女性员工一定要穿高跟鞋吗？

一些就业律师表示，公平地讲，既然男性和女性都必须达到类似程度的“仪容整洁”，这种着装规定并不违法。比如男性也可能被要求穿西服外套、打领带。

测试中可能遇到的词汇和知识：

PwC普华永道(Price Wterhouse Coopers)

receptionist接待员；前台[r?'sep?(?)n?st]

deem认为，视作；相信[di?m]

trainers运动鞋['tre?n?z]

scantily缺乏地；吝啬地['sk?ntili]

totter蹒跚；踉跄['t?t?]

enlightened开明的；文明的[?n'la?t(?)nd]

scrapped报废的[skr?pt]

stubble残株；发茬['st?b(?)l]

ponytails马尾辫['p??n?te?l]

decorative装饰性的；装潢用的['dek(?)r?t?v]

intervene干涉；调停；插入[?nt?'vi?n]

tights紧身裤袜[ta?ts]

The high heels dress code is stamped on（629 words）

By Brooke Masters

When Nicola Thorp turned up for her first day’s work as a receptionist at PwC’s global headquarters in London,she was sent home without pay for wearing the wrong shoes.

The problem,according to managers from the staffing agency Portico — which supplies workers to the professional services firm — was that Ms Thorp’s footwear was flat. She then refused to go out and buy the heels that are part of the agency’s dress code: between 2in and 4in.

To be fair,some employment lawyers say this kind of dress code is not illegal as long as men and women have to meet a similar level of“smartness”. Men can be required to wear a jacket and tie,for example,even when women are not.

Faced with all the negative publicity,and a complaint from PwC,Portico announced that it was changing its policy. But one has to wonder about the purpose of the requirement in the first place. Did Portico think it was supplying waitresses to Hooters?

A sexualised dress code might be deemed appropriate for a casual restaurant chain that advertises with pictures of scantily clad waitresses and describes itself as“delightfully tacky yet unrefined”.（I confess I am not a fan. But at least the place is honest about what it offers.

In fact,while Hooters waitresses are required to sport low-cut T-shirts and hot pants,even they are allowed to wear trainers. Long hours on their feet carrying huge trays of drinks would make uncomfortable footwear an impractical addition to the uniform.

Here at the Financial Times,the newsroom includes women in ballet flats and 4in spikes,while men don anything from brightly coloured running shoes to old-fashioned Oxford brogues. I have my own rule that I totter around on high heels only when wearing a dress that would look out of place in the office.

Whatever your personal preference,a heels requirement certainly has no place in the lobby of a consulting firm that regularly bangs on about the need for diversity and even sponsors a blog about equality issues called“The Gender Agenda”.

PwC argues,in a letter sent to those who complained through its website about the heels policy,that Portico’s policy is“industry standard”. The firm notes that many of its own female employees wear flats“because of the high mobility required by many of our roles”. So highly educated PwC accountants and consultants,who could obviously seek employment elsewhere,have a choice and can avoid the pain that goes with wearing high heels. How enlightened. But when PwC hired Portico to staff its lobby,the management either did not care about,or did not bother to look at,the rules the agency imposes on its receptionists.

Though the heels requirement has been scrapped,Portico’s dress code for women still specifies that a minimum of five different types of cosmetics must be worn“at all times and regularly re-applied”. It also regulates acceptable colours of nail polish（plum is OK but green is not) and lays down rules for tights（black for darker skin tones and“natural”for everyone else).

The company also bans stubble,bright coloured hair dye and ponytails for men,but in general the rules for women are far more prescriptive. The whole thing puts me in mind of 1950s airline stewardesses or geisha entertainers in Japan,who used to wear their own brand of uncomfortable footwear — wooden sandals balanced on tiny stilts.

Dress codes that force female staff to be decorative are particularly outdated at a time when companies are being urged to boost the ranks of women on their boards. No wonder more than 100,000 people have already signed Ms Thorp’s petition asking Parliament to intervene. Women are sick and tired of being told to toe the line.

1.Why Nicola Thorp was dismissed by PwC as a receptionist?

A. e-wore the high heels

B. wore the flats

C. wore the miniskirt

D. affronted the boss

答案(1)

2.Which one is not right for Hooters’waitresses?

A. sport low-cut T-shirts and hot pants are required

B. they are scantily clad in advertisement

C. they can wear comfortable shoes

D. trainers are forbidden

答案(2)

3.What is author’s attitude toward PwC’s heels requirement?

A. disapproving

B. favorable

C. sympathetic

D. sensible

答案(3)

4.Which one is wrong as the dress code for women in PwC?

A. a minimum of five different types of cosmetics must be worn

B. bans bright coloured hair dye and ponytails

C. plum is acceptable of nail polish

D. a black pair of tights is only suitable for darker skin

答案(4)

(1) 答案：B.wore the flats

解释：Nicola Thorpe第一天去普华永道(PwC)在伦敦的全球总部当前台接待员，结果还没领薪水就被请回家了，原因是她穿错了鞋子。为这家专业服务公司输送工作人员的人才中介机构Portico的经理们表示，问题在于索普穿的是平跟鞋。

(2) 答案：D.trainers are forbidden

解释：虽然猫头鹰餐厅的女侍应生按规定须穿低胸T恤和热裤，但她们也被允许穿运动鞋。

(3) 答案：A.disapproving

解释：作者表示不管你的个人偏好是什么，必须穿高跟鞋的要求在这样一家咨询公司的大堂并不合适，毕竟普华永道经常宣扬多样化，甚至还赞助了一个讨论平等问题的博客。

(4) 答案：B.bans bright coloured hair dye and ponytails

解释：女性着装要求规定女性要使用最少5种不同种类的化妆品，“并且经常补妆”。还规定了可以接受的指甲油颜色（紫红色是允许的，但绿色不行），还有关于连裤袜的规定（肤色较深的人必须穿黑色，而其他所有人必须穿“肉色”）。男性留胡子、染亮色头发、留马尾辫。