I chose to wear trousers today

[sapphire]

No, people went with Microsoft, not IBM. They went with Intel and turned their backs on Motorola.

There were many mini computer manufacturers. All of them are gone now. Data General survived and was the last to go. DG's mistakes were marketing related and product selection related, not creativity, innovation and technical forward thinking in its product lines.

The death of the mini computer market was based mainly on a blindness to a market that was moving away from minis to pcs.

DG survived as long as it did because of two creative innovations: Excellent UNIX servers and the best fault tolerant storage systems of the time.

What DG did wrong was selecting a Motorola processor when the industry was moving toward Intel. The other thing they did wrong was staying too diversified when they should have focused on servers and storage systems. Instead, they continued to invest in automating the manufacture of mini computers, a technology that was being abandoned by the marketplace.

Your analysis of the company and its successes and failures is off base. DG was wildly successful and highly creative and innovative technically, but marketing was broken.

What ultimately killed DG was when they brought in ex-IBM executives to "Fix" things. The IBMers fixed it OK, right into the ground.

[iain]

Wow! I'm impressed at your analysis!

I used to program for MiPs, DEC, ICL minis, RISC chips, as well as VAX/VMS systems. I was flabbergasted at how software would be compiled for one machine and fail miserably on another. I was also amazed that ICL took 8 months once to deliver me a part. I wrote to them that since I had asked them to send me a 14" cable, the Berlin wall had come down, the Rolling Stones had toured the entire world, and the whole of the USSR had dismantled itself, but still the cable was undelivered.

I think if manufacturers aim for convenience and for compatibility with the marketplace, they can't go far wrong. People have nothing at all against technology! But when they try to do something they hate frustration and delays and roadblocks and hurdles and disappointment!

[Pythos]

This is actually refreshing to here.

I am sorry for my attitude toward you.

It is hard for someone that has been slammed with "you have to look the look, usually meaning boring suit, if you want to succeed" to accept the idea that a company that does not follow that rule can succeed.

Recently I had to get my hair cut to present a "good image" for my job. I HATE it, and want my hair to grow back out. The people that run my shop are really caught by the statement "image is everything" which for me is absolute nonsense. My hair actually had a purpose. It stopped the skin on my neck and ears from burning (which sunscreen has minimal effect on), and so I am limited to work in shadows or in the shop. I also think I look like a block head with my hair short.

The aviation world is filled with "image" related people. Since I have been in aviation nearly all my life, this is what I have been exposed. All other stuff I have read about or seen on the news.

[SkirtDude]

deleted

[crfriend]

It is hard for someone that has been slammed with "you have to look the look, usually meaning boring suit, if you want to succeed" to accept the idea that a company that does not follow that rule can succeed.

Whilst they're rare, they do exist, and can be truly wonderful places to work -- not only to work but also to have fun at. And even ones that do encourage the "grey man" look can sometimes be fun; my third gig in my professional career was such a place, but it was fun because of the minds I got to work with (an engineering company) as well as the toys.

"Style over substance" has always been a problem in the workplace, and usually customers can see through the BS; it's the McManagers that can't, and perpetuate the BS in the name of "marketing" and "image".

Recently I had to get my hair cut to present a "good image" for my job. I HATE it, and want my hair to grow back out.

I wouldn't accept a job if one of the conditions was to cut my hair; it's taken me twenty years to grow it out and I'm not going to give that investment in time up because some doofus wants to exercise power and control over me at work. (OK, maybe if I was starving and needed money to eat I might, but that scenario's rather unlikely.)

The aviation world is filled with "image" related people. Since I have been in aviation nearly all my life, this is what I have been exposed. All other stuff I have read about or seen on the news.

How many of your co-workers are ex-military? That may be part of the problem. The first thing that happens to military recriuts is they have their individuality beaten out of them (questioning "The Leader" is a bad thing) so they can be moulded to be precisely identical and robot-like.

One thing I've found is that it really does help to "get out once in a while" to see what else is around, and how other folks behave. I'm fortunate in that I had some rather interesting jobs back when I was still in secondary school.

As far as long hair in your field goes, I supect that in some cases it'd be impractical; I know for instance that if I was going to be out and about near aircraft, especially on aprons and whatnot, I'd want my hair tightly restrained in either a braid or, more likely, a bun so it wouldn't get caught in things. Properly restrained, it would be neither hassle nor hazard, but it would drive an ex-jarhead to apoplexy. The same thing goes for loose flowing garments; for some things, trousers just make sense.

[Uncle Al]

Pythos,

I retired from an aviation job ( 26 1/2 years ) at the end of last
November. I know what you mean. However, our office went
'business casual' approximately 15-18 years ago. I've worn my
kilts to work several times. At my retirement party, I wore my
Irish National kilt, Prince Charlie coat and vest, and a green tie
that happened to match the green in my kilt. Not all aviation jobs
are image specific. People who work at airport ticket counters,
still must present "The Image", as well as Flight Crews.

Maintainence personel should dress appropriately for the job they do,
as well as personal safety. Don't want any fabric to get caught in
machinery. Same with hair. If it will get in the way or possibly get
caught in machinery, then yes, for safety, cut it.

On the other hand, if you're in an electronics shop, length of hair
should not matter, Just keep it pulled back, properly groomed
( clean ), and you should have no problems.

Carriers differ from each other in a lot of personel requirements.
Some do not allow facial hair, even on the janitors at 'off-airport'
locations. (I retired with a full beard. Not much left on top. )

IMO, you may want to 'investigate' other companies as to their
'appearance profile requirements'. These findings, especailly if
in your favor, could be brought to your HR dept. If they balk at
the idea, you could also show how morale (sp) is better, 'production'
is better, and 'the bottom line' is better.

Well, That's my $.02 worth based on my experiences.
( Yours may vary )

Uncle Al
Duncanville, TX

[Peter v]

This is actually refreshing to here.

I am sorry for my attitude toward you.

It is hard for someone that has been slammed with "you have to look the look, usually meaning boring suit, if you want to succeed" to accept the idea that a company that does not follow that rule can succeed.

Recently I had to get my hair cut to present a "good image" for my job. I HATE it, and want my hair to grow back out. The people that run my shop are really caught by the statement "image is everything" which for me is absolute nonsense. My hair actually had a purpose. It stopped the skin on my neck and ears from burning (which sunscreen has minimal effect on), and so I am limited to work in shadows or in the shop. I also think I look like a block head with my hair short.

The aviation world is filled with "image" related people. Since I have been in aviation nearly all my life, this is what I have been exposed. All other stuff I have read about or seen on the news.

Pythos, I wish to apologise if I have commentated at any time inappropriately, as I had momentarily forgoten your aviation binding. It may be very difficult to break through a settled culture, often stuck in a rut because all people in it behave a certain way, so the need with them is non existent to change or look more openly that up until now.

But there is always room for change. If only the people who have it for the saying are prepared to listen. There is absolutely nothing wrong with an image of a skirt wearing pilot, or a female pilot in a skirt, but that can show up just how stuck up the others may be, in their old ways, thus they don't want change. As for a respectable image, the pilot is the captain of the ship, who can say that you are not just the same, just as respectable in a skirt?

Every one of us must make choices, and sometimes we may choose to do things we disagree with, because we want / are in desperate need of / a "favour" from others, Like a job. Otherwise we can "fight" for our rights (to wear skirts) at a job of our chosing...

I am at a point where if at all practical, I WANT to wear a skirt at work, and don't care about what my colegues think. But I will have to find a job which is suitable for me, AND where they want ME, in a skirt or not. I am dreading the practical implications, of having to work in trousers all day, then coming home, and finally only having perhaps two hours inside to wear a skirt. Sometimes it feels like wanting the impossible. But it is possible, only I will have to find a job first, then make a stand.
Then I will see how it goes. After all, employers are not allowed to discriminate.

Luckily enough there are enough employers who see through the outer shell, and employ people on their merits, who they are, what they are capable of, irregardless of in a skirt or long hair, bald with a enormous belly, sexy or just plain "ugly". And of course there are corporate buisnesses, that want an ideal image, all clones, handsome young executives, all the same hair cut, three piece suits etc to fulfil their "image" ( an image of uniformity, of cumpulsary cloning ) If you can do the job they require, it still is today possible to make the choice and come up for your rights, you may get more respect than you had hoped for.

It is a scary thing todo, especially when your job is at stake, but a way of life , personal freedom is important too.

Life's chioices....

Peter v.

[sapphire]

After all, employers are not allowed to discriminate

Oh but they do, they've just gotten more subtle about it.

Luckily enough there are enough employers who see through the outer shell, and employ people on their merits, who they are, what they are capable of, irregardless of in a skirt or long hair, bald with a enormous belly, sexy or just plain "ugly".

Sounds like my department!

And of course there are corporate businesses, that want an ideal image, all clones, handsome young executives, all the same hair cut, three piece suits etc to fulfil their "image" ( an image of uniformity, of cumpulsary cloning )

And half of them don't know what they are doing.

Back in the 1970s, I was working in an IBM shop (after coming out of a freewheeling, miracle making shop) that was undergoing a change in operating systems. IBM sent out two instructors, both very nice and capable men. One was IBM corporate image down to his pores. The other had a mustache, hair as long as he could get away with, wore a beautifully tailored traditional suit made of denim, a white turtle-neck sweater and a string of beads. Hey, he had a blue suit, white shirt and "tie". His superiors had apoplexy, but really couldn't say anything.

I've found that the most tolerant workplaces are either associates with arts and creativity or technical creativity.

Pythos, I feel for you, I really do. Being compelled to fit into an image that is not your image really truly sucks.

[Uncle Al]

After all, employers are not allowed to discriminate

Oh but they do, they've just gotten more subtle about it.

I totally agree! They can become

Pythos, I feel for you, I really do. Being compelled to fit into an image that is not your image really truly sucks.

This I also totally agree with.

Unfortunately, I've been in the same position. But, I addapted to
fit so that my retirement was protected. Now, I wear skirts at home.
Kilts out and about or trousers if in really bad/windy weather.

Take heart, it will get better.

Uncle Al
Duncanville, TX

[AMM]

... There is absolutely nothing wrong with an image of a skirt wearing pilot, or a female pilot in a skirt, but that can show up just how stuck up the others may be, in their old ways,...

OT free association:

I was listening to a show on NPR a few days ago ("Wait, wait, don't tell me"?), where they had as a guest (for "not my job", I think) a woman who worked for "Candid Camera." She mentioned a segment where they had a plane full of passengers and they had a woman walk in in a pilot's uniform, so everyone would think she was the pilot. Back in those days, it was unheard of, so some of the passengers kind of flipped out. Nowadays, of course, few people would think it odd -- or if they did, they wouldn't admit it.

On-topic:

There might be an argument to be made that crews on airplanes shouldn't wear skirts (or "impractical" shoes), since one of their jobs is to handle emergencies (crashes, emergency landings, etc.), and one could argue that a skirt would make that harder. (IMnot-so-HO, it depends upon the skirt.)

However, if you did, it would apply to the flight attendants (stewards/-esses) even more than the flight crew, since it's the flight attendants who are primarily responsible for getting the passengers off the plane and to a safe place in the event of an emergency. I notice that there are still airlines with (female) flight attendants in short skirts, and even heels, so evidently marketing ("Coffee, tea, or me?") is still considered more important than safety.