to call him and have a talk with him. Also the store level person that told me it was ok to wear told me later the same day the manager got a call and was told the kilt was perfectly acceptable.


I understand every ones advice and i agree with a lot of the points made And i know by calling the line i made myself a target but this isn't the first problem ive had with said manager and im far from the only one who has had problems with him. i know of 3 times hr has been called on him in the last 2 months. I have held my tongue on a few occasions when the manager has done or said something inappropriate to me. He basically called me dumb in front of a dozen coworkers. When he first started at our store i was already working there and one of the first things he did was question all the managers about my pierced ears. Any way i truely believe i should be allowed to wear the kilt if i so choose. And i did take it a little further because i believe it should be allowed but also because it is just one to many things to hold my tongue on and allow him to get away with.

Bravo to you! Very glad you did this, not surprised to hear there have been other issues with this manager.

[Lallans]

Those who say it wise to not fight use the same reasoning. Don't fight it because if you do your manager will resent you.
When the English government raised taxes and heightened the grip on the colonists, the colonists dumped the tea into the ocean. When the Egyptian people had enough of their government overbearing on their lives they revolted. No matter what country or back ground we are from we have examples of people fighting for what is right or fair in their minds. Regardless of the difficulties they may have to endure. This issue is bigger than mr manager it's about right and wrong. If the manager is wrong then he needs to be corrected regardless of if he will like it.
CDNSushi: I know what you are saying about how the manager will feel. But let's kick this back to let's say 200 years ago. You can say the same thing about a slave owner. He thinks his slaves are only good for working. What do you think he would feel about his slaves eating with him or sitting next to him? Or maybe you can think back to history class when in the old west Asians were looked at as disgusting clowns? Is it right to be disgusted that a black person can eat with you? Is it right for some one to abuse a asian and make him into a fool? NO!!! Will the offending party be resentful? Ya darn right they will! But who cares? Freedom of the slaves has nothing to do with the slave owners. It has to do with the oppression of a people.
What I'm trying to say is if people were always afraid of what the "manager" was going to think no one would have much freedom at all.

[The above post and others]: I'm all for the Rights Of Man stuff. I admire people who died for the cause of freedom and hopefully would do so myself if necessary, but I don't think a retail store in tough times is the place to fight a minor personal-choice battle and thereby risk losing what is presumably scarce employment; I mean basically this is just a disagreement over a clothing issue, not taxation without representation or religious persecution. The OP is there and involved and has made his own decision on the matter, but that is my view.

[AN COIGREACH ALBANNACH]

Thanks Nighthawk for your definition of culture in particular.I had looked it up in our dictionary just to be sure my idea of culture was in line with the actual word and the definition you shared is far more informative and comprehensive than what my dictionary gave.

I did however have the basic idea right i think.To agree with you,culture is something you learn from within a society or a family,something the people around you pass on to you.Whereas heritage is something that comes with birthright.I knew there is a difference but i spoke of both, because i did not want those who perhaps have scottish heritage from a relative long dead who's actual 'cultural influence' is no longer felt to feel i was not including them as ones who may want to wear the kilt to honour the scottish way.Please let me explain.

Some of those whos family has not been in scotland for generations and come to some point where they 'find out' they have a scottish ancestor should be warmly encouraged for wanting to show pride in that by doing something like wearing the kilt. It really would be a long shot,though, for these ones to say they are 'practicing their culture'.That is not to take anything away from these ones,but as you pointed out there is a difference.
I must say it's these heritage based ones who,by way of being raised without any authentic(meaning living,significant) scottish culture in their family life,seem to unknowingly annoy my scottish freinds and relatives(and in turn sometimes me).In their uninformed enthusiasm to embrace their scottish heritage they can sometimes be seen saying and doing things under the label of 'showing their scottishness' that just makes actual scots and those with scottish culture cringe.

They do this out of eager,well meaning ignorance. Thats why i mentioned educating themselves in what SCOTS think is THEIR ACCEPTED occasions and style(and there are many) for the wearing of the kilt.
So i hope this clears up why i was mentioning both,i was trying to cover both angles, to encourage any wanting to show either cultural or heritage connections to scotland to wear the kilt the way it's done in scotland.Again the kilt is something anybody,heritage or no,can wear any way they want,just trying to say that the way you wear it may or may not be in line with the scottish way.

Interesting thought though,what you said about alt kilts.(for those reading but unaware i have in the past seen some that i think look outstanding)You are saying that they have a scottish heritage because of similar design and tailoring?To me i can see that,but that is not enough,for my opinion,to include them within items or customs that could be recognized as particularly scottish.The way that many alt kilts are designed to be worn without a sporran,have no tartan,and other innovations puts them in a category all their own.Worn with great flair and effct by many,yes,but a recognizable way to celebrate scotland,i don't believe so.Not to say they won't work their way into that bracket one day.To me that's up to if the scots really take to wearing them,for what reasons,etc.History will tell!

All this heavering does go back to the thread.In an earlier post i wondered if the o.p was perhaps mixing up wanting to practice scottish culture with a determination to exercise his freedom to wear the kilt.Both are worthy aims but in his particular case he's actually a bit off the mark if he thinks wearing his kilt to work is reflecting modern scottish culture.Ask the scots!Tell them you're going to wear something different to work just to prove a point for freedom of choice and most will back you in to the hilt.Tell them you're going to start wearing the kilt to work because it's scottish culture to do so these days and most will tell you you're at it.

[Cowher]

Although it is largely a moot point, it seems that we are actually arguing two different and somewhat opposite points.

While I don't think that a kilt is outside of most dress codes, this is probably not by intention but simply because the kilt was not on the mind of whoever wrote that dress code. However when faced with a situation like this where one is told not to wear the kilt, and choosing to fight, it helps to be coming at this from one position not two.

If the kilt is a Scottish (or even Celtic) garment and is worn because of culture or heritage, then by all means pursue this from the obvious discrimination angle.

If the kilt is simply an article of clothing that can be worn by anyone at any time regardless of culture or heritage, then pursue it from a strictly procedural argument about the dress code not actually forbidding it.

But to argue that it is a birthright to wear the kilt but those that lack that birthright also have the right to wear it, seems to me to be self defeating. I understand that the kilt has expanded way beyond it's original area or both geography and use, but in a workplace case like this it seems best to pick a battle and fight it, but stick to a single battlefront.

I agree wholeheartedly

[The above post and others]: I'm all for the Rights Of Man stuff. I admire people who died for the cause of freedom and hopefully would do so myself if necessary, but I don't think a retail store in tough times is the place to fight a minor personal-choice battle and thereby risk losing what is presumably scarce employment; I mean basically this is just a disagreement over a clothing issue, not taxation without representation or religious persecution. The OP is there and involved and has made his own decision on the matter, but that is my view.

I most defitinatly am taking this situation as it was happening to me. To me my freedom and happiness is worth loosing a job over. I am in no way pushing my opinion on anyone but if you want to do something and the rules do not restrict it then you should be able to do it. If HR told the OP that kilts were restricted due to safety reasons then I would be singing a different tune but the manager in this situation is the weak link not the company itself. I appologise if I gave the wrong impression.

[Calico]

The point I don't like is other people stepping in to explain what the other person was trying to say.

And here I thought I was doing comradely good. Sorry Doc.

Can we make up and be friends, now?

[Bugbear]

Can we make up and be friends, now?

* Hug *

[KiltedGirl]

And here I thought I was doing comradely good. Sorry Doc.

Well, since you were helping explain exactly what I meant, you were doing comradely good.

and thanks!

[Nighthawk]

Thanks Nighthawk for your definition of culture in particular.I had looked it up in our dictionary just to be sure my idea of culture was in line with the actual word and the definition you shared is far more informative and comprehensive than what my dictionary gave.

Just so you know- I don't really have time to read through your essay- I have a class to get to! However, I wanted you to know that I wasn't trying to "correct" you or in any other way give offense. Written language is so tough to interpret, and we all see the world through different eyes. A lot of the time when I post what is meant to be simply informative, people think I'm being snide or arrogant. I'm glad that I didn't come across that way to you. I'll read and respond to your whole post when I get home.