Uniforms

[trinybabe]

California

The company I work for is changing thier uniforms. For years they have supplied the shirts for the employees. Now they are requiring the employees to buy their shirts instead of supplying them. My question is, if a retail company requires you to wear a uniform, do they have to supply you with the uniform or are they allowed to require you to pay for your own uniforms?

[cbg]

This isn't my area of expertise and someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that if the uniforms consist of something that you could wear outside of work (example; khaki pants and a black shirt) they can require you to buy them. But if its something you couldn't wear anywhere else, such as a shirt with a company logo on it, they have to provide it.

If you don't get any further answers, you can verify with the state DOL.

[fayg]

Originally Posted by trinybabe

California

The company I work for is changing thier uniforms. For years they have supplied the shirts for the employees. Now they are requiring the employees to buy their shirts instead of supplying them. My question is, if a retail company requires you to wear a uniform, do they have to supply you with the uniform or are they allowed to require you to pay for your own uniforms?

i work for (large retail chain) and in associate press a quote from a ceo states that they will pay for a pair of pants. I thought under the california labor law just like if a company wants you to do something for the company they should not burden the employee with the expense and pay for it like travel expense they want you to go there. i personal dont wear kahki pants outside of the job i personally would not buy the pants because in that case i would already have the pants and would not have to buy them and have no need for them except at the place of employment

[fayg]

Originally Posted by fayg

i work for (large retail chain) and in associate press a quote from a ceo states that they will pay for a pair of pants. I thought under the california labor law just like if a company wants you to do something for the company they should not burden the employee with the expense and pay for it like travel expense they want you to go there. i personal dont wear kahki pants outside of the job i personally would not buy the pants because in that case i would already have the pants and would not have to buy them and have no need for them except at the place of employment

also now we are required to pay to work for the company ? if the company only pays a very low wage that shirt or pants has now became another burden for the employee to bear, would you have bought those pants/shirt if you did not work there? that is the real issue here

[Pattymd]

Don't get on your high horse, fayg. As a matter of fact, if the clothing qualifies as a "uniform", then California law requires that the employer provide and, in most cases, maintain them. Note this is not true in any other state that I know of off the top of my head.
http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/minimumwage.pdf