How to Write a Workplace Dress Code Without Creating Problems
Someone wears something a manager doesn’t like. The manager asks HR to update the dress code. Another situation comes up, so another restriction gets added.
Before long, the handbook contains a detailed inventory of clothing, footwear, hairstyles and accessories, but managers are still unsure how to address a concern.
A useful dress code does not need to anticipate everything an employee could possibly wear.
It should set the tone, explain the requirements that matter for the workplace and give managers a fair basis for individual conversations.
For Canadian employers, that also means understanding the difference between a genuine job requirement and a preference about how someone should look. Requiring slip-resistant footwear in a restaurant kitchen is very different from requiring servers to wear high heels.
Here is how to build a practical dress code, avoid common problems and handle concerns respectfully.
In this article
Start with why you need a dress code
Before writing rules, identify the purpose.
Are you trying to:
Protect employees from workplace hazards?
Meet food-handling or hygiene requirements?
Make employees identifiable to customers?
Establish a consistent uniform?
Set expectations for client meetings?
Address one employee’s clothing?
The last point deserves a pause.
If your policy is generally working and one person is not meeting a clear expectation, you may need a conversation rather than a new rule for everyone.
If nobody understands the expectation, clarify it. But avoid rewriting the handbook every time a manager encounters something unfamiliar.
Separate safety requirements from presentation expectations
Both can belong in a dress code, but they need different explanations and levels of detail.
Safety and operational requirements
These are linked to the work or workplace.
Examples may include:
Slip-resistant footwear where floors present a slipping hazard;
Protective footwear where there is a risk of foot injury;
Clothing that will not become caught in machinery;
Hair restraints in food preparation;
High-visibility clothing around vehicles or equipment; and
Restrictions on jewellery where it could create a safety or contamination risk.
Determine the requirement through the relevant hazard assessment, operational standard or applicable rule. Be specific enough that employees know what is required.
“Wear appropriate shoes” may be too vague for a kitchen or production floor.
Also, a dress code should not replace your safety procedures. Where protective clothing or equipment is required, employees need the appropriate specifications, instruction and training.
Presentation expectations
These relate to how employees represent the organization.
A business may reasonably establish a uniform, require a particular clothing colour or set expectations for customer-facing work.
An office might allow casual clothing on ordinary workdays while expecting more formal attire for particular meetings. A retailer may use branded shirts so customers can identify employees.
Those expectations should be clear and connected to the business. They should also leave room for different ways of meeting the standard.
Slip-resistant shoes and high heels are different requirements
In a restaurant kitchen, footwear requirements can be tied to slippery floors, hot liquids, dropped objects and other hazards.
A well-designed rule starts with those risks and identifies suitable footwear.
Requiring servers to wear high heels because management considers them more attractive is a different issue. It can introduce both safety and human rights concerns.
In British Columbia, WorkSafeBC specifically states that requiring hospitality workers to wear high heels while serving, bussing or hosting would violate its footwear regulation. Human rights guidance in Alberta and Ontario also identifies problems with sexualized or gender-specific requirements.
The useful question is:
What does this requirement help the employee do safely or effectively?
If the explanation comes down to “we prefer women to look this way,” reconsider the rule.
Define professionalism without turning personal taste into policy
“Employees must dress professionally” sounds straightforward. In practice, people interpret it differently.
One manager thinks professionalism means a suit. Another is comfortable with jeans and a clean shirt. Someone else objects to visible tattoos, bright hair or a religious head covering.
A policy needs more guidance than personal preference.
Explain the setting and the expected result. For example:
“Our office generally follows a business-casual approach. Employees attending formal client meetings may be asked to wear more formal attire, with expectations communicated in advance.”
Then provide a few examples suited to your workplace.
Be careful about treating cultural hairstyles, religious clothing, gender expression or disability-related clothing choices as inherently unprofessional.
Customer preference is not a reliable justification for discriminatory treatment, either.
You can set a presentation standard without requiring everyone to look the same.
What can an employer generally require?
Canadian employers can generally establish reasonable dress, grooming and uniform requirements, subject to applicable human rights, safety and employment obligations.
The details matter.
Expectation | A more practical approach |
Safe footwear | Identify the hazards and the required footwear characteristics. |
A recognizable uniform | Provide suitable options, sizes and an accommodation process. |
Hair secured around equipment or food | Explain the specific safety or hygiene requirement and acceptable ways to meet it. |
Clothing suitable for client meetings | Define the level of formality and provide advance notice where possible. |
Restrictions on discriminatory or harassing messages | Describe the prohibited content rather than relying only on “anything management finds offensive.” |
Jewellery restrictions | Connect restrictions to the relevant task, hazard or hygiene requirement. |
Different roles can have different requirements. An employee entering a production area may need protective clothing that an office-based employee does not.
The distinction should follow the work, rather than assumptions about the person doing it.
Where dress codes commonly create problems
Different expectations based on gender
Avoid rules that require women to wear heels, skirts or makeup while giving men more comfortable or practical options.
A stronger approach is to make appropriate clothing options available regardless of gender. If uniforms are used, consider fit, coverage, comfort and practicality.
The same wording should also be applied fairly. A policy that appears neutral can still create problems if managers scrutinize one group more closely.
Blanket restrictions on religious clothing or practices
A “no head coverings” or “no facial hair” rule may affect religious observance.
Where there is a genuine safety requirement, assess the specific risk and possible accommodations. Do not assume a religious item is incompatible with the work, and do not simply waive a necessary safety control without finding a safe solution.
Get appropriate HR and safety support where the requirements interact.
Ignoring disability or pregnancy-related needs
An employee may need different footwear, fabric, sizing or other adjustments because of a disability, medical restriction or pregnancy-related need.
Treat that as a potential accommodation issue. Do not assume it is a refusal to follow the policy.
Using vague or body-focused language
Phrases such as “nothing distracting,” “flattering clothing” or “a feminine appearance” invite subjective judgments.
Focus on the garment, task or specific requirement. Avoid comments about an employee’s body, attractiveness or whether their appearance might distract someone else.
Applying the rules selectively
If a manager ignores the same clothing choice on some employees but challenges it on others, the problem may be enforcement rather than policy wording.
Consistency does not mean refusing accommodations. It means using the same decision-making approach and having a legitimate explanation for differences.
What should the policy actually include?
For many workplaces, a short policy can cover the essentials.
Include:
Purpose: Why the organization has dress expectations.
General standard: The overall approach to clothing and presentation.
Role-specific requirements: Uniforms, footwear, hygiene or protective equipment.
A few useful examples: Enough to explain the standard.
Accommodation: Who employees can contact about an adjustment.
Responsibilities: How managers clarify expectations and address concerns.
Keep detailed safety specifications in the relevant procedures and refer employees to them.
If uniforms or special clothing are required, also explain how employees obtain them and who covers the cost. Check the applicable rules before introducing charges or payroll deductions.
Sample dress-code wording
The following is a starting point to adapt to your workplace:
Dress and Appearance Employees are expected to wear clothing and footwear suitable for their duties and work environment. Clothing should be clean, in good repair and allow employees to perform their work safely. Our usual workplace standard is [describe your approach and provide a few relevant examples]. Any additional expectations for particular assignments or events will be communicated in advance. Role-specific uniform, hygiene and protective-equipment requirements are set out in [identify the relevant procedures or instructions]. Requirements will be applied fairly, with respect for human rights and accommodation obligations. Employees who need an adjustment should contact [role or contact]. Managers will address concerns privately, explain the relevant expectation and consider any need for clarification or accommodation before determining next steps.
That is a framework. It will not replace the specific footwear instructions your kitchen needs or the protective-equipment requirements for your production team.
It also does not need another paragraph for every possible clothing trend.
How to have the individual conversation
When an employee is not meeting an established expectation, address it privately.
Do not turn a concern about one person into a company-wide email if a direct conversation would resolve it.
1. Check the expectation first
Can you identify the rule and explain why it applies?
If the policy permits casual clothing and the employee is wearing something you personally dislike, pause before treating it as misconduct.
If the expectation was never clear, communicate it before assuming the employee deliberately ignored it.
2. Describe the concern without judging the person
For a footwear issue:
“These shoes don’t meet the slip-resistant footwear requirement for the kitchen. We need footwear that meets the standard before you work in that area. Is there anything making it difficult to obtain or wear suitable shoes?”
For a meeting expectation:
“For tomorrow’s client presentation, we’re asking the team to follow our formal-meeting dress expectations. I want to clarify what that means and check whether you need anything to meet them.”
Keep the conversation about the requirement.
3. Ask and listen
The employee may have misunderstood the rule. They may be waiting for a uniform replacement, unable to find an appropriate size or experiencing a medical issue.
Give them room to explain without requiring them to disclose sensitive information publicly.
If an accommodation need emerges, move into the appropriate process rather than continuing as though the issue is simply non-compliance.
4. Agree on a practical next step
That might mean replacing damaged uniform items, arranging suitable footwear, clarifying what is acceptable or assessing an accommodation.
Address an immediate hazard before the employee continues the affected task. For an ordinary presentation concern, a reasonable correction period may be more appropriate than an immediate punitive response.
5. Follow up proportionately
An initial misunderstanding is different from repeatedly ignoring a clear, reasonable requirement after it has been explained.
Document significant conversations and use an appropriate response based on the circumstances. Do not automatically send someone home unpaid or deduct money because of a dress-code concern; those decisions can create separate employment issues.
Do not use “management discretion” to fill every gap
A clause saying “management has the final say” does not make an unreasonable or discriminatory decision acceptable.
Managers need a shared understanding of the standard and how to apply it.
A useful test is whether two managers could explain the same expectation in broadly the same way. If one allows something and another disciplines it without a clear reason, employees are left guessing.
Use recurring questions to improve the guidance. Use individual conversations to manage individual situations.
A practical review before you publish
Read each requirement and ask:
What business purpose does it serve?
Is it tied to a task, hazard or clear presentation expectation?
Could someone meet the same purpose another way?
Does it create a barrier related to a protected ground?
Can employees obtain suitable clothing or equipment?
Would managers apply it consistently?
Is this a rule everyone needs, or an issue we should address directly?
If you cannot explain a restriction beyond “that is what we prefer,” give it another look.
A good dress code sets a usable standard. Managers still need to explain expectations, listen to employees and handle concerns respectfully.
Need help with your dress code or employee handbook?
A&A helps Canadian employers develop practical HR policies and navigate the conversations that come with managing people.
We can review your existing dress code, identify unnecessary restrictions and help you establish expectations suited to your workplace.
Stay Up to Date on HR & Employment Changes
Subscribe to the A&A newsletter for practical HR advice, employment updates and useful resources for managing your team.
Sources
Alberta Human Rights Commission: dress codes and employer responsibilities — reasonable standards, gender-related concerns and accommodation.
Ontario Human Rights Commission: sexualized and gender-specific dress codes — human rights considerations for workplace appearance requirements.
Ontario Human Rights Commission: employer dress-code checklist — comparable uniform options, comfort, coverage and sizing.
CCOHS: footwear assessment checklist — distinguishing dress preferences from hazard-based footwear requirements.
WorkSafeBC: personal protective clothing and equipment guidelines — footwear requirements, including high heels in hospitality.
