Casual Wednesday?

I rarely read the news feed Apple sends across my phone. Mostly because although I have an awesome iPhone 6, which is the totally perfect size for talking, it’s not the perfect screen size for my 20/40 eyes to use for reading. However, as I accidentally scrolled to the left one too many times, May 25th’s New York Times article “The End of The Office Dress Code” caught my questionable eyesight and my attention. I was compelled to explore further investigations of this potential phenomenon via my desktop monitor because, well, I wasn’t wearing my glasses at the time.

The article’s focus is on an exhibit on uniforms and conformity and the ironic relationship between uniforms and fashion. The writer also speaks to the change in attitudes toward what is deemed professional dress in the workplace, a uniform of sorts, especially for women, and how fashion trends have created an evolution of the “dress code”. If a huge, ginormous billionaire such as Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook can admit to wearing the same grey t-shirt everyday to give himself more brain space to “focus his energy on other decisions”, surely there can be no correlation between what we wear to work and productivity, right? Apparently, there was also this social media thing dubbed “Sweatergate” last month, attributable to an joke perpetuated by a Los Angeles meteorologist centering around the need to cover up her bare shoulders while on the air and her male coworker covering them for her….social media went berserk. How dare he! Double standards!! Off with the station manager’s head!! Whereas many moons ago, it was considered crass to wear a tank dress without a sweater or blazer anywhere other than a picnic. Clearly, mindsets about clothing in the workplace are changing and Twitter has neither chill nor sense of humor.

Having worn security uniforms and movie theater usher vests everyday at one point, I appreciate the extra brain space not having to think too hard about your work attire creates as well as the purpose for uniforms and visibility in customer service oriented positions. But in the office as a paper pusher? Nah. The office dress code has long been one of the minor annoyances I struggled with- even before I had an office job. When I began thoughts about a career path, I was pretty adamant with two things – one, I must work indoors 100% of the time and two, I don’t want to wear a three-piece suit and pumps every day.  I’m a really casual, calm, cool, and collected individual. Not that I’m a t-shirt and pajama bottoms for work kind of girl, but I am a cute top, curvy jeans, and comfy wedges Señora.

My office attire and my bar attire preferences are one and the same. In my early 20’s, these preferences usually got me written up. Needless to say, I also got sent home a few times to change. Some would argue that it’s common sense to never wear leggings or belly shirts to work; ok, I get the why a belly shirt is wrong thing. But my argument to leggings was always why not?? They are pants. My whoo-ha is covered. Plus, I’m sitting on it anyway. Who cares? I crunch numbers in a cubicle all day. I later realized the answer to my question of “who cares?” was anyone who believed it is the woman’s job to curb male carnal instincts because he just is unable to can.  Sexy clothing and bare legs or protruding breasts are a distraction to your office mates and therefore, unprofessional. So are bike shorts on men, unless you’re a courier. Thus, we have created dress codes that spell out for employees how to leave the house everyday because otherwise, if left up to our own vices, we would come in looking like Tina Turner and The Mack everyday and cause such a distraction that work productivity would diminish to near zero.  *insert eye roll here*.

I must admit, Human Resources has tried to make dress codes as equal as possible in the last twenty years or so by not making codes gender specific or having a long list of  “acceptable wear” just for women. However, as a result of these efforts, I have seen dress codes that are two pages long and require employee signatures to verify it was read. Because for every outfit a female can’t wear, there has to be an equivalent outfit that a male can’t wear listed, too. Pants for everyone; thonged sandals for none.  Funny dress code tidbit: my last place of employment actually had the words “no visibly dirty clothing” in its dress code policy. I still wonder why this sentiment had to be put into words…I’m going to assume it was due to someone being extra proactive and not someone who came out the house that morning with ketchup and mustard stains on a white button-up.

My last battle with a dress code was during the mid-2000’s concerning Capri-length pants for ladies. I don’t win many dress code battles, so this one was a milestone for me.The fashion trend was Capri, or knickers, and pumps. I thought it was cute and business casual; my fellow female coworkers thought it was convenient and comfortable.   My boss, a lawyer by trade; an Executive Director by title, didn’t like the trend. They were “too close to shorts” he said. He notoriously wore a suit and tie 4 days a week and on day 5 he wore a polo shirt and khaki’s. I persuaded him to consult a few online forums, talk to a couple of women in senior management, and even take a trip to Macy’s to see if Capri suits were in fact being sold as business wear. (They were.) Much to his chagrin, he conceded to allowing the pants as work attire, but inserted a new clause in the dress code – no pants shorter than knee-length. The concern was not that someone would show up in Daisy Duke’s, but that that someone would be male. So to keep the dress code equal, it had to be done. Or, he could have spent that two weeks on doing something else uber important, like focusing on the new document retention policy requirements for nonprofits.

In the constant struggle by GenXers for work-life balance, the happy medium seems to be shifting to glass-enclosed offices, less free coffee, more healthy snacks, and a heightened sense of personal accountability.  Professionalism is  no longer about designer suits and dressing up for the job you want; it’s an attitude. Now, I am in no way advocating for dirty clothes and pajamas or for showing up to official business meetings wearing miniskirts and flip-flops. However, the traditional three-piece uniform with sensible pumps is staying in the closet, sans interview. My current office’s dress code policy is one line – “be comfortable, but dress appropriately for your day’s business interactions.” Meaning, please recognize sweatsuits to a business meeting with grant makers will be frowned upon and we probably won’t ask you to go to another meeting with anyone ever again.  Unspoken, yet, understood. And somehow, work gets done. Imagine that. Clothes and productivity not being totally related. Who would have thought it possible? This girl right here. Oh, and Mark Zuckerberg.

 

 

Divatude in the C-Suite

This past weekend while I was tuned in to an HBO snooze-fest, I saw an advertisement slash infomercial slash plug slash call to action urging Hollywood to hire more women directors for big budget and blockbuster films. I have no idea what the technical term was for what I was watching because it was about 15-minutes long so it wasn’t a typical commercial, it didn’t ask the viewers to send money anywhere so it wasn’t an advertisement or an infomercial and featured the likes of current actors and directors speaking on this problem that I didn’t realize was a problem, so it wasn’t quite a plug to watch the next great hit movie. Whatever it was, the call to action didn’t catch my attention until the third viewing when one of the reasons cited for women not receiving the calls to direct blockbuster films with larger budgets was that women are terrible with fiscal responsibility. *Gasp* Excuse me????

There have been thousands of studies and analyses completed on the subject of which sex is more efficient and effective fiscally. The vast majority of these studies agree that women win this title, hands down. I say the vast majority and not all because while I will not claim to have read every study,  of the thirty or so I have seen, I have not seen ANY that point to males being the best financial stewards. I’m pretty confident 0/30 is a pretty good statistical indicator of population. Being a woman in finance, I can’t help but compare the similarities in this story with the lack of women in the C-Suite. According a CNN Money analysis published in March 2016, of the top five leadership positions in the S&P 500, 14.2% are held by women. That’s the CEO, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Information Officer, Chief Marketing Officer, or the Chief Operating Officer. 24 of these companies have female CEO’s, which translates to 4%.  This leaves a whopping 10.2% of females in the other four positions. I’m not even going to discuss how many of these women are not white, today. That’s a totally different blog and not the point here. Women are not receiving the accolades to match the advances made in education over the past 15 years, where women are obtaining Bachelor’s degrees at a higher rate than men. But they are certainly not receiving the pay to match the student loan debt attached to the increases in education. The good news about the pay gap is in the last 40 years, the average gap has closed by 20 cents between women and men in general. The bad news about the pay gap is that it still exists and at the current rate it will not be closed for another 100 years.

In a nation where women still receive an average of 79 cents to every dollar men earn across all employment fields, Fidelity Investments published research in 2014 showing portfolios owned solely by women perform better than those owned by men. The average return on investment for the ladies in 2014 was 7.4%; the average return on investment for the gents was 7.3%. Not because women are better guessers at performance, but because women take fewer big risks with their investments. Experts chalk this up to the overconfidence of the male ego. (HA!) Men tend to have riskier portfolios and subsequently lose money more often than women. Women tend to hold investments with lower risks and reap higher rewards. Men perform investment trades more often than women and experts blame this paradigm on their overconfidence and egos. Ideally, in investing you want the highest rewards while taking the lowest risks. This strategy is proven to work and women have it down pat. Fortune 500 companies with at least three female directors have seen their return on invested capital increase by at least 66%, return on sales increase by 42%, and return on equity increase by at least 53%. So why aren’t there more females being hired to manage the moolah? Stereotypes.

When you take a look at the risk-reward model, in order to achieve the greatest rewards, you must be willing to take the greatest risks. Women are not generally subscribers of that theory. Therefore, the stereotype in both Hollywood and Corporate America seems to be accurate that a)women tend to make financial decisions based on intuition and emotions vs. hard logic and facts and b) women don’t go for the big jobs or ask for the big bucks as hard or a frequently as men do, ergo, minimizing both risk and rewards. It also fuels the belief that women will not be able to handle the high-pressure risky decision making necessary to make them successful as a big budget director or as a S&P 500 CEO. The idea that women just won’t be as good as a man in financial management positions has been embedded in our society to the point that we really don’t think about it’s validity or truth anymore – it is what it is and it’s not changing. In present day 2016, a good-ole-boys club still exists. There are men who don’t believe women are better financial stewards, and they speak for the masses. They make the C-level hiring decisions. They are the board members. They are the persons with the oversight on who they trust to direct their film ideas. They are even the ones who are running for President of the United States in 2016. (Le sigh.)

What do women need to do to become more visible in these roles? Women were “given” the right to vote and to equal education almost 100 years ago. Roe vs. Wade was 40 plus years ago.  Yet, somehow, employers are not recognizing that diversity is not only an issue of race, but one of sex as well. In my opinion, ignoring for a second that HBO was cited as having one of the worst hiring rates for female directors, the HBO advertising slash call to action piece is a step in the right direction. Although women are scientifically proven to be better communicators than men, they shy away from conversations about finance, including salary negotiations, benefits, and promotions. We don’t discuss our credit scores, our kid’s college tuition, or our own student loan debt collectively. Starting a public conversation about the inequality in our systems will make more people take notice and learn this is a problem with the simple solution of actually looking at women for these positions, not because they are women, but because they are qualified to lead. Managerial diversity training is still necessary to move women forward in business. While it is not my dream to be a CFO of a Fortune 500 company, it is my dream that I have the opportunity available if it wanted it. Here’s to hoping the female directors in Hollywood gain momentum in this fight for equal opportunity and that female executives get the opportunity to bring a little Divatude to the C-Suite in my lifetime.

Lent-if you put it on the Internet, that makes it true.

“I’m giving up meat for Lent”. The words flowed out of my mouth so smoothly, as if they were melted butter being poured on my loaded baked potato. My new Work Sister/Husband looked at me for a full 3 seconds before replying “Whet??”. Sigh. “Whet?” is right. What was I thinking? Clearly I had been staring at the monstrosity of a payroll journal too long. Give up meat? “You know bacon is meat, right?” he said. I glared at him out the corner of my eye. Ugh. Did I just go crazy?

However, on second thought, maybe it’s not such a crazy idea. My sister has been vegan for over 20 years and she looks amazing. She’s also an actress, soooo….yeah. Not a good example. In reality, I rarely eat beef because it tears my stomach apart later; my pork is limited to bacon and fried pork chops from The Bottom Line; but the chicken tho??? Chicken?? I may die.

And I slowly realized that death was the point. The season of Lent is about repentance for your sins and gratitude for having another chance to get it right this year. 40 days, excluding Sunday, to lifestyle changes that will put you yourself more in tune with your spiritual side. A slight pause in life to appreciate all that life has to offer and clearing out the clutter that exists in my mind, body, and soul. I truly appreciate you, chicken. Now I’m going to appreciate spinach and broccoli and quinoa and what they do for my body more. 20lbs, be gone!

Lent is also a time to refocus your energy. I’m participating in a challenge to clean out my closets- removing 40 items, one item per day, for 40 days. At the end of the 40 days, the bag of items will be donated to  a women’s shelter. Which means the shoes with a hole in the sole are NOT the items we are talking about here….items that are in good condition that someone else could wear. Whew. My poor closet tho.

So on day four, I’m doing fine. I’ll check back in on day 14 and see how this no meat thing works out. Good thing shrimp is not meat. Yep. I googled the meat-eating rule. Shrimp, crabs, fish, oh my! I may not die after all.

A Redefining Diva

My 2015 goal in life was to practice beautifying myself at home. Driven by a want to spend less and save more, I knew this was one area I would excel in. I’ve been doing my own hair since since I was a teenager and I took a class to learn some nail techery in my early 20’s. I went natural and perfected the twist-out 2 years ago and I have plenty of pretty polish and I could always get more for 99 cents at the CVS or Beauty4U. Piece of cake!

I forgot the reason I went to the hair salon and the nail shop wasn’t because I was too lazy or it was too costly; but because I needed to put myself in time-out every so often.  I tend to rip and run around DC from sunrise to sunset every day. Well, more accurately, from 6 am to 2 am…on a regular basis. It was rare that I was in the house in the bed before 11pm ever. I didn’t factor in that I needed me-time in order to buff, file, and polish myself up.  Going to the nail salon or spa forced me to just “be” for an hour or so and let someone else take care of me.

“And the day came when the risk it took to remain tight inside the bud was more painful than the risk it took to blossom.” My 2016 goal is to get back to the nail salon. I didn’t do a bad job at the actual polishing, but I did do a bad job making time to sit still for an hour. My toes became one more chore to add to my list of things to fit into my day. That ain’t diva, y’all. I was supposed to be happy to beautify me. Instead, I became resentful of my toes. As cute as they are.

Reevaluating and redefining life goals. It happens. It should happen.  Here’s a link to a great list of 10 questions to ask yourself while reevaluating your life by Katerine Cerulean. Sometimes we get so stuck on not being a quitter or a failure that we forget that the whole reason we have a goal in the first place is to make us happier.  If your goal is making you miserable, it’s not leading you toward your dreams.

What is the point of having a great dream if you are not on the path to achieve it? WC Fields wrote “If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again. Then quit. There’s no point in being a damn fool about it.” My toenails may not incite world peace, but they incite inner peace. And in the end, that’s what counts.