It’s been a busy fall at the DEI Consulting Practice, and I’m honored to have been featured in a recent article about DEI issues in the legal workplace. In October, the American Bar Association published an article about outdated dress codes in the workplace and how these policies have a disproportionately negative impact on LGBTQ+ people, women, people of color, and people with disabilities.

Dress code expectations for legal professionals are often set as a way of projecting credibility, both to colleagues and to clients. But, as the article lays out, the notion of “professionalism” is rooted in tradition, from the point of view of a dominant cultural lens (i.e. white, straight, cisgender, male, able-bodied) of what is considered appropriate. Stanford Law School professor Richard Thompson notes in the above mentioned article, “The default historically had been, ‘If I’m not familiar with it, it’s unprofessional, it’s weird, it’s some kind of radical statement, it’s countercultural—and that doesn’t belong in the workplace.’”

It’s important for workplaces to question these traditional notions about dress codes and determine whether these restrictive policies are inadvertently undermining efforts to create a more inclusive and diverse workforce. For example, policies that uphold rigid, binary gender norms not only fail to reflect the changing demographics of our field, but place anyone who is outside of those dominant categories at a disadvantage. 

Many of us within the LGBTQ+ community can relate to these challenges, particularly anyone who has undergone gender transition or anyone who is nonbinary. It’s one thing for a workplace to adopt nondiscrimination policies on the basis of gender identity and gender expression. It’s another thing for a workplace to take a proactive step of inclusion by evaluating existing policies and practices to make sure they are upholding the recommended best practices for LGBTQ+ inclusion.

Over the past four years, I have worked closely with several global law firms to provide a comprehensive review of policies and practices as they relate to LGBTQ+ employees. It’s critical to have an eye towards inclusive language, as this is constantly changing. And it’s also important to make these policies intentional and easy to find. One of our long-time DEI clients, Jenner & Block, shared their updated dress code policy in the ABA Journal article, which serves as a model for other workplaces: 

“All general personnel are free to dress in professional business attire that is consistent with their gender identity.”

A growing number of law firms have created “Gender-Inclusive Workplace Guidelines,” #2 on the LGBTQ+ Bar DEI Index, which are stand-alone policies that support trans, nonbinary, and gender-diverse employees. These guidelines not only cover dress codes, but also a range of relevant policies such as nondiscrimination, privacy, restrooms, leave, names/pronouns, and inclusive benefits. 

We see highly gendered dress guidelines upheld in many law schools as well. The Bar’s “LGBTQ+ Best Practices for Law Schools” guide finds that Career Services advisors and law professors are uniquely positioned to prepare law students for professional opportunities, and make valuable connections with potential employers. Despite their good intentions, however, they can perpetuate outdated dress codes because they believe this is what will be most helpful to students entering a conservative legal field. This is harmful not only to LGBTQ+ individuals who may fall outside the traditional gender binary, but it places a higher burden on women/feminine-identifying people to walk the narrow line between “conventionally unattractive” and “too attractive to be taken seriously.”

The LGBTQ+ Bar was also a contributing sponsor to the Harvard Law School LGBTQ+ Advocacy Clinic and Beyond Binary Legal’s excellent guide: “Creating More Welcoming Workplaces: Practical Steps Towards Nonbinary Inclusion in the Legal Profession.” The guide reports that choosing workplace attire or hairstyles is often a source of stress for nonbinary employees, and one that can sometimes lead to material consequences. One respondent, who some perceive as masculine, described being sent home from court for not wearing a tie, even though they wore a woman’s suit. But the guide also offers practical steps that employers can take to be more inclusive, such as implementing gender neutral dress codes, and enabling employees to present however they feel most comfortable.

Now is a great time to update dress code policies to create a more welcoming environment for everyone. If you would like our expertise on crafting the most up-to-date best practice standards for LGBTQ+ inclusion and on how to roll these policies out with critical conversations about why they matter, contact dru@lgbtqbar.org.