Worse for the Wear

Low-Wage Store Employees Challenge Dress Codes as Coercive and Costly

By Amy Merrick
Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal

Some retail employees are complaining that they're losing their shirts trying to meet dress codes at work.

Three lawsuits recently filed in San Francisco state and federal courts-against Gap, Abercrombie & Fitch and Polo Ralph Lauren-argue that the stores illegally force their low-wage store employees to buy extensive wardrobes from the brands they represent.

Robert Boleyn, a plaintiff in the complaint against Gap and a part-time employee at one of its Los Angeles stores, says he earned $300 working in December-and spent $500 on clothes that month to fulfill the dress code. One day, Mr. Boleyn says in an interview, he was reprimanded for wearing a shirt from Banana Republic, a higher-end chain owned by Gap. "You're on pins and needles when you walk in, because you don't know how the policy is going to be interpreted from one day to the next," he says. The complaint alleges that Gap store employees must buy "an up-to-date wardrobe of each season's product line."

Each suit contends that by expecting employees to buy and wear a certain brand, the retailers violate California labor laws. According to the state's labor code, when a job requires a uniform, the employer must provide it. "The term 'uniform' includes wearing apparel and accessories of distinctive design or color," the California code says. Clothing from a particular store fits the definition of a "distinctive design," the lawsuits claim. The suits seek changes to store policies, employee reimbursement and punitive damages.

Barely Minimum Wage

Some labor experts say a ruling against the retailers in the California courts could have national consequences. That's because the retailers' clothing policies also may violate a federal law prohibiting employers from making deductions from workers' paychecks that reduce wages to below the minimum wage. Attorneys for the plaintiffs in the three suits say the clothing requirements amount to such deductions. Most entry-level employees in Gap, Abercrombie & Fitch and Polo stores earn slightly more than minimum wage.

Gap says its policy is simply that store employees must wear Gap-brand clothing or clothing similar to it. Alan Marks, a Gap spokesman, says the policy doesn't compel employees to buy Gap clothes. "We're very clear on our policy," Mr. Marks says. "It's aggressively communicated to our sales organization, and it's discussed on a regular basis as a part of senior staff meetings."

But current and former employees and store managers say that in practice, the policy is interpreted so strictly that only Gap clothing is acceptable. Especially when executives from Gap's corporate organization visit a store, managers often require employees to wear styles currently being offered in the store, they say. One former Gap manager says that before executives visited, she sometimes bought clothing for employees who couldn't afford to purchase anything new.

Of course, employees do qualify for generous discounts. Gap's employee discount, for example, ranges from 30% to 50%. "These kids are usually our target customer, so they want our clothes," says Laura Weil, chief financial officer of American Eagle Outfitters. American Eagle typically discounts employee purchases by 40% to 50%. Employees aren't required to wear the store brand, but they may not wear logos of other brands, Ms. Weil says.

In addition, many specialty retailers say personal appearance is part of the job of working in an apparel store. They want employees who do more than fold sweaters and ring the registers: Like the music and furnishings, employees should reflect the image of the store and the brand, they say.

The Abercrombie & Fitch lawsuit quotes portions of the company's dress code that refer to employees as "brand representatives" and describe their job duties in part as "looking great in A&F style clothes" and "projecting the A&F brand with energy and enthusiasm." That policy, the lawsuit contends, is "unduly oppressive and burdensome to A&F employees in that most work for low wages and are required and/or coerced to spend a significant portion of their hourly wage from the first day on the job, to purchase current A&F and/or current A&F-style apparel." Abercrombie & Fitch didn't return calls seeking comment.

$30,000 in Clothing

At Gap and Abercrombie & Fitch, the undiscounted retail prices typically range from $34 to $50 for shirts and sweaters, and $30 to $60 for pants. At higher-end Polo Ralph Lauren stores, workers have to buy clothing that retails for as much as $400 for a sweater and $500 for a pair of pants, claims Toni Young, lead plaintiff in the Polo Ralph Lauren lawsuit. She says the company offers employees a 65% discount off retail prices. Even so, to keep her job at the company's San Francisco store, Ms. Young says she spent more than $30,000 on Polo Ralph Lauren clothing since 1997.

In a statement, Polo said it "has a dress code for employees that we believe is in compliance with all applicable laws. If retail employees wish to purchase our clothing, they may do so at a substantial discount." It declined to elaborate on the policy.

Retailers' dress codes vary widely, says Tracy Mullin, president of the National Retail Federation, a Washington trade group. Many retailers supply store employees with certain items. Kmart, for example, provides red vests to sales associates; Sears, Roebuck hands out matching shirts to salespeople in its home-improvement and automotive departments.

Even at Gap's discount division, Old Navy, employees get T-shirts. Mr. Marks, the Gap spokesman, says Old Navy staff get the shirts because the stores are much bigger than Gap stores and customers wouldn't be able to find help easily if employees didn't wear the matching shirts.