As we pass through a critical transitional phase, witnessing positive developments while having limited time, it is essential to prioritize effectively and avoid getting bogged down in trivial matters. The Undersecretary of the Ministry of Finance issued a circular regarding the dress code for ministry employees. The title immediately drew my attention to the uniform worn by hundreds of millions of Chinese during the rule of Chairman Mao Zedong. It consisted of a simple, practical cotton jacket in gray, blue, or khaki, with a closed collar, no tie, and four pockets, paired with matching trousers for both men and women as a symbol of equality.
However, the government quickly abandoned this absurd practice after Mao’s death. The Ministry of Finance justified its circular by stating that it aims to establish a professional work environment and eliminate any ambiguity or confusion among employees regarding what constitutes appropriate “official attire” in the workplace. The circular focused particularly on female employees’ attire, stating that the “official dress code” is an abaya in calm, formal colors. It also specified that appropriate work attire includes a skirt or a wide-cut dress of a modest length below the knee, or a jacket or shirt of an appropriate, covering length. The circular emphasized moderation in the use of jewelry and makeup, in keeping with a formal work environment.
Therefore, employees are prohibited from wearing tight or ripped clothing, shorts of any kind, short or transparent clothing, dresses with excessive slits, sleeveless shirts, short jackets or blouses, low-cut clothing, sportswear, or hats while at work. Tattoos must be covered, while shirts or clothing bearing inappropriate slogans or designs are prohibited.
The circular also warned that violations would be subject to disciplinary action. I have some questions about this circular:
1. Is the priority now productivity, dedication, and honesty in performing one’s work, or has dress become the standard by which employees are judged?
2. Who decides the appropriate length of a woman’s dress? Should the department head carry a measuring tape?
3. What happens if two or three millimeters of a large tattoo are visible?
4. Who decides, fairly and objectively, whether an employee’s makeup is inappropriate? Are there established standards, or is it left to the discretion of the department head?
5. Are department heads required to conduct daily rounds to monitor female employees and ensure compliance with the decision?
6. Since the department head is responsible for enforcing the decision, does it apply equally to them and to those above them? Otherwise, we may end up with inconsistencies even in something as basic as skirt length.
7. Is there a regulation that defines what constitutes a “calm and formal color”?
Is the logic behind this circular to occupy an important ministry throughout the workday with matters of discipline, reprimands, and warnings over dress-code violations, in addition to printing, stamping, and signing penalties, suspending promotions, deducting salaries, and referring employees for disciplinary action?
What about employees’ ethics, work discipline, and dedication to their duties? Will department heads have any time left to perform their actual work? And who will hold them accountable if they act arbitrarily? Has any authority established that ethical standards within the Ministry of Finance were so low, and work performance so poor, that such a circular was necessary?
By Ahmad alsarraf
email: [email protected]
email: [email protected]
