Gawker got its hands on some internal memos regarding American Apparel's branding rules for retail workers. They are, as one would expect, fucking ridiculous. (I kind of agree that no one should wear Uggs ever, but I'm not going around making employment rules about it.)
I guess the good news is that they're looking for "late 80's - early 90's" looks, so Claudia and Stacey (but not Kristy!) would be more than welcome at one of their cattle casting calls.
Way to be, American Apparel.
I feel like Claud would be heartbroken at the thought of no gladiator sandals. What would the BSC do without sandals that laced up their calves? D: D: D:
ReplyDeleteI think Claud would be so disappointed at not wearing docs!
ReplyDeleteDocs.
Which they should learn to spell. Because, since they are going in a nautical direction, "dock" martins sound appropriate as opposed to Dr Martens, aka DOCS, which are not nautical at all. Sheesh.
They could've had the common courtesy to spell Doc Martin's correctly.
ReplyDeleteTrue, minus the 'i' and the apostrophe.
DeleteI think spelling it "dock" is AA's way of sounding "chique."
ReplyDeleteFor such a snotty, self-righteous personnel policy, it certainly is poorly written.
If we had AA stores in Australia I'd stomp my Doc clad feet right in and tell them where to shove it.
ReplyDeleteWe do have AA stores in Australia. If we had one in Brisbane, I'd stomp my doc clad feet in there and... buy up half of their new items. I'm sorry, horrible HR policy aside, I love the new look v.v
ReplyDeletethis is fucking absurd.
ReplyDeleteNo one should ever wear boat shoes, unless they are on a fucking boat.
Really? I love my sparkly Sperry Topsiders. I just have to believe that Claud would approve!
DeleteROFL at "chique" -- used twice no less (did Claudia write this?), their crazy hyphenate brand image, and AA's delusions of attaining class.
ReplyDeleteWow. Just.....wow. Do people really spend time thinking about this? (And apparently not spell-checking it before using it with a large retail company?) American Apparel has never shouted 'classy' to me- are they going to cease all unitards and neon underwear as well, to conform to the "Classy-Vintage-Chique-Late 80's-Early 90's-Ralph Lauren-Vogue-Nautical-High-End-Brand" style they're attempting to enforce?
ReplyDeleteP.S. Your blog cracks me up.
So, no more skin-tight clothes looking like trashy extras in a Wham! video?
ReplyDeleteAlso, way to pick up on my look for summer circa 2006, American Apparel. Awesome.
"Classy-Vintage-Chique-Late 80's-Early 90's-Ralph Lauren-Vogue-Nautical-High-End-Brand"?!? There are several words that come to mind when I think "American Appare" but I can assure you that they don't include class, vintage, chique, or high-end. Also, what is chique?
ReplyDeleteIs 'there' the chique way of saying 'their'?
ReplyDelete(As in 'employees are instructed to base all there outfits on these styles.')
Or is a 'there' outfit internal code for outfit worn within the store? 'Cause 'there outfit' might be a good slang phrase for someone looking like an American Apparel jackass.
p.s. I just threw a resort wear theme party in which many of the attendees seemed on point with the new guidelines. Synergy.
LOL at "Dock Martins". Way to stay classy. Also, I work at AA.
ReplyDelete"Vintage shoes"? How vague is that? What if they're vintage Converse? Vintage Docs?
ReplyDeleteThat is disgusting.
ReplyDeleteI just saw another posting on Gawker about the new American Apparel "grooming policy", and it seems a little too drab for Claudia. They say that "jewelry must not be distracting", and "One earring per ear is encouraged. Earrings, necklaces, watches, bracelets, etc. must be simple and tasteful". I don't know if I could work in an environment where distracting jewelry was discouraged!
ReplyDeleteHere's the link: http://gawker.com/5562965/american-apparels-complete-guide-to-grooming
P.S. Your blog rocks my socks!
Wait? Did I just read that there are styles IN THE STORE that are saying are off brand? WTF?
ReplyDeleteAA is ridiculous, but it could be worse. When I worked at Express in the mid 90's our retail employee guide told us what kinds of LOTION were acceptable to use (along with the usual accessories, makeup, etc.).
ReplyDeleteI worked in the stock room unloading boxes and was eventually asked to leave for not wearing full makeup and silk shirts to unload a truck. In my "Docks".
Despite their vertical integration/sweatshop free policies....american apparel and its sexploitation drive me nuts. NUUUUUTS!
ReplyDeleteSo now they want to be classy instead of ...hiring porn stars to do their photo spreads? But why? and are we letting them?
Though it's no surprise as in an interview the dude was all "I want to be the Gap. I want to take over the Gap and be better than the Gap." Not verbatim, but he did name his aspirations to be the new "Gap" explicitly.
Wow, whoever wrote those AA memos needs to go to AA (you know, the other AA).
ReplyDeleteI used to work retail. Any way you slice it, it's hell. So many stores have policies similar to these (hire the model-pretty girls. One of my college roommates, a wannabe model, was given one of the more coveted jobs at Express because they "liked her best") but they aren't dumb enough to state these preferences in writing.