Unemployment and appearance

Press, 16 July 1983, Page 16

Unemployment and appearance

Sir,-To L. M. Slater (July 12) and Sharon Hunter (July 18) let me make myself clear. At no time did I mention, in my reference to the unemployable, any minimum standard of dress. I reiterate: very few of the vast number of unemployed bothered to apply for positions paying well above the award which required little or no experience, despite being advertised by the Department of Labour over several weeks. I admit that like many other employers, I am drawn to a well-presented person but consider their aptitude for the position offered is of prime importance. In my experience however, persons who have made an effort to present themselves well, will generally be better employees. I am‘flattered by Sharon Hunter who

compared me and my sort to that worshipped by millions, but let us be real. It does not matter that she considers dress unimportant. What is important is that there are thousands of unemployed, an undeniable burden on our social system, who can only enhance their chances of vocational success by presenting themselves in a businesslike manner. Idealism does not count. — Yours, etc., LINDSAY SMITH. July 13, 1983.

Sir,—Lindsay Smith (July 11) asks my opinion on the employability of punk rockers. Good question. I, myself, am and have been for some years now, classified as a “punk rocker.” I am also a human being, and in employment; I, and obviously at least a few others, consider me very employable, and readily say the same for a lot of my fellow “punk rockers.” I hereby rest my case and shall not reply to any further correspondence. However, if anyone wishes to continue this issue with me, I suggest we meet in a restaurant and argue and throw food at each other there, as that seems to hold as much wisdom as does bickering through a newspaper column.—Yours, etc., N. TAYLOR. July 11, 1983.