Uniform standards

Reply

Old Sep 13, 18, 2:42 am
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Programs: BMI Diamond Club
Posts: 71
Uniform standards


I realise the workplace has changed significantly over the past 10yrs or so and that a more relaxed and informal dress code for general office attire is more the norm these days than it used to be.
I'm not sure I agree with these sentiments however when it comes to wearing a uniform. I've worn 2 in my working life and when I did I took pride in my appearance and tried to wear it well.
Without revealing his identity, I watched a MF crew process T5 earlier and snapped this shot. This was a departing crew fresh for a day of flying and not an inbound crew about to clock off.
While I don't have an issue with sneakers/trainers I do think there is a time and a place for everything and coupled with the Julian McDonald ensemble it looks way too casual and verges on making the individual look scruffy. Is this acceptable attire for a BA crew member or am I dire need of a reality check? Thoughts?
charlieboy77 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 18, 2:57 am
  #2  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: BKK
Programs: SK EBG for Life (*G), BA Gold, HH DIA, IC Platinum Ambassador, Hertz President's Circle, Sixt Plat
Posts: 170
In general, no it is probably not acceptable - but there could be all sorts of (company approved) reasons, exceptions and what not as the reason for this particular crew member to wear such shoes. To me it looks like he is even trying to keep it as neutral (black) as possible to not stand out. I am sure there is a reason which is neither your nor my concern.

Guess this is the problem of smartphones and cameras everywhere - there is always someone around prepared to take your picture and stick it on a public website (and yes I realise there is no face, but still).
IAN-UK, Dan72, wrp96 and 6 others like this.
SKT-DK is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 18, 3:01 am
  #3  
FlyerTalk Evangelist, Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Somewhere between 0 and 13,000 metres high
Programs: AF/KL Life Plat, BA CCR, A3 G, Aclub Plat, Hilton D, IC Plat Amb, Starwood G, blablablah, etc
Posts: 22,467
Yes, there could be, for instance, medical reasons why this might be accepted whilst otherwise it probably is not. That said, if it was up to me, it would be wholly acceptable, I really do not mind. Similarly, I'm glad that female crews have now been able to change shoes after boarding to wear something comfortable in flight and actually wish they could do so at all times. Life is too short for people to need to be uncomfortable in order to look smart...
IAN-UK, dddc, Andriyko and 15 others like this.
orbitmic is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 18, 3:04 am
  #4  
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 160
There will be a health reason for this. It will have been cleared by their own line manager as well as the CSM on the day. We’re not all allowed to wander around in trainers because we fancy it.
If you turned up to work wearing these without a valid reason, the chances of you being offloaded are pretty high I would’ve thought.
Dan72, Gengy, flygirl68 and 2 others like this.
MFCC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 18, 3:09 am
  #5  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Programs: Mucci des Hommes Magiques et Magnifiques
Posts: 13,851
There maybe a valid reason for them wearing training type shoes but the ones shown are not acceptable and I would have offloaded this crewmember.
Can I help you is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 18, 3:21 am
  #6  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London
Programs: Mucci. Nothing else matters.
Posts: 33,311
Originally Posted by Can I help you View Post
There maybe a valid reason for them wearing training type shoes but the ones shown are not acceptable and I would have offloaded this crewmember.
Even though he's displaying a stylised Speedmarque? (Sadly, the eBay page linked to no longer displays the offending item.)
origin and charlieboy77 like this.
Globaliser is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 18, 3:30 am
  #7  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: BKK
Programs: SK EBG for Life (*G), BA Gold, HH DIA, IC Platinum Ambassador, Hertz President's Circle, Sixt Plat
Posts: 170
Originally Posted by Globaliser View Post
Even though he's displaying a stylised Speedmarque? (Sadly, the eBay page linked to no longer displays the offending item.)
It is upside down tough, which may be the reason - violating brand standards and all
SKT-DK is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 18, 3:38 am
  #8  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Programs: Mucci des Hommes Magiques et Magnifiques
Posts: 13,851
And not to mention the white soles which are far more obvious.
scubaccr likes this.
Can I help you is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 18, 3:50 am
  #9  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,480
If you want to talk about uniform standards, take a look at the smorgasbord still on show over at AA......you can still see LUS, LAA, new AA and a host of variations in between......
rossmacd is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 18, 3:53 am
  #10  
formerly rxfleming
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: AUH, DXB (and GLA)
Programs: BA Gold, HHonors Diamond, Marriott Plat Elite
Posts: 2,439
If he has health reasons to wear those horrid things with his suit then he should at least wear just plain black ones.

Ive noticed an increase in crew with untidy hair, creased suits, loose fitting trousers (re: baggy) and even ladders on tights. And when you fly BA as little as me (probably around 10 times a year) these things stand out.

I realise not everyone will agree with me but when you’re competing with the likes of EK, EY and VS on key routes, your appearance goes a long way. And I know this doesn’t affect all crew - but generally I find MF much more presentable than EF or WW.

Just my two cents.
argonath likes this.
travelwithross is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 18, 4:00 am
  #11  
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA Blue
Posts: 25
Can't see the problem here. I assume he has a valid reason to be wearing non-standard footwear, in which case under the circumstances the shoes clearly strike a reasonable balance between comfort and smartness. Indeed, there are clearly worse footwear he could have chosen to wear. It isn't like he is wearing white sport trainers!!!

At the end of the day, I'd rather my plane leaves on time with a full crew roster, instead of the plane being delayed due to one crew member being offloaded for incorrect footwear. First world problem, much?!
billyb750 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 18, 4:00 am
  #12  
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 160
Originally Posted by travelwithross View Post
If he has health reasons to wear those horrid things with his suit then he should at least wear just plain black ones.

Ive noticed an increase in crew with untidy hair, creased suits, loose fitting trousers (re: baggy) and even ladders on tights. And when you fly BA as little as me (probably around 10 times a year) these things stand out.

I realise not everyone will agree with me but when you’re competing with the likes of EK, EY and VS on key routes, your appearance goes a long way. And I know this doesn’t affect all crew - but generally I find MF much more presentable than EF or WW.

Just my two cents.
The trousers are baggy on everyone, they’re just about the worst fitting things I’ve ever worn.
MFCC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 18, 4:25 am
  #13  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: London
Programs: BA Gold, Accor Gold
Posts: 672
Originally Posted by MFCC View Post
The trousers are baggy on everyone, they’re just about the worst fitting things I’ve ever worn.
I'd agree with you there, the cut of the BA trousers does seem really bad.

Another thing I often notice, is the poor quality of the shirts worn by some of the chaps. I'm not sure if you are able to supply your own white shirts or they're BA issue, but some of the ones I've noticed and really thin and worn out. I think I'd keep my jacket on!
bhbloke is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 18, 4:30 am
  #14  
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 160
Originally Posted by bhbloke View Post
I'd agree with you there, the cut of the BA trousers does seem really bad.

Another thing I often notice, is the poor quality of the shirts worn by some of the chaps. I'm not sure if you are able to supply your own white shirts or they're BA issue, but some of the ones I've noticed and really thin and worn out. I think I'd keep my jacket on!
The shirts are also BA issued, and also particularly ill fitting, especially on slimmer or shorter individuals. Some have had them 'tailored' privately to get them to fit slightly better but officially this isn't allowed and you run the risk of a CSM picking you up on this. If we're going to look bad, we all have to look bad together.
BA235, wrp96 and bhbloke like this.
MFCC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 18, 4:31 am
  #15  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Programs: Mucci des Hommes Magiques et Magnifiques
Posts: 13,851
All of our uniform is now made of poor quality/cheap materials and the design and cut needs updating, we are promised a new uniform for next year but I am not holding my breath especially for the quality.
wrp96 likes this.
Can I help you is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: