Grooming standards-Beards

[copelandamuffy]

I iron my uniform, I don't bother starching it and I don't spit shine my boots because I work in a warehouse and they're thrashed by the end of my first rounds. I keep them neat and I keep them reasonably polished.

Some of us work, not, in ideal conditions. Not everyone works in a downtown Corporate office building in Pittsburgh, Phoenix, or Boston.. where you have a nice jacket, sports jacket, and a nice pair of pants

I work in a warehouse. I sit near the wide open bay doors, for trucks open wide most all night. I live/work in Massachusetts. At night it gets cold. 5/10/15 degrees. I have on sweaters, gloves, and woolen hat. I patrol as well parking lots. Amongst snow/ice/ and parking lots that are sanded. The warehouse where the trucks are is spotted with oil, and grease. And I am checking Bill Of Lading, matching trailer/tractor/seal numbers, and not in pretty weather

Do my best to keep groomed. Keep my jacket, and pants cleaned.

And I have no tattoos, No beard
Cannot do a lot that I have gray hair, and partial bald

[Lunch Meat]

The Grooming standards have changed since I started in this industry. I think that has to do with the fact that the labor pool has changed

I mean if your choice is between leaving the position open and hiring somebody who is otherwise qualified but has visible tattoos you hire somebody with the visible tattoos.

I think the beard standards are getting a little bit ridiculous. I don't mind if somebody shows up with a neatly trimmed beard but when you show up with one of these hipster bushes on your face that doesn't look professional. I also don't care for guys wearing earrings on the site.

Having said that I don't set grooming standards for my employer. I'm clean-shaven because that's my personal preference and I keep my haircut to military standards For the same reason.

I iron my uniform, I don't bother starching it and I don't spit shine my boots because I work in a warehouse and they're thrashed by the end of my first rounds. I keep them neat and I keep them reasonably polished.

[Consolewatcher]

As far as I’m concerned, when it comes to this business: Clean shaven, fresh haircut, pressed uniform, spit shine shoes. Any less is a slap in the face to the professional warriors who have given their all.

I'd expect a guard to have shaved that day and not go too long between haircuts (say, every 3 weeks). I don't expect a pressed uniform, but one that is generally not wrinkled (for example, take your shirts out of the dryer as soon as they're done and hang them up, and don't stuff them in a backpack to bring them to work. As for shoes, I don't expect them to be "spit-shined", but rather generally clean. If you have leather shoes, it takes 60 seconds to put a quick layer of cream polish, another 60 seconds to rub them with a rag, and 30 seconds for a quick brushing. Do that once a month (with the occassional quick rag for scuffs) and you'll be fine.

[TOII]

We are security personnel our job is to protect property. We are not part of the warrior class. The only warrior class we have are military. Aren't you the one that says security personnel are above Corrections Officers. We are not. Corrections Officer are above security personnel. I piut security personnel instead of security guard or security officer because there a licensing authorities that prohibit security personnel from referring to themselves as security officers or security enforcement officer as is the case in most of Canada.

no, not above...just different role.

[fortsmithman]

As far as I’m concerned, when it comes to this business: Clean shaven, fresh haircut, pressed uniform, spit shine shoes. Any less is a slap in the face to the professional warriors who have given their all.

We are security personnel our job is to protect property. We are not part of the warrior class. The only warrior class we have are military. Aren't you the one that says security personnel are above Corrections Officers. We are not. Corrections Officer are above security personnel. I piut security personnel instead of security guard or security officer because there a licensing authorities that prohibit security personnel from referring to themselves as security officers or security enforcement officer as is the case in most of Canada.

[Lunch Meat]

The reason the army doesn't allow facial hair is because it prevents you from being able to seal your gas mask.

I've seen Sikh officers before. They are usually in critical needs specialties, the one I'm thinking of was a dentist and they're non deployable.

[Squid]

Context seems relevant here. What population (or segment of such) will the officer be dealing with? Much as I hate the stubble shaved-three-days-ago type of beard that's so popular now, the fact is that it might present no issues at all to people who patronize a concert, a bar, a college or perhaps a sporting event. It might not be well-received in some other venues.

For a proprietary security organization that serves a fairly predictable clientele, it should present no legal difficulties if the dress code for security officers comports with that of any other employees who interact with the public.

For contract services, the problem is compounded by the typical need to reassign officers from one account to another ad hoc, each of which might have different expectations. The congregation of a Christian church might be highly resistant to and/or offended by anyone who appears to be Muslim, a Sikh, etc. - and now what do you do? Could the membership of a southern country club prohibit or specify that there should be no contract officers who are black?

We live in an extremely litigious society for two reasons:
1. Our law schools produce far more lawyers than the country needs. The lawyer/citizen ratio in the United States is the highest in the world. All of these lawyers are looking for lawsuits to file.

2. ...and they can all file lawsuits willy-nilly, however frivolous and unfounded they may be, with no personal penalty to themselves or to their clients. There are few other nations in the world that do not impose a penalty of some sort on those who file frivolous lawsuits. In most countries, the loser, at the very least, is obliged to pay any and all legal expenses of the winner. When faced with that prospect, I can assure you that people think twice about filing lawsuits if they don't have a genuinely provable cause of action.

...and so, in the United States, even if your dress code does nothing more than require employees to comport with an appropriate standard based on the population you serve, you can be sued by anyone who claims that your dress code is intended to implement policies of discrimination, etc..

Welcome to Litigious America, where lawyers get rich and common sense dies.

Frankly, doing something about this disgraceful situation would probably stimulate the economy more than any tax reform.

It really chaps my ass that some Sikh signed up, and got, several years of US Army paid medical school, knowing full well all the US Army regs, then he claims, and gets, an exemption for full head dress.

I remember when my family signed up for ROTC it was very clear that if you take the money after first two years the Govt had the option of having you serve out your term as an enlisted man if you for any reason didn't make the officer cut. In other words you HAD enlisted and hopefully would be an officer. But any nonsense and they could bust you for Desertion and slam dunk you into Military Prison, etc.

There are real reasons all armies (except maybe Saudi?) require short hair and mostly no additional (personal) headgear.

I hear they are also very big on "no special snowflakes in my Army" concept, and that anyone wanting Special Snowflake status is actively HARMING the Corp and worse than the actual Enemy, and they KILL the Enemy, etc.

Obviously, the right thing to do would've been give the Sikh a regulation haircut, then send him up to military prison for a few years as an example. "But the Army already invested so much...." Not really, and not in "big scheme of things", and I'm sure Leavenworth could really use a good Medical Orderly. I hear its pretty rough.


But I personally could care less how much hair a guard has, and where they have it. But on other hand I've got no prob with any employer's regs. IMO Civil Rights applies only to Govt employment.

Realistically, only top pay Security jobs should think they can require "grooming" beyond basic hygiene, and only "hygiene" if that applies. "Guarding dirt pile"? Who cares, and nice if those with bad hygiene can be directed to such "opportunities".

[Lone Wolf]

As far as I’m concerned, when it comes to this business: Clean shaven, fresh haircut, pressed uniform, spit shine shoes. Any less is a slap in the face to the professional warriors who have given their all.

[SecTrainer]

Context seems relevant here. What population (or segment of such) will the officer be dealing with? Much as I hate the stubble shaved-three-days-ago type of beard that's so popular now, the fact is that it might present no issues at all to people who patronize a concert, a bar, a college or perhaps a sporting event. It might not be well-received in some other venues.

For a proprietary security organization that serves a fairly predictable clientele, it should present no legal difficulties if the dress code for security officers comports with that of any other employees who interact with the public.

For contract services, the problem is compounded by the typical need to reassign officers from one account to another ad hoc, each of which might have different expectations. The congregation of a Christian church might be highly resistant to and/or offended by anyone who appears to be Muslim, a Sikh, etc. - and now what do you do? Could the membership of a southern country club prohibit or specify that there should be no contract officers who are black?

We live in an extremely litigious society for two reasons:
1. Our law schools produce far more lawyers than the country needs. The lawyer/citizen ratio in the United States is the highest in the world. All of these lawyers are looking for lawsuits to file.

2. ...and they can all file lawsuits willy-nilly, however frivolous and unfounded they may be, with no personal penalty to themselves or to their clients. There are few other nations in the world that do not impose a penalty of some sort on those who file frivolous lawsuits. In most countries, the loser, at the very least, is obliged to pay any and all legal expenses of the winner. When faced with that prospect, I can assure you that people think twice about filing lawsuits if they don't have a genuinely provable cause of action.

...and so, in the United States, even if your dress code does nothing more than require employees to comport with an appropriate standard based on the population you serve, you can be sued by anyone who claims that your dress code is intended to implement policies of discrimination, etc..

Welcome to Litigious America, where lawyers get rich and common sense dies.

Frankly, doing something about this disgraceful situation would probably stimulate the economy more than any tax reform.

[zm88]

I'll be around more frequently now.

As as far as beards, I've been in a plain clothes capacity the past 5 years and haven't really had any uniform standards except for no tank tops or sandals. Back in a uniform, I wear my beard trimmed low and "neat looking". It's funny, as just about every cop I see on shift is wearing a beard now.

[copelandamuffy]

I see this place is the same as the last time I popped in.

Check in more often. We need sane, and wise people like you.
Some of us are getting old, and nutty Right ST?

[zm88]

I see this place is the same as the last time I popped in.

[Soper]

Try signing up with the military as a REAL AMERICAN, taking and spending LOTS of their enlistment bonus money, then springing it on them that you need to sport a nice full beard, a YUGE head of hair, like "its against my religion to cut it...EVER" and you are a hairy person with a very robust scalp....and....and....your religion also requires you to carry a goofy knife at all times. Putting on a G-suit, or wet suit? Gotta have the dumb knife. Everyone else in Boot Camp checks any outside knifes at the door? Sorry Drill Sargent, I made up a religion that says I get to keep MY knife.

Allowing all sorts of lawlessness and nonsense, then trying to silence everyone about it by name calling with "bigotry" etc is one of the worst diseases the USA has right now.

Bigoted posts regarding Sikh Religious requirements. You have issues.

[Squid]

No. Since when is bigotry tolerated?

Try signing up with the military as a REAL AMERICAN, taking and spending LOTS of their enlistment bonus money, then springing it on them that you need to sport a nice full beard, a YUGE head of hair, like "its against my religion to cut it...EVER" and you are a hairy person with a very robust scalp....and....and....your religion also requires you to carry a goofy knife at all times. Putting on a G-suit, or wet suit? Gotta have the dumb knife. Everyone else in Boot Camp checks any outside knifes at the door? Sorry Drill Sargent, I made up a religion that says I get to keep MY knife.

Allowing all sorts of lawlessness and nonsense, then trying to silence everyone about it by name calling with "bigotry" etc is one of the worst diseases the USA has right now.

[Squid]

I've done posts where I started bring and wearing my own dust-masks after the first day. IMO the company of course should've provided all that and I would've made a fuss but it was a very temp gig. My point is a SO never knows where he is gonna post AND should always be ready to tough it out.

You don't want a team of wise guys to run a SO off his post by kicking up a little dust upwind.

So I vote no beards that keep you from wearing at least a basic white "dunce cap" dust mask.