Dress Code Mandates Underwear and Deodorant

(Brooksville, Florida) The local city council has passed a revised dress code which specifies that city employees must wear underwear and use deodorant and repeated infraction could result in termination of employment.

The new dress policy instructs employees to observe "strict personal hygiene," to include deodorants.

It also bans employees from coming to work with clothes emblazoned with foul language, nude or semi-nude pictures and messages that promote drug use.

Halter tops and revealing, "sexually provocative," garments are out. The same goes for piercings beyond the ear. Cuts and wounds must be covered.

Then there's this, under the "unacceptable attire" category: "The observable lack of undergarments and exposed undergarments."

This is nit-picking. It should be sufficient to instruct all employees to present a professional demeanor and let managers and supervisors be responsible for their people.

However, the dress code is a done deal so apparently the city bureaucracy will have to empower dress code enforcers to assure compliance.

As an aside, this reminds me of my USNavy experience when Petty Officers were occasionally stationed outside the entrance to the base exchange to check sailors' haircuts. The shaggy-haired got written up and had to answer to their chain of command.

On a different note, women displaying an "observable lack of undergarments" would appear to include those without evidence that bras and panties are being worn. As such, the city of Brooksville seems to have mandated that panty lines be visible or a thong must be worn and capable of being verified.

Nevertheless, if an employee decides to go commando, there is probably no way for the observable undergarment police to know unless that person says, "Hey, I'm going commando." On the other hand, I could be wrong and Brooksville authorities may decide to conduct snap observable undergarment inspections.

I contend that the Brooksville dress code is largely unenforceable.