Teachers upset with new dress code requiring underwear

[mfcorey1]

By Rick Couri

The rule begins by saying, “Foundational garments shall be worn and not visible with respect to color, style, and/or fabric.”

It goes on to state, “No see-through or sheer clothing shall be allowed, and no skin shall be visible between pants/trousers, skirts, and shirts/blouses at any time.”

Female teachers are also required to wear a bra.

The letter describing the change was sent to teachers in Little Rock, Arkansas, last year, but the new standard takes effect this fall. With that deadline closing in, teachers are looking at ways to fight the ruling.

Outer garments also have to meet new requirements. Disallowed are slogans for beer, drugs, gangs, sex, or alcohol.

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/education/teachers-upset-new-dress-code-requiring-underwear/nf77z/

[Iggo]

1. If there's already a dress code for the kids, then this is gonna get funny.

[MissMillie]

2. You know, I'm all against draconian rules

But it really doesn't seem all that draconian to me to expect professionals to show up for work dressed, well, professionally.

[Lee-Lee]

3. Not really seeing a problem here

Most professional jobs have standards for appropriate attire.

[Louisiana1976]

27. Same here. At my last job (which wasn't teaching) we weren't allowed to wear

anything denim.

[TreasonousBastard]

4. OK, so we really want to support teachers who insist...

on their right to wear flipflops, spandex, and beer slogans?

Or is it just the bra that they want to burn?

[derby378]

5. Someone please tell Coach to holster that thing in boxer briefs and be done with it

Bad enough he wears his gym shorts one or two sizes too small...

[Union Scribe]

20. That takes me back, lol.

Our gym teacher not only wore quasi-hot pants, but they were white. And he led us in stretches at the start of every class. I don't know if they teach that in gym teacher school or what.

[lovemydog]

47. No kidding. That crap is traumatizing, lol.

[Mike Daniels]

6. I guess being able to flash skin/cleavage after work at the local bar isn't enough for some people

Any teacher who has a problem being asked to show some decorum in front of their students needs to look for another job.

[Brigid]

7. OK, a quick mental inventory of my closet reveals:

Almost nothing that would violate these rules. They just don't seem at all onerous to me.

[whistler162]

8. If they required that in one school district

I work in they better leave out the custodian who wheres Bermuda shorts all year long, Central New York.

If the district had to put this policy in place some teacher(s) must have violated it already.

[KurtNYC]

9. Well, there goes yet another job option for Paris Hilton. n/t

[Dorian Gray]

10. Isn't that how almost all

professional workplaces should expect their workers to dress?

[hughee99]

11. So no Jeggings?

[Initech]

25. Or Jägermeister thongs?

[big_dog]

45. Even More Problems with Jeggings

[yellowcanine]

12. Okay, this should be good for a lot of hilarity.

Starting with the use of the stilted term - "foundational garments" Is this the same as underwear?????


Does this mean I have to wear some type of undershirt? If it is not visible how the eff will you know?

Same goes for tighty whiteys. How the eff will you know?

[Egnever]

13. Clickbait!!

WOOT!

The teachers concerns had nothing to do with a requirement to wear underwear. They seem to be much more concerned with unclear standards open to interpretation from one principle to the next. That of course isnt nearly as sexy as them objecting to wearing underwear so I understand the silly headline.

[tkmorris]

15. Yeah I thought this had to be nonsense

So I did a quick google and sure enough, it is. I don't understand why people take these articles at face value.

[Egnever]

16. Complete nonsense

I dont get it either. It happens all the time though.

Sort of removes some of the mystery of why so many are so misinformed. Next week look for the posts that use teachers refusal to wear underwear as some sort of talking point.

[mfcorey1]

23. Everything I googled indicated that it is true, especially this:

http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archives/2013/09/03/little-rock-school-district-adopts-a-staff-dress-codedress-code-some-grumble

If you have something that negates, please post.

[madfloridian]

37. See my post #36

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025013137#post36

[joeglow3]

22. What was your thought on these

"In 2012, teachers in the beachside hamlet of Hampton, N.H. called an attempt to prevent teachers from wearing jeans, tank-tops and flip-flops “derogatory and condescending.”

This year, in Lewis County, W. Va., teachers pitched a fit because the local board of education voted to prohibit them from wearing blue jeans, faded jeans and shorts to work."



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/09/06/little-rock-school-district-will-now-make-teachers-wear-underwear/#ixzz332lOmO4t

[lululu]

24. what's wrong with jeans

next they'll have to wear girdles, which is what I think a "foundation garment" is.

[joeglow3]

43. Where do you draw the line?

I have no problem telling teachers to dress with some level of professionalism. They are role for the kids and should show them what to expect when they grow up.

[Starry Messenger]

39. Isn't Daily Caller Glenn Beck's website?

[joeglow3]

44. Don't know but it was linked in the article linked above.

[alphafemale]

48. A dress code in a place of employment is in no way an infringement on rights.

They are mildly annoying at best.

It is not like they are dictating how you dress when off the clock.

[Gormy Cuss]

14. Who's gonna check for those foundation garments?

If teachers can't have any portion visible, say like a bra strap, does that mean they'll be sent to the principal's office for a quick check?

The other requirements aren't so onerous (except for the cost of new wardrobe items, especially outer garments) but I wonder what the real deal is here. Is the district punishing them for some failed labor negotiation?

[WinkyDink]

34. One can tell if not there. I worked with a teacher who looked like the cover of an R. Crumb comic.

[Gormy Cuss]

40. And I worked in a place where the CEO made a supervisor tell a woman to wear a bra

when she already was wearing one.

Then there's thong underwear.

[WinkyDink]

49. Faux-pas City!

[1000words]

17. Don't you see what going on here?

[closeupready]

18. Why does everyone think they are a 30 year old Sharon Stone?

Even Sharon Stone wouldn't be able to get away with that now.

Or maybe she would. I guess in a world where Katy Perry can faux-lactate on stage as 'performance art' and Miley can twerk with abandon, anybody can do anything. I mean, in theory.

[dogknob]

19. The hardest part will be learning to speak Swedish.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

21. This is being done to prevent what? Naughty thoughts?

[WinkyDink]

50. To promote decorum? A sense of place & propriety? You know, like "No shirts, no shoes, no service"?

[SevenSixtyTwo]

26. I've always thought school uniforms

were a good idea. Save the social sizing up for after school events and personal time.

[B Calm]

28. So when skid marks start to show on the outside

of outerwear, they'll know who is breaking the rule?

[Aerows]

29. If you are already attired properly

How would they know if you are wearing undies or not? If all of your things are covered properly and modestly, what motivation would anyone have to search you for undergarments?

[alphafemale]

35. It is generally pretty damn obvious if someone isn't wearing a bra

Underpants. meh. Many dresses look better without them.

Whether the look of either is a scandalous is a meh.

Setting dress codes is the right of the employer though.

[Aerows]

46. "it is pretty damn obvious"

Yes, if you aren't wearing underwear.

Because you are wearing something so provocative that people with underwear on are suddenly prudes because they notice your behind hanging out.

That is my comment. I don't mind if you wish to wear a nice dress, but when it gets to the point of being stripping... I may be too conservative. I just care for the girls in the family, and again, I was concerned.

[Shrike47]

30. I practice law. There's a dress code. That's what I would expect of a professional.

[MADem]

31. Here's how you solve that problem. Put the children in uniforms. Let the teachers wear

whatever they'd like, so long as they wear a "Mister Chips" academic robe (zipped up, mind you) over their clothing. Mortarboard optional!

[Rhinodawg]

32. Then this should be acceptable...

[WinkyDink]

33. You might be amazed by what younger teachers think is appropriate attire for the profession. Too bad

if they need to spend some money buying something other than college-acceptable clothing. That's what grown-up jobs require.

[madfloridian]

36. Follow the link, click through...leads to a right wing ed group founded by 2 people.

It is known as a false front group, so to speak.

Here you go.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/09/06/little-rock-school-district-will-now-make-teachers-wear-underwear/

http://eagnews.org/little-rock-dress-code-requires-teachers-to-wear-bras-and-underwear-next-year/

Here's more about EAG.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/8110

EAG isn’t really a group. It’s two very partisan men with ties to the Mackinac Center for Public Policy and Dick DeVos of Amway Corp. fame. Olson’s brother is director of education policy at the Mackinac Center, another anti-union, pro-privatization group. The man who incorporated EAG, Eric Doster, is a Michigan Republican Party lawyer who has served on the board of the Great Lakes Education Project, a political action committee linked to DeVos. DeVos, of course, helped finance the failed 2000 vouchers initiative.

EAG bashes the collective bargaining process and school employees’ rights to inform the community and to work to elect leaders who value students and the employees who teach and help them at school.

Olson claims to be nonpartisan, but he is a partisan Republican Party activist and an officer in the state party.

Olson refuses to disclose his group’s funding sources, making it difficult to discern whose agenda EAG is pushing.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

55. wait, are you suggesting that they don't have a dress code?

maybe i am misreading your intent with this post...

sP

[madfloridian]

56. I am saying consider the source.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

57. just because you don't like the source (justifiable or not)

doesn't mean it isn't true.

http://www.katv.com/story/23421028/lrsd-new-dress-code-for-teacher-requires-undergarments-be-worn

sP

[madfloridian]

38. Here's a video of the article's original author talking with Glenn Beck.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/8244

[mysuzuki2]

41. Who gets to check if they are wearing underwear?

[tabasco]

42. I would rather live in the future

when everybody will be wearing Nehru jackets.

[Generic Other]

51. As a child of the sixties and an Asian woman

the bra thing is a joke. I have never owned one, and find the idea foreign and frankly none of your damn business. Don't push your damn manboobs in my face while wearing some polo t-shirt and talk to me about "foundational garments."

[3catwoman3]

60. Eeeeeeeeeeee...

...eeewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.

I once saw a guy with more body mass that that wearing a mesh tank shirt with really lowcut arm holes. Totally gross.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

52. I gotta say, when you're wearing a dress shirt

you really do need an undershirt to help wick away the sweat without getting nasty sweat stains on the dress shirt.

But I also know someone with fibromyalgia who has told me there are some days where it's incredibly painful to wear anything as constrictive as underwear and a bra.

So I can see both sides here.

[SoCalDem]

53. Huh? They are fighting it?

I thought teachers were grown ups...who knew how to present themselves in a professional manner..

[madfloridian]

54. Another EAG goody..."pay to potty" has 3rd graders "peeing themselves".. Exact words.

http://eagnews.org/pay-to-potty-policy-results-in-third-graders-peeing-themselves-in-school/

I don't know if these guys who set up their foundation for the purpose of supporting the "reform" movement and dissing public schools...are serious or if this is satire.

But it is stupid.

VANCOUVER, Wash. – Two 9-year-old students in Vancouver, Washington were deeply embarrassed last week after a classroom policy led to them urinating on themselves.

The policy, implemented by a third-grade teacher at Mill Plain Elementary, forces children to pay $50 in Monopoly money in order to use the restroom. Children receive the fake cash for good behavior and can also choose to buy pizza, popcorn and toys.

Jasmine Al-Ayadhi, whose daughter Reem wet herself, says she supports children learning the value of money but argues that the bathroom policy goes too far.

“When it comes to a bathroom issue, when a child has to pay money to use the bathroom, that’s wrong,” Al-Ayadhi told KATU News. “It’s inhumane. That’s a health issue.”

Al-Ayadhi says Reem, who was down to her last $50, desperately wanted to buy popcorn with her friends and attempted to wait until after class to use the bathroom.

Here's another list of stories, and I swear they sound like satire. However having researched some of the group's idea, I think they are serious.

http://eagnews.org/topics/indoctrination/

[Erose999]

58. Pictured: required underwear

[nolabels]

59. With right bodies and few other acroments those could be quite stylish

In world full of lemmings the last thing the establishment wants is free thinking teachers who can figure out what is appropriate dress on their own