Mike Davies, Editor-in-Chief Ω
Last week’s opinion piece entitled, “You’re probably not very good at your job,” was the source of some contention, apparently.
I feel it only right that I clarify my remarks in that particular piece, as it seems as though it was taken by some as a defence of the misogynistic tendencies of many food and beverage establishments — or that I was claiming that women don’t make good servers.
My intent was to address the service staff in the article written by Sarah Del Gallo of Ryerson University — which ran immediately above the article in question — who were complaining about the low-cut shirts and heels they were“forced” to wear by their employer and the lack of breaks they found themselves taking during their shifts.
The point I was trying to make is that those servers have a choice in their employment, and instead of complaining about their circumstances perhaps they should pursue other employment options.
These businesses that encourage exposure of their servers’ bits exist because there is a demand for them.
They will continue to thrive because they have people willing to work under these conditions, and patrons who will continue to frequent them.
I do not claim that it is right.
But if I’m unhappy with the expectations demanded of me by my employer, I find a new employer — if I’m unhappy enough.
Which was the point I was attempting to make.
These female servers stay in these jobs because they realize that they may have to try harder in that industry if they work somewhere else — somewhere where they can’t make a bunch of extra money just for being attractive and revealing that fact (pardon the pun).
I have met many excellent female servers during my time in that industry, and my assertion that “it’s easier for them,” than it is for their male counterparts to be successful in that position was NOT meant to be a statement that you will not get good service unless you “get the guy,” when you go out to dine.
I used that first-hand example because it is a true story. In fact it is many true stories.
I was often confronted with this type of statement during my time in the business — and in fact had groups request my section when they saw me on the floor (if there was a host present), or directly ask me if I had an available table where I could serve them because they had dealt with unacceptable levels of service from women in revealing clothing too many times in the past.
My point in this apparently controversial piece was that as long as there are women willing to work in skimpy outfits and men willing to pay them to do so — regardless of the level of service they receive — this situation will not change.
And there will likely always be women willing to work these jobs.
Because like I said, they do not have to be as good or try as hard in those positions in order to make a decent living — and they know it, which is why they complain instead of just leaving.
I’ve worked in establishments where female staff were told specifically to dress more conservatively than they were — and didn’t like it because it took away their opportunity to make bonus money from chauvinists who pay extra for some skin or cleavage.
It is not right.
But it is what it is.
As soon as everyone refuses to put up with it, these businesses will change their approach — but I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for that.
I do not defend the people that operate these businesses but also don’t see the defence for people who choose to work for them and complain about it.
I do understand why both exist, though.
It’s called capitalism.
Prove me wrong, ladies. I sincerely hope that you do. I’m not being patronizing — I genuinely hope that I’m wrong about this.
You go into work wearing full-length black pants instead of a skirt and a collared long sleeve shirt done right up to the top (or at least second from the top) button for the next month at your serving job.
And let me know how that works out for you financially.
Note: You can see the original story that caused the outrage HERE
Are you sure this article shouldn’t be called: “Just to clarify, I’m a sexist pig.”
While I do encourage discussion and engagement, I really shouldn’t have to point out that if you have nothing intelligent to add to the discussion, you probably shouldn’t bother talking. This paper is by and for the students and faculty of a post-secondary institution, and this is argument you make?
If you read that article and come to the conclusion that the author (myself) is sexist, then you should probably take some classes on reading comprehension.
I say numerous times that I condemn the misogyny prominent in that industry, and that I encourage people to battle against it.
Pointing out inequalities in your society doesn’t mean you support the fact that those inequalities exist… Especially when part of your point is that people should be trying to change that situation.
How is this argument not sexist? You use the same argument against women that has been used against them, in all industries, to undermine their success. The old, “well they only succeeded because of their looks and sex appeal.” Reluctantly admitting that there are a few female servers out there who actually do some work does not excuse this fact.
And then at the end of your article you basically undermine any value that a female server has other than sex appeal.
“You go into work wearing full-length black pants instead of a skirt and a collared long sleeve shirt done right up to the top (or at least second from the top) button for the next month at your serving job.
And let me know how that works out for you financially.”
You certainly don’t “condemn the misogyny prominent in industry,” instead you call women spineless, lazy and greedy if they don’t change their place of employe. Not only that, but you then undermine any sort of worker’s rights by saying that employees have no right to complain about poor working conditions because they can just find a new job.
That’s the type of discussion we’re trying to encourage. Thank you.
The piece that you’re commenting on was an attempted clarification of the one I wrote the week before that I got negative responses on that are very similar to the arguments that you are making. I obviously did not do a good enough job clarifying my position, and I thank you for bringing this to my attention.
I disagree that I ever said anything about women being “spineless, lazy and greedy if they don’t change their place of employe,” or that I “undermine any sort of worker’s rights by saying that employees have no right to complain about poor working conditions because they can just find a new job.” I do make the point that people have the choice to continue to work at their current place of employ or to find one more suited to their wants/needs, but the point I was making is that as long as there are people willing to work those jobs to file in behind you when you leave, nothing will change. It’s like a professional football player complaining that he has to work out all the time to keep in good enough shape to keep his job. If he doesn’t want to do that, he can stop…but there will be someone waiting who IS willing to do that, and he will simply step into the role now vacated. Nothing will change.
And my challenge was a genuine one, Erik. I know it may have seemed “snarky” as my mother would say, but I truly meant it. I would sincerely like all servers (male and female) wear professional attire to their jobs….all the time. But the fact is that this will not happen because many men are chauvinists and will pay extra in the form of gratuity for a sexily dressed waitress…and many female servers (as well as business owners) take advantage of that fact.
I DO WISH IT WOULD CHANGE. The article was meant to point out how difficult (if not impossible) that change will be. My apologies if that did not come across in the piece.
And for the record, as soon as I see a man talk about how he took the easier of the routes available to making a comfortable living complain about the fact that that route exists in the first place, I’ll call him out on it, too. I’m actually really hoping to find that scenario. Again, not being sarcastic or “snarky.” I really do want to write that piece. If you have an example of this, let me know and I’ll be happy to explore it in the paper.
Your last comment is completely disingenuous because in almost all fields men still make significantly more money for the same amount of work. Men also are more likely to inhabit higher positions while women are still held below the glass ceiling. Even in the restaurant industry, that you are complaining about, in my own experience management positions are more likely to be held by men, and the restaurants are more likely to be owned by men. Your complaints seem to generally be that because of their gender women have it easier than men in the restaurant industry, but historically and currently the male gender has been privileged in almost all fields.
I completely agree about the discrepancy between male and female earning in most industries. I will also agree that the majority of managers in food and beverage are male. However, I think you’d find that many of these female servers (and male ones, in fact) earn more money than their managers. I’ve seen many people (both male and female) turn down promotions into management roles because of the pay cut they would be taking by accepting…though maybe not according to the government – which is one of the benefits of having a job where a good chunk of your income can go undeclared.
The point I’m making is that it bothers me when people complain about the fact that an easier way exists to make money after they’ve taken that exact easier way to make money. This would be true no matter what the sex is of the person doing the complaining, or the industry in which they work.