Rather than throw the discussion off-topic in "An Onboard Etiquette Question", I thought I would start a new topic about dress codes (the guy in the bulkhead seat who declined a move was wearing a T-shirt and no shoes).

I fly coach, and the most casual I dress is pants, shoes (not sneakers), and a long-sleeve button down shirt. My wife dresses similarly, and my little boys (except the baby) wear the same kind of outfit I do (they are comfortable clothes, so they don't mind).

Dressing decently isn't that DIFFICULT! I think that flying would be more civilized if airlines had a dress code, certainly in First Class.

The situation seems to be getting worse -- my AA non-revving relatives say that the non-rev dress code is not being enforced, even in First.

I just don't understand why someone wearing a T-shirt should be in First Class. I've seen people (in coach) wearing shorts and flip-flops, as if they were at the beach! Help!

People dress casually (not to say sloppily) for everything these days. I doubt you'd have much luck with a campaign to get pax to dress better, particularly when one sees people attending weddings and funerals wearing shorts and t-shirts. I admit have have yet to see anyone at a funeral barefoot, though.

I would think that if I paid for a first-class ticket (or any other ticket for that matter), I would be able to dress as I want. If a t-shirt and shorts is what I feel like wearing, then so be it.

I admire your dressing-up for travel. I try to do the same.

But I can see the other person's point of view as well.

I have seen people, travelling or in the office or at a restaurant or otherwise, I myself consider dressed inappropriately, but I don't find them offensive per se. At least not until their private bits are starting to show.

Why do you take this issue much to heart?

I am sorry but I do not understand your sentiment here - If I am sitting in First or Business Class, and have either paid for the ticket myself (or my employer has). I should be able to wear whatever I want.

A 16 hour journey is not the time and place for a suit, and given the high chances of food/drink spillage over that time (either my own fault or someone else's), neither is anything smart. Baggy combat pants, loose shoes, old polo or t shirt do the job fine for me. I do make sure there are no holes in my socks now though.

I think we act the way we dress, on the job, traveling or anywhere else. People seem to act more civilized when they are dressed in some type of decent manner. That said if someone is paying for their own way it is not up to me to judge or control how they dress. As for the non revving situation. Recently my son was flying home from his grandmother's funeral. First Class out of Chicago. He had on a nice pair of slacks, Timberland shoes and a Tommy Hillfiger polo shirt (not tucked in) ORD gate agent handed him his boarding pass with the comment, "tuck in that shirt, you look like a slob". So I think they are still enforcing employee dress class. At one time employees had to dress up to not stand out from the paying passengers, now we follow the dress code and really stick out.

I definitely agree with GK. Especially when it comes to long-haul flights. But in any case - why do you need a dress code. What you would sometimes need more is a "wash code". That is when I sit next to someone who smells as it happened on a flight from London to Cincinnati. But clothing is not an issue!!

I don't think this has anything to do with someone's right to do anything.

It has to do if someone should do something.

It's about having consideration of the total social environment surrounding them, and what is generally expected in that particular setting.

How much was paid, IMHO, has absoulutly no bearing on if that gives someone additional rights to break the expectation of what is generally exceptable in that setting.

The attitude that "I can do whatever I want just because I paid lots of money" (or used an upgrade) doesn't sit well with me personally. That's nothing more than saying that you think you are purchasing some sort of special "waiver" of acceptable conduct, IMHO.

It's all about taking into account the considerations of others, and how your actions effect the experience of others. IMHO. If you go to a five-star restaurant where everyone is dressed rather nice, and someone comes in dressed in swimming trunks and flip flops just because there is no rule against it...it can ruin the experience of "elegance" that others have come for.

I suggest, don't be one of those people that "do whatever the hell they want to" in social settings. Have consideration of how your actions will effect others experience. Be nice. Fly right. And use your own good judgment as to what is "right" to wear.

There's a reason the airline's have a strict dress code for their employees flying in First Class.

IMHO.


[This message has been edited by PremEx (edited 08-17-2000).]

PremEx,

I couldn't have said it better myself. I agree with you completely!

/Pete

And how does someone dressed in a t-shirt and shorts in an airplane affect you?

If you find that offensive, I would hate to see what else completes your list.

As someone who flies mostly economy, I would hardly call flying a social occasion.

No, we don't need a dress code. But at the same time, no matter how much we pay for our tickets, and no matter how tired we are, the world does not begin and end with what "I am entitled to." I wouldn't bring a tuna sandwich on the plane because I am hungry. That would be unfair to others (not because I get to eat, but because the sandwich smells so much). When we share space with others, we should at least respect, and perhaps even set an example for, that person.

Now, this isn't to say that we should dress up. Jeans, even a clean t-shirt seem appropriate. But the sandals with no socks and the tank tops ... Well, my two cents.

[This message has been edited by zrs70 (edited 08-17-2000).]

Additional thought -- regardless of the number of dollars shelled out, the purpose of First Class is that it's supposed to be a "nice" place to be on the aircraft. That includes a bigger seat, a higher F/A to passenger ratio, higher quality food, etc. Dressing well makes First Class really feel like it's a nicer place to be on the aircraft (just my opinion, of course).

Look at it this way -- why go to a five star restaurant, when you can get basically the same food at a tenth the cost by going to a fast food restaurant? If a five star restaurant seated people in tank tops and flip-flops, it would't "feel" like five stars.

Usually there are health code considerations, such as wearing shoes, a shirt, etc, that should be enforced (remember the old "No Shoes, No Shirt, No Service" sign when entering places that serve food) but it is hard to say what the correct form of the clothes should be (e.g., coat and tie). In some cultures people use perfume to mask odors, other shower and apply deodorant, some do nothing at all (I think based on personal olfactory encounters) - which is right depends on your point of view.

I always try to dress nice on the plane, especially if I am in F/B because you never know who you might meet (the future ex-spouse, not that I have any experience in this at all), but I do love my TIN-TIN tee shirts too

[This message has been edited by beetee (edited 08-17-2000).]

The flip side: if everyone in economy got dressed up to fly, would it then all of a sudden 'feel' glamourous?

I think not. It would feel creased and spilt-on and farcical.

There is a big difference between flip-flops and wingtips, cut-off jean shorts and ironed slacks, two-sizes-too-large tank top and coat/tie. That's what I'm getting at (something like the no shoes, no shirt, no service, but a tad better, just for F class).

This has actually come up before!

See:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum94/HTML/001629.html