[Sheel]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

This is very poor logic: It would not be right to wear shorts in one place, so it isn't in another.

Maybe, but so are the reasons not wear proper attire at a proper occasion, coming later...

That is not true. Courts are somewhat up the scale from routine bureaucrats. As an example, I might file papers with some court office wearing shorts, but no, I would not appear for the case thus dressed.

I might visit you wearing shorts, but perhaps not your grandfather. In neither case would it be actually disrespectful (what's wrong with shorts?) but an elder person might take it as such. So, what is the difference then, between your grandfather and the RTO. The RTO is actually paid to serve me, not to dictate how I should approach him.

First thing first, save for another public servant, no cattle class/mango man can say this unless that one person is a part of a large group or is in a queue.

Why do we wear ethnic clothes on a wedding/puja or some celebration? Formals for office, official meetings? One does dress for the occasion. Anyone going to any Govt office in a very casual attire hints the post holder that this person has simply walked in and has no respect for the office, his work & my chair/post.

One may continue to fight for his constitutional right. Thank you

[TD_GHY]

Originally Posted by Sheel

Why do we wear ethnic clothes on a wedding/puja or some celebration?

This is beginning to change now. If you've seen the recent trends of wedding receptions, you'll observe the groom dressed in a suit (relatively expensive than the guests of course) while brides are still dressed in ethnic wear. Suit is not an ethnic wear I believe.

Same with Pujas as well. Ethnic wear is slowly becoming an exception rather a norm.

Formals for office, official meetings?

Because that's what the British did. Else, how can one justify the black dress for advocates in 40+ degree Celsius temperatures

Anyone going to any Govt office in a very casual attire hints the post holder that this person has simply walked in and has no respect for the office, his work & my chair/post.

You are correct here. But by the same logc, bank officials are also deserving of respect. I find even elders (40+) coming to Public Sector banks in casuals and shorts. I don't think a bank employee would dare ask him to go and change to full pants before processing his request. But a RTO can as we have been made to believe by many in this thread. So, it means a RTO is far superior than any bank employee despite both being public servants.

So you see exceptions are there. We don't ask the groom to change into an ethnic dress, don't ask the drunk guy dancing at a Ganesh Chaturthi or Durga Puja pandal in skimpy clothes to change into an ethnic wear, then how can we not tolerate an exception of a person not wearing what every other is wearing to a RTO?

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by TD_GHY

You are correct here. But by the same logc, bank officials are also deserving of respect. I find even elders (40+) coming to Public Sector banks in casuals and shorts. I don't think a bank employee would dare ask him to go and change to full pants before processing his request.

Bank officials are shop assistants. They are there to sell you stuff. Sadly, they are often less efficient and knowledgable than shop staff. Yep... I'm over 40, by more than twnety years!

But a RTO can as we have been made to believe by many in this thread. So, it means a RTO is far superior than any bank employee despite both being public servants.

It means that the RTO can actually do something to make our lives tangibly difficult. That is, actually, the only power they have. In practical terms, I'm not keen on making one want to exercise it

[Sheel]

Originally Posted by TD_GHY

This is beginning to change now.

Dressed for the occasion would be more apt instead of ethnic and a dhoti/kurta is more comfortable than a suit, especially in summers.

But I honestly think we are heading nowhere, to each his/her own. And it also appears that we live in different worlds, so as they say, in Rome, do as Romans do.

Thank You

[LoneRidder]

Originally Posted by Sheel

Why do we wear ethnic clothes on a wedding/puja or some celebration? Formals for office, official meetings? One does dress for the occasion.

One may continue to fight for his constitutional right. Thank you

I guess you have summed it well. "One does dress for the occasion!"

Are we still ignorant of this fact or LOVE to pretend to be ignorant!

[pratyush6]

Originally Posted by Doge

Wearing shorts and walking nude or in briefs is completely different. I am guessing that you're unaware that people of my age (above 18) are cool with wearing shorts,even boxers to where ever we want because we or at least I, don't give a darn about what anyone else thinks and I won't wear trousers or jeans in the baking summer heat.
Btw, Kurt Cobain got married in pyjamas.

Enough has been said about this. But what you've said, just actually proves my point - You can wear boxers to "wherever" you want.

I really do not have anything to say after that. Enjoy buddy!

BTW, some of the arguments in favor are rather bewildering. Someone is okay to tear the application papers and pay bribe but cannot put an effort to dress up. I really want all of these fellows to land up in job interviews like that! I am like Enough said.

[TD_GHY]

Originally Posted by pratyush6

BTW, some of the arguments in favor are rather bewildering.

Some of the arguments against are equally bewildering as well. Eg- Equating it to wearing bikinis is the best one.

Someone is okay to tear the application papers and pay bribe but cannot put an effort to dress up

It can be said both ways. Someone can put an effort to dress up well, but not put in an effort to pass the test without paying a bribe.

I really want all of these fellows to land up in job interviews like that! I am like Enough said.

People have already done that. I've already written about casual wear in interviews in one of the posts on this thread with examples. Guess you missed that.

[samy1117]

My First Post!

I believe this unofficial dress code requirements are still active in rural/tier 3 RTOs across India. Three years ago, when I went for driving test with T-shirt and Jean to my local RTO in TN, RTO attendants told me that T-shirts are not allowed and asked me to wear shirt which I had to purchase from nearby shop.

[dashoin]

Wow, so many posts both for and against wearing shorts!

The fundamental rights allow an individual to wear what he/ she wishes. Now, the Fundamental Duties (yes, thats a part of the Indian constitution) also require an individual to abide by the Constitution and respect it's institutions. An RTO officer is a representative of the Executive which is an institution. A decent dress is just one of the ways to show respect to the institution (not the individual) while transacting goverment business, which in this case is an application for a driving license. The issue of bribes is more of an individual issue and should be separated from the respect an dignity of a Government representative. I have had experiences of not being even hinted for bribes when working with the Government officials and being directly being given a "price".

Banks, including nationalised ones, do not form a part of the executive. However, they can take a stand on whom they would like to form a business relationship with. Stiff targets ensure that they are courteous with everyone.

The notion that my taxes are paying their salaries every morning when I drive to office and get to see their official vehicles and compare it with my 12 year old Esteem

[Jaggu]

Originally Posted by dashoin

An RTO officer is a representative of the Executive which is an institution.

Are you sure about this?

Don't think RTO falls under executive definition, it comes under the road transport department of individual state. It's job is to define rules and regulation at state level while being within the premises of national rules and ensure proper process are in place to enforce the same.

I don't think it has any executive power at central or even state level. That would be with the Transport ministry, local or central at the best.

Powerful does not mean respect, like i said they are offering a service and at the best certifying authority, which for me falls under service. They should not be bothered with what i wear, as long as it is legal under constitution, while i interact with them for my need for service.

[TD_GHY]

Originally Posted by dashoin

The fundamental rights allow an individual to wear what he/ she wishes. Now, the Fundamental Duties (yes, thats a part of the Indian constitution) also require an individual to abide by the Constitution and respect it's institutions. An RTO officer is a representative of the Executive which is an institution.

RTO is not a constitutional body and hence does not come under the ambit of the fundamental duty "to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions". They are statutory bodies established through Acts of State Legislatures. RTO is just another office of the State Govt per se.

Also, Fundamental Duties are not enforceable without legislation, while Fundamental Rights are.

[Obi-Wan]

Another one bites the dust? or another feather in our caps?

- Non-Secularism
- Casteism
- Quota system
- Sexism
- Corruption
- Bribery

etc etc etc and now...

SHORTS!

I am sure this is frowned upon by the same strata of folks who loiter around in their Boxer shorts thinking those are like regular ones. Come one man, you are not Superman and Boxer shorts are undergarments!

[dashoin]

The Executive refers to the government. The RTO, as a part of the government, is a part of the Executive. The other institutions include the Legislature (Parliament) and Judiciary. The reference is made to Government and does not differentiate between Central or State.

In my previous post, I am only pointing out that as Citizens of India, all of us have a few fundamental duties to follow which includes what I have written above. The respect is to be shown to the post not the individual.

It is my fundamental right to wear what I please. I am in shorts and a T shirt most of time when I am at home or travelling. I am not questioning this right. I have merely pointed out a fundamental duty.

The language for Fundamental Duties clearly states " It shall be the duty of every citizen ...". These are not enforced through legislation and one has a moral obligation to follow them.

In a nutshell, if I were in the guy's place, I would have been dressed appropriately while going to a government office.

OT: Two posts in one hour; thats a new record for me! Time to hibernate!

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by Obi-Wan

Boxer shorts are undergarments!

Indeed. There are limits, and I wouldn't wear boxer shorts (which are my style of underpants) outside the house in the street! Supermen are still required to wear trousers --- with the underpants, of whatever style, on the outside.

I do think that my shorts are fairly respectable. They come to the knee, at least, and are not bright colours. I felt a little embarrassed wearing them to carnatic concerts in December, but one artist, at least, knowing of our flood situation, was simply delighted to see me there at all: un-ironed kurta tucked into the shorts, mud-encrusted sandals.

I am not entirely bloody-minded about this. I am a little reluctant and uncomfortable to show off my knees to elders (and my elders are 70, 80 and more) because I know it is not considered polite. This is not the same as agreeing with some guy who thinks that the sign on his desk makes him a better person than me.

[VeyronSuperSprt]

All government offices other than courts (judiciary) and legislature (parliament which we do not have a direct transaction connect) are extensions of the Executive. Even the Muncipality, Panchayat and Village offices are extensions of the Executive. The powers to exercise their functions are delegated to them by the President who receives it from the Constitution. It is not that the President directly delegates power to the RTO, but through the State, in this case the Transport Ministry > MVD > RTO.

But wait !!! The constitution is what we have copied from the British - it has most of its parts copied from them - so we shouldn't be respecting it, isn't it ?

We now respect and allow Google to PLAY GOD because it is American - read no dress code - and allows candidates to come for interviews in Shorts.

The real truth is that the profit margins in any successful IT company on every production employee can even be in the region of 70% after tax if the business has been managed well - so most corporates accommodate everything that candidates want so that they feel comfortable at work and continue laying the golden eggs.

But when the going gets tough, (ask anyone working in IBM currently going through a difficult phase for instance) you'll find how the pampering in the earlier days has gradually given way to fairly harsher treatment.

So, as long as Google continues to remain profitable with the golden eggs it will allow the goose to wear shorts to interviews or any place else and do most of what he pleases within the organisation too as long as the eggs come in.

It's smart business sense and called clever focus on the bottom line and not really so much of forward thinking which is only the image projected to lure in the goose and keep him inside.

The business logic in a nutshell - you lay eggs, I don't care if you wear shorts.