LO U I S E B R O O K E - S M I T H O B E
Opinion
Must we dress to impress post-Covid? For those now used to working in ‘casuals’, the return to daily decisions about suitable workwear presents a challenge, says Louise Brooke-Smith. Depending on where you are, summer has seen the easing or end of lockdown rules. It means that we are probably planning for a hybrid return to offices, a gradual increase in face-to-face meetings and – for a few – a return to traffic jams and crowded trains. Some employers are pushing for a complete return to the chains of city-based desks, breakout areas with improved ventilation and more greenery to tick the environmental box. Others are following the ‘whatever works for you’ route and leaving grown-ups to make grown-up decisions. Whatever the model for you, I know that the most pressing thing on my mind is “What the hell do I wear?”. A year of lockdown might have brought awareness of the need for exercise, grabbing some fresh air and walking among and talking to the trees. But I can’t be the only one to have found that being home-based has meant a few more inches around my tum. So, when it comes to getting back into working garb, it is proving difficult. Garb – ‘Clothing or dress, of a distinctive or special kind’ – always meant different things to different people. It was drilled into me as a trainee to look smart for client meetings, whether imeeting the public to discuss planning issues in the council house
14 T HE PL AN N E R \ AU G U S T 2 0 2 1
reception, or negotiating with agents and investors in swanky offices. Site meetings could allow the wearing of smart trousers and a jacket, suitable to complement the ill-fitting PPE. Well, ill-fitting if you happened to have a 38EE chest and normal-sized feet for a woman. Day to day in the office with colleagues it was the useless code of ‘smart casual’ – always a term that was easier for male colleagues to follow: chinos and a blue shirt. For ladies, it was rubbish. Smart is a suit; a wellcut dress and jacket. Casual to me is slobbing around in PJs or trackies. Mixing the two never really worked. Now we have the added dilemma of trying to fit into our former work attire. We have the decision of whether a return to the office to chat with colleagues requires
“WHAT WE LOOK LIKE SHOULD HAVE LITTLE BEARING ON THE END PRODUCT OF WHAT WE DO, WHAT WE SAY AND THE DECISIONS WE MAKE” formality or whether shorts and a T-shirt will suffice. After all, it’s the quality of the work that matters. There are those who look dazzling on Zoom with wellcoiffed hair, smart jackets and clean shirts and ties. Some of us, however, get away with a scarf hastily wrapped over pyjama tops for those early calls. What do we do now? Given the decision, flawed in my opinion, to hold council meetings in person, there has been a re-emergence of the
suited and booted brigade. Face-to-face meetings are also seeing the return of smart dress. But site visits? There’s a challenge. Recent site visits for me have seen everything from jeans and sweatshirts to Savile Row. There is no right or wrong. It has been interesting to observe the mix-and-match approach, particularly of male colleagues, where the jacket fits but the trousers have been hastily swapped with a pair that can zip up without indicating your religion. Dressing to impress – does it matter? If there is anything we should have learnt over the past 18 months it’s that where we work, how we work, and what we look like should have little bearing on the end product of what we do, what we say and the decisions we make. If work is better for you when in a dressing gown, sitting on the settee at home, then great. If you like the routine of office hours, sitting at the hot desk in well lit and ventilated offices, and wearing a uniform that works for you, then great, too – it’s the work that should be impressive, not what we look like.
Dr Louise Brooke-Smith is a development and strategic planning consultant and a built environment non-executive director I L L U S T R AT I O N | Z A R A P I C K E N
