TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 6 °C Friday 24 May, 2013

Column: Interview? Put some trousers on, pyjama girls

We’re very quick to judge, writes TheJournal.ie columnist Lisa McInerney, but it still stands that the dole office is no place for parading the middle finger to society.

Lisa McInerney

I HAVE TO say that the story about how the Damastown social welfare office in Dublin had to ban the wearing of pyjamas to interviews provoked in me more than its share of smirks.

It’s a mental image worth its weight in lulz. Legions in loungewear, shuffling bleary-eyed with Winehouse beehives towards the horrified civil servants within; cigarettes in one hand, thumb chafing index and middle finger on the other; a scene from Dawn of The Bed-Head. It made me giggle. Why wouldn’t it? You’d think it beyond the realms of probability that a civic office would have to draw up sartorial guidelines for visitors, but there you go. Some people really are that shameless… and dedicated to personal comfort.

I remember the first time I met a Pyjama Girl outside of a sleepover. I popped into the pet shop on the Coal Quay (People’s Republic version) for doggie treats and there she was, bright pink and Ugg-shod, chattering away with the ease one can only enjoy when one has claimed the city as an extension of one’s bedroom. At first I thought she was ill, perhaps that she’d snuck out of a hospital ward for a cheeky fag and a catch-up, but no, she’d traipsed into town on a similar errand to myself, except she hadn’t wasted precious energy squeezing herself into a pair of skinnies and curiously unflattering ballet pumps.

I was chagrined at first… the effrontery! But then I thought, well, it’s only effrontery because I deigned it so. I mean, I didn’t ask her why she was wearing her PJs to the petshop. I just assumed it was because she was socially impertinent. She might very well have been on the way to a sleepover; I wasn’t bold enough to ask.

There are social norms and social gaffes, of course, decided by a collective stance on common decency. All of this outside law and legislation, naturally; we might decide it’s not acceptable to write a company memo in Klingon, or hang furry dice from your ears, but it’s not illegal. The horror directed at those who wear pyjamas in public comes under the same vague tenet; pyjamas as daywear is not illegal, but not socially acceptable either.

It’s not the actual wearing of the pyjamas… it’s how they’re worn

And it’s not the actual wearing of the pyjamas, either. It’s how they’re worn. If the intent is to make them high fashion, or to stake a challenge to revealing wardrobe staples approved by the patriarchy, then that’d be grand. Lady Gaga could wear Statement Loungewear and Vogue would applaud her ecstatically. But if it’s that the pyjama-clad simply don’t care what the rest of society thinks about their attire and grooming habits, why, then it’s an attitude problem. Women refusing to put pants on… just because? Lord help us.

There’s no denying there’s a little social snobbery to this Pyjama Scorn. There are quite a few ladies in SUVs who frequently do the school run in their PJs and slippers, but they don’t get out of the car and start wandering in gangs down the high street, so that’s ok. Instinctively, I’ll judge a woman who appears outdoors in her sleepwear or slippers, because I’m as quick with the State-of-Yer-Wan quips than the next pseudo-toff. When a pal once shrugged that she’d gone– and had been admitted – to the local (rural) nightclub in her slippers, I worried if it would compromise my social standing if I didn’t immediately unfriend her on Facebook. Luckily, I wasn’t ostracised by association and the town didn’t blow away in a Biblical plague.

There are pyjama enthusiasts who maintain that their chosen leisurewear is freshly washed and ironed, so why distinguish between pastel flannel and bobbly leggings or cheap jogging bottoms? It’s a good question when you think about it. I’d never leave the house in my plaid Penney’s PJs, but I could be persuaded to go to the supermarket in my grey Penney’s trackie bottoms. The only difference between the two is a colour pattern. And is there any real issue of decency with women wearing PJs outdoors, when there are so many builders’ bums and saggy bulges in common-or-garden male fashion?

We’re so very quick to judge people. Most of the time, judging people on their physical appearance does no one any favours; it drives me up the wall when people dismiss as degenerates anyone involved in the Occupy protests who has dreadlocks, or when we judge our TDs on their haircuts instead of their political performance.

We judge by appearances because that’s how we process the world and divide our time and attention

But that’s human nature. That’s how we process the world around us and divide up our time and attention. Burly man wearing patched leather jacket and goatee? Probably a biker. Wildly smiling youth in a high-vis vest with a clipboard? He’s a chugger; avoid. Woman wearing teddy-bear pants tucked into wool-lined boots? More than likely not on her way to work.

Because this is the problem with the Damastown story. The Pyjama Girls in question are not dropping their kids to school, or nipping to the pet shop for doggie treats. They are attending a social welfare appointment, and their reluctance to dress conventionally doesn’t bode well for their willingness to pull together with their countrymen. Whether or not there are jobs to be had, or whether the social welfare interview in question is likely to include anything more probing than “Have you applied for anything recently?” is hardly worth asking. In post-Tiger Ireland, the collective anxiety is palpable. We’re all on edge, worried about personal and national coffers, wondering if anyone’s yet found a path out of the
fog. We’re turning on each other far too quickly, and that hostility is stirred on the shakiest of grounds.

There is little room for debate with Pyjama Girls on why they’re rejecting traditional outfits. The fact is that the dole office is no place for parading the middle finger to society.

I’m all for personal freedom. I’m all for women wearing what they like. I couldn’t care less if they want to wear wellies to the office or a ballgown on the bus. But for attending social welfare interviews, for joining the queue with those of us sapped by financial circumstance, there’s an undeniable obligation to show solidarity and respect. I’m with the staff of the Damastown office. Pyjama Girls attending for interview should just put some damn pants on.

Read: Irish social welfare office ban on pyjamas for interviews noted in London Times editorial>

Read previous columns by Lisa McInerney>

Read next:

Comments (68 Comments)

  • I’m all for people wearing what they are most comfortable in and I’ve seen people in their PJ’s around Dublin, something which left me rather bemused. I do think that there is a difference between going to Tescos for a carton of milk and going to the dole office for an interview. I’ll put it another way, a company I worked for had a smart casual dress code for the office. Men didn’t have to wear a jacket or tie while they were around the office and women the same. However if a client was coming in for a meeting then the tie had to go on as well as the jacket and smart casual turned into business dress. The reason for this was that when you are meeting someone you try to put forward your best image and make a good impression.

    I would feel more comfortable going to interviews in a pair of jeans and sweat shirt but I don’t think that I would get very far! If someone wants to wear their PJ’s to an interview that’s fine but they shouldn’t complain if they feel that their is some sort of underlying bias against them. Personally, if someone came into me in PJ’s I would have negative feelings straight away. If they can’t be arsed walking into my office and making an effort to get dressed properly then how hard are they looking for a job?

    Reply
    • Everyone keeps banging on about an “interview” – they were going in to sign on, and be interogated as to why they have no job. I have absolutely no doubt that if these people were going for a job interview they wouldnt turn up in their pyjamas.

      Reply
  • so if its ok to wear night wear to an interview is it also ok to wear swim wear?

    Reply
  • I have read the commnets and opinions above and am left with a sense of utter disbelief that people ACTUALLY think its acceptable to turn up for an appointment that concerns your future employment prospects wearing pyjamas????

    The notion that these people’s human rights are being violated is just insane! Have we turned into a nation of politically correct wastrel’s that have an excuse for everything and a solution for nothing?

    I cannot believe that these people find it hard to set an alarm, have a shower and get dressed in normal attire, does not have to be a suit or dress and attend an office for an appointment that is aimed at helping them. If they had a job would they turn up every day in pyjama’s…I don’t think so. They would be sent home or disciplined. So where is the difference?

    It is not “snobbery” or being on a “high horse” to expect that whilst the tax payer funds their time in unemployment that they should show drive, motivation and enthusiasm to get back to work. I don’t think that is too much to ask…is it?

    Libertarians need to wake and smell the hummus…these people are taking the preverbial out of you and I. They have no intention of finding a job if that is the sole effort they put into starting their day. I, for one would be mortified if anyone saw me out in public with what I would consider house wear.

    Reply
  • Absolutely brilliant article! Best sums up my feelings – it reminds me of the time my mother went to the social welfare office once but had gotten all dressed up o.o She came back rather confused – but that was when no one who dressed like they wanted a job was on the dole long enough to notice such a trend!

    Reply
  • B7584 30/01/12 #

    Wear some F’ing clothes.

    Reply
  • Damn Journal comment system!
    Apologies if this seems like a repost.

    The social welfare is paid for by the taxes of the working.
    It’s ok to be on the dole, I don’t honestly mind. If you can’t find a job, I won’t go kicking you.

    However, you damn well better be looking.
    In an interview there is only one thing you do. Sell yourself. Smart clothes, smart attitude, smart!

    Let me put it this way.
    If a salesman came to my door, in pyjamas, asking for money. Do you think they would get any?

    (Btw: Great article!)

    Reply
  • Horrible habit . It shows no self respect or respect for those they meet .

    Reply
  • Bottom line is this… if a person is on the Dole, then are to be fit to work. This means, physically, mentally, hygenically and attire wise. The act of banning pajamas is discrimination, only if the pajamas are the only attire the person has to wear. I’m sure the person wearing pajamas wouldn’t be caught out on a noght out in their pajamas!

    Reply
    • Agree Marlon. It’s only discrimination if they have no choice of attire & are still judged.
      It’s an interview lads. If you make no effort for an interview (by arriving in the same clothes you’d wear to the shop), then that speaks volumes to your interest in getting work, your ability to consider other people, your ambition.
      Setting a standard like this can be ‘a teaching moment’ (!) for those who hadn’t realised how appearance affects interviews

      Reply
  • Its not about if its the law or not, its about having a bit of respect and manners, two things that are sadly lacking alot these days

    Reply
  • A simple rule when going for an interview is to be more formal than those interviewing you, any interview!!

    Reply
  • So true and funny

    Reply
  • You can wear what you want to where ever that’s not the problem , but if wear something then you have to respect the other persons point of view . The person you are meeting also has a point of view and if they think that you are lazy, outgoing , energetics then that is your fault because that is the opinion you have giving them you must remember that they don’t know you and you should always put your best foot forward.

    Reply
  • Des Bishop got it in one….no wonder so many girls having babies, they’re permanently dressed to make them :)

    Totally agree with Lisa. Pj’s should be when your getting INTO bed, not out of it. Our local Tesco’s has banned all pyjama wearing clads. If they can’t be arsed to dress themselves, what can they be arsed to do?

    Reply
  • I’ve seen them going to court in their pj’s!

    Reply
  • I wore my pjs 2 my local shop at 8am the other morning, the shopkeeper couldn’t stop laughin’ at me, smacked me on the arse and told me I looked lovely. Can safely say that won’t be happening again :/

    Reply
  • No one’s mentioned the PJs Song by the Toll Trollz?? Made neither today nor yesterday, and yet still relevant. The trend for wearing PJs in public has been around since long before the demise of the Tiger, and quite frankly I find it puke inducing on a level with biting your toenails on the Luas (which is also putatively legal). It says to me that the PJ wearer does not respect our society enough to conform to accepted norms, and even worse, they DO NOT RESPECT THEMSELVES enough to make even a modicum of effort in terms of how they present themselves to the world. It may not be fair, nor politically correct, but the fact is that our first impression of everyone is shaped by their appearance. Wearing PJs doesn’t give the ‘middle finger’ to society, it’s not a form of protest, it’s not a fashion statement; it merely shows that you’re as “lazy as shuck wather” as the Mammy would say. Hardly what you’re looking for in a potential employee!

    Reply
  • Pennys should just cut to the chase and start selling pjs with a slogan that reads “I’m Rockin’ on Your Dime”.

    Reply
  • Nice piece.

    I find it funny that people defend wearing PJs outside, dole office or otherwise. If you can’t bother getting dressed then I’m sure you’re not contributing much to society in general. Perhaps being tolerant of this sort of laziness is a part of the problem with Ireland today. It SHOULD be stigmatised for the general betterment of the country along with many other things. I’ll make a list later.

    Reply
  • I have to say I don’t get it..
    I can appreciate someone nipping out to go the shop quickly – y’know, you’re just settling down after a shower after a long days work and realise you need milk.. Personally I’d shove on some clothes, but I’m not gonna judge someone in Superquinn /Tesco etc for nipping out quickly..

    What I don’t understand is people who seem to choose to dress this way.. I’ve seen girls wearing pyjama bottoms with stilettos on Talbot St in the late afternoon, I’ve also seen girls hanging out around town in their fleecey teddy bear design PJs.. The rest of their appearance is done up, make up, hair etc, but theyre wearing pjs.. That, I just don’t understand, as fashion statements go its way over my head.. Maybe I’m just getting old lol!

    The thing that really bugs me though (and usually goes hand in hand) is the Uggs. Considering the price of those hideous things (€200+ in Schuh!) – is there no support around the heel and ankle? I see all these girls walking around and their feet are no longer on the soles, the entire boot has slanted over so in reality they are walking on the side of the boot.. I shudder to think about the effect that this has on the skeleton.. I see a lot of girls requiring knee or hip surgery before their time because of these ridiculously overpriced and badly made “boots”.

    Reply
  • Every generation finds a problem with how younger people dress – be it mini-skirts, saggy trousers or pjs. The reality here is that we have people in a social welfare office deciding that they have the right to decide what other people wear before they dispense state payments. That, to me, is bang out of order.

    Let’s be honest here – just because someone wears pjs to a dole office doesn’t mean they would wear them to a job interview. Nor does it mean they’re not looking for work.

    As you rightly point out in the article, there is no substansive difference between wearing tracksuit bottoms and pj bottoms. What differentiates the two is that wearing pj bottoms when out on the street is something that working class girls like to do. It’s a fashion thing for them – and therein lies the problem. Middle class people don’t like working class people behaving in an ostensibly working class manner. This is exactly the same as when a young guy from a housing estate buys a car and pays to have it modified. People whinge about safety concerns and noise polution from exhausts – but that’s not what they’re really upset by.

    There is no ‘hygene factor’ or ‘decency issue’ or ‘respect’ issue – they’re completely covered up. These are excuses to object, and not very good ones at that. Middle class people just don’t like this ‘underclass’ having its own seperate identity – it’s own way of dressing, their own tastes in music, sport, cars, food.

    When it comes down to it, nobody has the right to tell someone what they can and can’t wear.

    Reply
  • the P j ITOUS EPIDEMIC
    Cmon it was fine when the teens where doing it popping around the corner on saturday mornings in there PJs..However for me ..it’s gone a bit too far..Women doing the weekly shopping in their PJs with slippers on and House-Coats. I dunno, You can’t go to work in your PJs…nor can you go for an interview.

    Reply
  • I’m fed up of “attention seekers” wearing pyjamas…..just ignore them…..when they see that people arn’t interested in their attire, they will hopefully go back to wearing “normal” clothes!….But then….I wonder…..what will be the next trend?….Men in boxer shorts and women in their bra’s and knickers?

    Reply
  • Yet another few steps back down the evolutionary ladder. Michael Turley

    Reply
  • You wear pj’s to an interview so you DONT get the job. You stay on the dole and happy days your plan worked.. fairly simple.. each to their own…
    now lets round up the corrupt politicians and bankers and take our money back.

    Reply
  • We need to adopt the Swedish system make these people work be it beautifying the environs or working in whatever job the government sees fit for them to do. If you can’t show enough respect in getting something for nothing then why get it at all.

    Reply
  • @Lisa Saputo @Gerard Mooney . Iam not sorry for the way I feel it is my right to have an opinion . and too hell with the “goody two shoes” if you dress like a tramp then expect to be treated like one. If you wear a hoody and cover your face then expect people to look at you as if you have something to hide. If your face has tattoos and piercing then expect people not to trust you.If you wear PJ’s in public then expect people to think your are lazy.. The reason I have this opinion is because the scumbags out there dress like that and they are the one that give people these opinions . ” many years ago I was in England and I saw a couple walking down the street I asked this couple for the time they both separated and went around me , I found out after the that was trick used for mugging people they had no way of knowing whether I was genuine or not . Looking back that couple were not wrong they where been careful ” I also have friends that have tattoos and piercings and dreadlocks . Remember if it walks like a duck talks like a duck well I might be wrong but it could be a duck. At least that’s my opinion for what it’s worth.

    Reply
  • chances of someone who actually wears PJs to the dole office reading this?

    Reply
  • The way to parade the middle finger to society is by wrecking the economy. Borrow lots of money and renege on the debt and take off to warmer climes with the ill-gotten gains. Leave everyone else to pick up the pieces while you transfer the cash to your nearest and dearest in order to make it inacessible to the legal authorities. Nobody will notice. They’ll be too busy reading silly pieces about how people dress going to the dole office.

    Reply
  • If only Closed minds came with closed mouths.

    Reply
  • Eoin Faz 30/01/12 #

    Simple solution:

    Have two separate cues, one for those in nightwear and one for those in daywear.

    Reply
  • Wear some damn clothes! It’s our money that pays the social welfare and I want to see people being invested in their future and respectful of their peers. Who, in their right mind, would take someone, in their Pjs, seriously, be it dole queue or job interview? To say nothing about the hygiene factor. Get a grip!!!

    Reply
  • Dress for the job you want not the job you have…..

    Reply
  • Annie 01/04/12 #

    @paul doyle, most sensible comment here. The vitriol towards the people wearing pyjamas outside is shocking. They used to think women who wore trousers were dangerous, they used to think a lady’s ankles were ‘private parts’, shit changes and clothes are clothes. To think that the people who wear pyjamas are dirty and lazy is small minded and prejudice to the extreme.

    Reply
  • AVREEEL 30/01/12 #

    Great article, whatever your view, I’m sick of the assumptions people are making about the women wearing the pyjamas,” they dont work”,” they are laz”y,” they are dole scroungers”, they are unproductive members of society because they wear pyjamas in public? All of them? Seriously folks, I’m more worried about the scroungers running around in suits!

    Reply
  • This seems rife with snobbery. Let people wear what they want wherever they want, it’s doing you no harm at all. ,,This doesn’t bode well for their willingness to pull together with their countrymen” my foot. Neither does a government that is looking to reform the very system that crippled this country but instead tables a motion on a dress code. Do we know that all pyjama-wearing people just go collect their dole and then sit around all day in their pyjamas? Obviously not, and it could well be that they spend the rest of the day productively. Honestly, what gets me the most is the line ,,whether the social welfare interview in question is likely to include anything more probing than “Have you applied for anything recently?” is hardly worth asking.”. It is blatant discrimination against those mentioned, and THAT seems to be more damaging to our country than people in comfy clothes. Get off the high horse.

    Reply
    • Indeed.

      I remember when Ireland did not take things to serious and have to be so politically correct.

      If people wore a suit to the interview they would still be claiming the dole.

      Nuff said bruv, or shall I not use slang incase it upsets some people?

      Reply
    • They should get Louis Copeland or Louise Kennedy to design a suit made from pyjama material. Keep everyone happy!

      Reply
    • Genius.

      Reply
    • “Do we know that all pyjama-wearing people just go collect their dole and then sit around all day in their pyjamas? Obviously not, and it could well be that they spend the rest of the day productively.”

      You’re right we can’t know for sure. But if they can’t be arsed to dress before going out in public I’m gonna have a stab and say they’ll sit around all day in their PJs — it’s an extrapolation, but what else would they actually need to do that day which would necessitate them dressing more than going to the social welfare office and signing on?

      Reply
  • I think it is terrible, ones social protections should not depend on what they are wearing and I point to the Civil Service lack of staff dress code speaking from experience, I used to work in a “dole” office and I never had a problem with what anybody wore or didn’t wear.

    Thinking on it from a legal view point, it’s descrimination to judge somebody from what they wear and the only way around that would be to write a dress code into law for someone claiming government benefits and that in itself could be against the law.

    Anybody?

    Reply
    • I disagree, you don’t have to dress up to go to the dole office but it’s a mark of respect of the people around you and of those who are serving you to at least have a wash and put clean clothes on. If you don’t want society to discriminate against you don’t give them such an obvious reason to.

      Reply
    • This is an opinion piece. The author clearly points out that it’s not illegal to wear pj’s, nor should it be. But the prevailing opinion is that those that do are snubbing their nose at the rest of us. That’s it.

      That said, I’m of the opinion that an office funded by the government shouldn’t be able to impose a dress code. There are other ways of determining if people are attempting to find work.

      Reply
    • Yes there are ways in finding out if people are looking for work and they are in force, it has nothing to do with how you dress or if 9 out of 10 people in your company do not agreee with how you freely choose to dress.

      Talking from experience, I was always disgusted to smell drunken people, men and women who were dressed in dirty rags and smelling terrible with yellow fingers and it made my stomach turn but they are tolerated over someone with possibly clean clothes and brushed hair who may not smell?

      I do not agree with the idea of wearing pj’s out in public but should they be denied public service for which they could be entitled to based on taxes paid and might be keeping their clean clothes for a job interview later in the day?

      I just think it’s silly and possibly wrong to deny them a public service based on a personal belief by member of staff no matter how many agree.

      Reply
    • @ Lisa Saputo, maybe we should respect their choice to wear what they feel comfortable in while they are going trough a difficult interview?

      Maybe it’s lazy and maybe they should respect other people in what way they dress but it is their choice by law to wear what they like.

      Society should not discriminate anyway, are you saying they deserve to be discriminated against because you don’t like what they wear?

      Should a person with possibly smelly dreadlocks have the same treatment, somebody from a different culture for having a head dress on?

      Look at it in perspective, let’s not waste time laughing at them or judging them, lets put our efforts into taking care of them and maybe they would find work quicker and they might have less bad things to say about “society”.

      Reply
    • I am sorry Gerard, I spent just under a year in and out of the dole office and I managed to wear proper clothes. I don’t see why anyone else shouldn’t be able too as well, hey they can wear tracksuit bottoms and still look respectable.

      Reply
    • In your opinion they are not respectable.

      It is now law.

      Local offices should not be able to write their own laws.

      PJ bottoms are not something that get in the way of the work.

      Fact.

      Reply
    • It is not law*

      Reply
    • Ok, so I suppose Gerard you would hire someone who came to an interview wearing their PJs? You would have no issue being served food by someone who is wearing what they slept in the night before? If your child was sick and the doctor came around to their bed wearing Thomas the Tank Engine PJs you wouldn’t find that off putting at all. If you were up in court and your barrister turned up in a nighty, you wouldn’t worry at all?

      Reply
    • Gerard if you’re invoking the legalities of the situation then you’re missing the point.

      Reply
    • @Nivag, that is exactly my point.

      @Lisa, this is actually not to do with interviews, well I know in the office it was to do with people signing on with pjs and that is why the ban was invoked.

      Reply
    • well if that’s your point you haven’t articulated it very well.

      Reply
    • I know what the story is about, you were the one bringing up the interviews not me. Still either way its not appropriate to wear PJs anywhere but your own home.

      Reply
    • And as we all well know……Bankers in Armani are great role models!!!!!!!!!!

      Has anyone ever stopped to think that maybe they just cant be arsed…no job to go to, cant afford to go out socialising. And as for the interview, they were going in to sign on and be spoken down to by people who are well paid and have financial security as set down by the Croke Park agreement. Are these girls flashing everything to everybody, the answer to that is no. Of course its not a problem to enter any social welfare office wearing a cropped boob tube and hotpants that leave NOTHING to the imagination, or if your a bloke that wears his jeans so low down on his arse that it defies gravity, not to mention builders bum or the great unwashed. Havent we more to be worrying about than people wearing PJs to sign on. Cop on people

      Reply
    • Nothing says “can’t be arsed” more than not bothering to get dressed to sign on.

      Reply
  • I’ve always gone to a job interview looking at least as if I was fit for the job. If people want to dress in a slobbish manner, that’s up to them. People will draw conclusions from another person’s dress / appearance and you will be judged on that. So appropriate dress is important whether you like it or not.

    I wouldn’t be seen dead in the chav uniform but it’s still a free country. And there’s few enough jobs for the well dressed so it’s hardly fair to point the finger.

    Reply

Add New Comment