Nature and our legislature hate a vacuum. In order to fill this void, legal action was taken and considered and voted down regarding whether or not women could wear pants to work. Since two women representatives also voted against the bill, I assume that testosterone had nothing to do with the issue.

Why can't women be allowed to wear pants, pantsuits (or is that pantssuits?), and even culottes to work? From a personal point of view, most such apparel is sufficiently becoming. There can't be any safety concerns: if anything, skirts would be more hazardous. If they're comfortable and not outlandish (say, seventies' polyester plaid that even men wore), I cannot think of one reason to ban pants for women in the work place.

Maybe it's a masculine backlash against the progress that women have made in assuming traditionally male roles at work. What better way to get even than to have women freeze their legs off in colder climes? Or...maybe the whole thing is a conspiracy by pantyhose manufacturers.

Back in the late sixties, I was in charge of a department of a large bank located in a huge building in El Monte which, as most Southern Californians know is not the fashion capitol of the world. (It isn't even the fashion capitol of Los Angeles.) Our department all twelve of us had just occupied this refurbished building: we had no public contact, and there wouldn't be any other employees around for at least two months. One morning my secretary asked me if it would be all right to wear a pants suit to work. Sure, says I especially since we're still

unpacking boxes. In fact, for a couple of days, why don't you just come in in jeans.

Two days later, I got a call from head office in San Francisco. "What the hell are you trying to do, Winning?"

Being really fast on the uptake I replied, "Huh?"

"You let one of the girls come to work in pants. Now, every woman employee even the tellers are asking to be allowed to wear pants, pantssuits, and those whatdoyoucallits, culottes! In five minutes, you've undermined twenty years of dress code!"

"What's wrong with pants," I asked?

"Women wear skirts and blouses, a suit, scarves, that sort of thing. Next thing you know, you'll allow them to wear Levis."

"But, what's wrong with pants?"

"Pants are for leisure, and this is not a place of leisure."

( You're telling me, I thought.) "Look," I said, "we've allowed miniskirts for the past two years, skirts so short that hairdressers aren't the only ones who know. We considered uniforms that even the airlines wouldn't allow. In our branches, our tellers [almost all female in those days] stand behind four foot counters where you can't see any of them below the waist. What's wrong with pants?"

"It's not the way we do things around here, and we haven't done them that way for a hundred years." (That is an actual quote. I always took copious notes as a CYA precaution.)

"I don't mean to be difficult [a perfect opening which he didn't take], but change happens. Styles change. Organizations change. Women wearing pants does no harm, and if it makes women more comfortable, so much the better. Remember, we didn't allow men to wear beards...until we got sued by Fred who reminded the world that our founding father wore a beard. We've got men representing the bank who wear the most gawdawful garb, ties wide enough so that they don't have to wear shirts, knit trousers with bellbottoms, and hair that's shoulderlength. What's wrong with women wearing pants?"

"You aren't paying attention. Our dress code calls for skirts and blouses or suits. That's the way it is, and that's the way it's going to be. I don't know how I'm going to repair the damage you've done, but you better countermand the order you gave."

"Too late. I guess you didn't hear, but all the other managers gave permission right after they saw my memo to staff. Since this is the Personnel Department, it would be easier to rewrite the dress code, don't you think?"

Several months later I was transferred to Northern California, having left either a legacy or a trail depending upon who one spoke to.

Upon reflection, most dress codes are a mindset. Other than safety and health issues, they have little to do with a rational view of the world, a business' customers, or the fact that change does take place. That said, for the more staid organizations, there are limits which must be set. Except in the entertainment business and its fringe associations (like record stores), I do believe that ten earrings are too much (in the vernacular). One nose ring is one too many. Tasteful tattoos...well, that's an oxymoron. Tshirts with slogans even "I _ My Doberman" have no place in banking, finance, or anything past the fifth floor of the Sears Towers...which brings me to my solution.

Organizational status is directly proportional to flooring. As most of you have noticed, the lower echelons in most corporations have linoleum. The next level has institutional carpeting, kind of what you'll find in airports. On the next level you may find the same carpeting with padding. At the vice president level, the carpet has a oneinch nap. Senior vice presidents get carpeting so thick that it is unnecessary to wear shoes. And, finally, above the clouds, surprisingly there is no carpeting but rather hardwood floors with eighteenth century hand woven Afghan rugs (and Picasso's by Rembrandt).

Therefore, anyone who stands on linoleum all day will be allowed to wear pants and lowcut shoes. If level 0.5 carpeting is present, pants are still acceptable, but all shoes must have some sort of heel. Vice presidential carpeting calls for suits for all. Therefore, women may still wear pants, but it must be part of an ensemble the pants have to have a matching coat. Senior vice presidents, men and women, must wear suits, ties, wingtips and any other uncomfortable garb, but high heels are a no-no since they could get caught in the carpet and one could break one's neck. In fact, this is the only level which must adhere to the strictest of dress codes. These are the people who are too high up to be comfortable, but not high enough to be unwilling to flaunt their positions through the outright exhibition of Armani or Lizzie. Last, at the highest rung of the ladder, anyone making over $200,000 a year can wear whatever he or she wants. If he or she has made it that far, there's no one left to impress. However, since heels make so much noise on hardwood floors and the clicking of heels could wake someone, tennis or running shoes are mandatory.

If there are any questions, I'll be available as soon as I get done sweeping the sawdust from my office floor.

P.S. In January 1995, the California legislature actually gave women the right to wear pants at work. Your tax dollars at work...