Pantyhose At Work: A Woman's Bondage Or Her Best Behavior?
LisaMarie Luccioni, Image Establishment | Mar. 28, 2011, 1:09 PM

My professional image PowerPoint presentation is finished. I've shown
slides of women in blue suits, beige blazers, polo shirts, and sloping
curves of cleavage on display. I've explained the difference between
men's single-breasted and double-breasted jackets and (attempted to)
justify whether men should wear wingtips, cap-toe oxfords, loafers, or
some other shoe type on the job.

But now comes the time I most relish: Audience Q & A.

And here we go, the question that is always asked, no matter what:

"Do I have to wear pantyhose?"

Most women view pantyhose as constrictive instruments of torture.
They're friends with nylon fibers on the job as long as said fibers
create computer carrying bags. But when nylon binds the belly, nylon
is kicked to the curb with a resounding thud.

Meanwhile, other women don't feel completely attired until pantyhose
(control top, no less) completely cover their bottom half. What's the
right choice?

I've concluded there's no magical answer. One size does not fit all.
Pantyhose are a contextual issue. However, here are some factors that
may help guide your decision:

DRESS CODE OR LACK THEREOF: I'm surprised many companies don't have
official dress codes with clear guidelines. I've worked with offices
that prefer female employees to wear hose, but offer no clear mandate.
The end result? Some women wear, and other women wear anything but.
While some dress codes demand strict parameters, others need
flexibility. I once taught in a school where pantyhose were required
during the cooler months. But during the more relaxed summer quarter,
we could switch to sandals sans hose. While a compromise of this sort
may not be for everyone, it worked here, which was the whole point.

AESTHETIC OF FEET & LEGS: I'm being honest when I discuss this
segment, so please decode with that in mind. Some legs just look best
when covered with pantyhose, tights, socks, pants, or a long skirt.
Leg stubble, calloused foot skin, and a chipped pedicure don't convey
polish. Some people, such as myself, are naturally pale-skinned. My
uncovered legs look shockingly white when contrasted against a strong-
colored skirt or dress. Some may shrug, and conclude it's no big deal.
But to the extent that my glaringly white legs are a distraction, it's
then a work-related issue. Women in workshops will often say their
bare legs look perfectly acceptable. Do your colleagues, clients, and
boss agree? An important question.

OCCUPATION: I'm a college professor and a definite job perk is relaxed
attire. As long as I'm wearing a top and a bottom, I'm good to go. If
the university president requests my presence in his office, however,
I'm reaching for my Hanes. Traditional fields (banking, law, finance)
have an expectation of formality and pantyhose help achieve that
purpose. But women working on a construction site don't need hose;
they need steel-tipped work boots. Creative fields might even
encourage hose in bright colors and textured patterns, where the legs
and feet then become works of art.

Other variables exist, of course, but these three factors should be
considered before shoes are even placed on one's feet. "Women
want...three-dollar pantyhose that won't run," comedienne Phyllis
Diller once joked. I sense women would also like a once-and-for-all
answer on the pantyhose debate, but while that declarative conclusion
may occur in the future, at the moment, it's anyone's guess.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=http://...ior-2011-3

I work at an Law Office. Pantyhose are required just like a neck tie for men. It's the dress code.

They aren't that bad once your used to them