On January 18^th, 2015, I found myself in an uncharacteristic state of despondency – I had just realised that I could never get my dream job at Zee Media Corporation Limited (ZMCL). You see, I’ve had a soft spot for this sterling organisation ever since their ground-breaking and tireless pursuit of journalistic perfection resulted in the arrest of a Zee News editor and the then Zee Business head for allegedly attempting to extort Naveen Jindal-owned companies.

That is the sort of ambition my father told me to keep an eye out for. So, when an email from ZMCL to its employees, mysteriously found its way into my inbox, I opened it in the hopes that Subhash Chandra, in all his omniscient wisdom, had deigned to offer me gainful employment. What I found instead was a “strictly confidential” document that told me that I could never be a part of ZMCL – because ZMCL has now officially implemented a dress code.

Now, generally when a document is labelled “Strictly Confidential” it’s for one of two reasons – the content is so useful that a competitive advantage would be lost were it to go public, or, more commonly, the content is daft enough to cause embarrassment but some higher-up wouldn’t listen, so it still exists, just not openly. Now, if ZMCL’s document was the former, someone else would be writing this piece, but you’re stuck with me, so it should be fairly clear that the document titled “Attire and Grooming Policy for Zee Media Corp. Ltd.”  is not a milestone achievement in corporate administration or motivational theory.

The document starts off grandly enough, celebrating employees as the “brand ambassadors” of the company, boasting of the incredible diversity of “people, personalities and individuals with unique approaches to life”. A diverse group of people – each with their own ideas and styles – That doesn’t seem like an issue. Luckily, the brains at ZMCL are smarter than me, so not only have they turned it into an issue, but they’ve also found a solution to it – an attire policy that will help “showcase the brand as one”, because apparently, up until now, people interacting with ZMCL have struggled to grasp the concept of differently dressed people belonging to the same organisation.

Now, even before I get into the document itself, I can already imagine the ruthless pragmatists that cohabit the cyberspace I so cherish. “Obviously a media organisation would have an attire policy and besides it probably only applies to anchors dumbass”, is how I imagine your feverishly typed comments would look. Firstly, a sentence like that requires more punctuation, and secondly, no. This policy applies to ZMCL employees classified as:

a) Permanent Employees
b) Probationers
c) Consultants
d) Trainees/Interns

While I’m not up-to-date on ZMCL’s corporate structure, that scope seems to apply to everyone who’s anyone at ZMCL. Even trainees and interns, usually treated as expendable props that eat, aren’t exempt from the makeover. In fact, it isn’t just the television channel employees this applies to, employees at DNA have told Newslaundry that, while the circular is dated September, 2014, they too have only recently received the attire and grooming circular, making it markedly easier to spot DNA journalists at news events – just look for the over-dressed people trying desperately not to be noticed.

Now, on to the dress code itself. While I have no gripes with an organisation trying to adopt a more corporate look (even if I wouldn’t want to work for one), the dress code seems to have been conceptualised by my Jesuit high school principal. The entire circular has a strongly paternalistic tone. Some of the rules are nit-picky, overbearing, inconsistent, and, in the case of women, have sexist overtones. Let’s begin with the men.

Casual dresses, ripped jeans, kurta-pajamas, shorts, cargos and T shirts are all on the no-no list, with the organisation favouring formal wear instead. Heck, just dressing formally alone isn’t enough, clothes must be without creases, stains, fade, broken buttons, loose threads and you’re in contravention of ZMCL’s policy if you so much as roll your sleeves up. Clothes must also have “a perfect fit to the individual”. I’ve already worked myself into a cold sweat and I haven’t even gotten to footwear and hygiene.

Footwear too is an issue – not only are slippers, sandals and sports shoes disallowed, but even the colour of employee’s formal shoes is stipulated – shoes “must be black/brown/dark in colour” and even if you’ve managed that, beware what socks you wear for, in their infinite wisdom, ZMCL has also stipulated that socks must be without pattern and only black or navy blue in colour. Smelly socks will also not be tolerated though whose job it is to check for funky smelling feet isn’t mentioned.

Hygiene, which most organisations trust their employees to have learnt about in the third grade, also doesn’t escape the attention of the folks that came up with the circular. Hair must “be neat and complementing your style”, an example of the sort of ambiguous wording that makes Section 66A of the IT Act 2000 so wonderfully controversial. Further, hair cannot be oily, must be of “an acceptable length” and with “moderate sideburns”. Just what the acceptable length is, or what moderate sideburns are, is unclear. I guess some poor soul at ZMCL will doubtless find out in time when he’s sent home from work to moderate his sideburns and trim his hair, or maybe just shave his head to beat the ambiguity of the circular.

Facial hair is no less regulated. Employees at ZMCL must shave on a daily basis, or if they MUST keep a beard then that must be “trimmed and well kept”, also, if your moustache infringes on your upper lip then you’re once again in contravention of company policy. Smelly employees must also have been an occupational hazard for ZMCL because they address it in depth – no bad breath, body odour or smoker’s breath will be tolerated. Deodorants and mouth fresheners are recommended. And lastly, watch your weight – while the company may not stump up for your life or health insurance that doesn’t mean they must suffer chubby employees, especially reporters or anchors.

If you thought men had it rough, women, as generally seems to be the case, have it worse. Once again, formal wear is mandated, and to the list of clothing not allowed for men we can add halter tops, camisoles, spaghetti tops, harem pants and my personal favourite – ULTRA short skirts. Just where the line is drawn between ultra-short skirts and regular short skirts is beyond me, but one would hope that an organisation that sees fit to make such a specific demand has also constituted a panel of experts, armed to the teeth with measuring tapes and metre rules, to ensure compliance.

Unlike male employees, who aren’t allowed kurta pajamas, women are free to wear kurtis and salwar kurtas, bringing into question just what criteria ZMCL’s ideas on attire are based.

Once again, attire must “have a perfect fit to the individual” and must not be “transparent” (in case employees are into sporting fibreglass and plastic). Plunging necklines, showing innerwear and short dresses are also no-no’s.

Once again, sports shoes, flip flops and floaters are not permitted. And in case what you’re wearing exposes your heels, then you better not have cracked soles. We just hope that the reality of reporters in back of beyond drought-hit zones not having access to regular pedicures doesn’t shape the sort of news ZMCL covers.

Still, the real fun begins after the attire guidelines. While men are free to make it snow in the office with their dandruff, ZMCL expressly forbids women from having dandruff or lice.

Women must also wear “light office makeup” at all times, because, as we all know, a woman without make up makes office productivity drop by at least 20 per cent, and that’s just one woman. Now, imagine a whole office of cosmetics-free women! Women must also wax regularly, in fact, the rule about rolling back one’s sleeves doesn’t apply to women, because (I imagine), it would be harder to tell whether they’ve waxed their arms or not. Facial hair must also be bleached or “removed as appropriate” (even if it doesn’t yet cover your upper lip).

Nail polish, if worn, must also not be cracked or chipped, because that can only happen if you’re actually working and god knows ZMCL doesn’t want that…Oh, wait! They do want that? Um… I guess the lesson here is to always carry your nail polish because ZMCL doesn’t tolerate poorly-manicured nails. Once again, body odour will not be tolerated, with the circular not only recommending the use of deodorants, but also specifying that said deodorants must not be “hitting on the nose”.

Enforcing rules like this in today’s day and age makes it clear that, while ZMCL is proactive when it comes to attire and grooming, what they really need is a circular on sexism.

Quite what the punishment is for these transgressions is unclear. Does an employee get sent home for violating the policy? Do they get docked pay? Dressed down? Do they have to report to an in-house grooming facility where they’re “fixed”? Given the overbearing nature of the policy itself, all these options seem equally likely.

In the first few pages of the document, ZMCL stated that the intent of the policy was to define the culture of the organisation, which they have – it just isn’t very positive.