In this state you can be fired for any or no reason at all unless you're in a protected group.

Tight Synthetic shorts are nasty and stinky!

So, OP, any follow-up?

You could also make a couple of great comparisons. Them asking you not to wear cycling-specific clothing could open the door to scenarios like the same employee complaining of being threatened by a motorcyclist in black helmet and leather jacket. Are they going to suggest that the rider not wear such safety gear? Or, since you work in healthcare, that everyone is wearing their pajamas (scrubs) around work--would they think of asking any of them to dress any differently?

Once you win this, come in the next day carrying a cucumber in your shorts...

OK, but it's still an "at will" state. They can fire you because you caused them trouble, or because they didn't like the fact that you pulled into a parking spot at a 9 degree angle this morning, or for no reason at all. The only recourse you have is to collect unemployment.

Maybe the armed forces or other government organizations have recourse, but those of us in at-will states in private industry are always an eyeblink away from unemployment. Your defense against this is to be valuable to the organization. In this case, I suspect that nobody had ever called anyone on the "zero tolerance" thing. I also wouldn't be surprised if the policy got rewritten after he was gone. I have no way to know, I don't know anyone else who works there.

I agree and putting on a pair of shorts was suggested to the OP earlier in the thread.

However for the sake of argument and to keep this thread interesting, there might be a larger issue here, which bugs me. It appears to me that somebody is using the "uncomfortable work environment"part of sexual harassment to impose their will on others in the work place whether or not any sexual harassment is actually occurring. To me this is wrong and I don't think it is a small issue because if they are successful doing this once, they are going to do it again. Although, I will qualify that we may not know what is all going on here.

Again for the sake of argument, as far as dress code goes I think this is a bit of a gray too. For example, a plant type workplace may have locker rooms where workers change into "work clothes" from "street clothes." I don't think it is self obvious to everyone that dress codes can start when you set foot on company property.

So basically some of you think that riding up to the door in Lycra in full view of anyone who wants to be offended is fine, but at the door you should put on another pair of shorts for the short walk to the locker or men's room? That seems really silly to me. What if the offended co-workers are out on the sidewalk having a smoke and you have to go by them there? Should you ride into an ally first so you can change before you get near the building? Is it okay on the side walk, but not okay in the hallway?

How do you draw a line like that? I don't think it can be drawn fairly and that needs to be pointed out to people who want to be offended by other people.

Good post. I think you summed it up well.

First of all, let me say that I don't think some guy wearing lycra cycling shorts into work should be construed as a sexual harassment issue unless he's obviously and deliberately parading his junk around.

I'm looking at this strictly as a dress code/company image issue.

Secondly, I don't see it as that complicated.

I sometimes run at lunch and will take my shirt off while I'm running if it's warm. I put it back on before I come back into the building. It's not that hard.

If someone glances out the window while in their office and sees me shirtless, well, they can either look away or get the binoculars. Or they can gawk at the woman sunbathing topless in the neighboring condo complex.

A line can be drawn that's easy enough for everyone to understand. Not everyone may be happy with that line. That's how it is. People argue over how cold or warm the office should be too.

Thats the problem with tight stretchy pants for fun they allow ones junk to be paraded around quite easily since they follow every contour. There is nothing left to the imagination. This is why MTB shorts or regular clothing is better for a commuter. Its my contention that performance/comfort gains are minimal for most commuters anyway. Why do cyclists insist on dressing like pro team members anyway? Not only is it unnecessary it looks odd to the rest of the world. I often think of the line in the movie Nacho Libre.....sometimes men wear tight stretchy pants for fun, or something to that effect when I see cyclists all costumed up. To each his own.

So, are you a freakin' troll, or do you just have mental health issues regarding your body?


Oh, and FWIW, my genitalia is not "junk", and does not threaten the public order when I'm wearing standard cycling shorts or bibs.

It depends on how you commute. For me it's not just a commute, -it's training. I push it.
If I ride hard without padded bike shorts or tights, I'll be hurting in places I'd rather not hurt. I guess I could get MTB shorts but I'm not going to wear them during a triathlon so it would just be an extra expense. FWIW, I don't even own a traditional cycling jersey so it's not like I'm a poseur or something.

If it looks odd to the rest of the world, so be it. I'm sure my reflective vest isn't considered high fashion either.

One thing I will agree with though, lycra isn't strictly required for commuting. Probably most of the commuters I see aren't wearing lyra or are wearing it under something else.

I understand about using a commute as a training ride, I've done that in the past and more recently when I had a way to freshen up adequately. Years ago when I worked as an employee, my employer had a shower installed in the new building for emergency contamination clean up and for one employee who liked to run to work. Naturally I used it too. I don't however find that padded shorts help in any way and in my case, they seemed to bunch up. I went back to wicking undies and regular shorts or sweats. I did recently order a set of non padded, black wool, semi tights for the cold weather. Kind of a loose fit but not as loose as sweat pants. I can see the economy of not buying something extra if you are using the same gear to compete in.
I guess I'm saying in response to the O.P. that I find it unnecessary to use the tight stretchy stuff and that was what caused the stir at his work, it appears. I just think there are plenty of regular clothing items that could be used to commute with and even work in, if the cyclist didn't purposely put out the maximum effort on the way to work. This approach might cut down on the friction at work and reduce the need for "extra" work clothes.

I was just responding to the previous posters comment about someone purposely parading his "junk" around. Thats a common term describing genitalia in some regions in America.
My point was that skin tights make that almost impossible to avoid. And no, not a troll, I post frequently and I don't have mental health issues regarding my body. I just don't think skin tights are appropriate in the workplace. Its even kind of embarrassing walking around in them off the bike at times. I view them kind of like walking around in a speedo. Some places will toss you out of their business for not wearing a shirt so its not unreasonable to think some might not want to view a middle aged man wearing skin tight stretchy pants too.
Just because we are comfortable with our bodies doesn't mean others are. Thats why most people wear modest attire in public. Maybe the world should all go about in the nude?

I wouldn't have a problem with that...but, it would probably make me even less likely to shop at Whale-Mart .

As for modesty, etc...I guess it depends on where you live. Presumably in repressed places like Ohio or Georgia, community standards are less tolerant of men wearing form-fitting clothing...out here on the West Coast it doesn't seem to be much of an issue.

Perhaps the discomfort regarding men is associated with the increasing average girth in America - most men now routinely wear baggy clothing to cover up the flab they're carrying around. So, any man that's comfortable wearing form fitting clothing may be viewed as a threat...it would make an interesting sociological research project.


And it all seems like a double standard because women routinely wear "stretchy pants" and "stretchy tops" all the time without being asked to cover up (with the notable exception of Southwest Airlines recently, but that was a short skirt as I recall).

Wow, I had no idea this thread would blow up so much. It has been interesting to see all the different responses.

However, it would seem that I am not the only target of this employee's rantings. While I have been away from work it seems that her and another supervisor got into it over something regarding the location of the woman's cube. Well long story short (heard through the office grapevine) was that the woman was so upset that she ran the supervisor down with her scooter. Needless to say the source of my problem no longer works here.

Regardless, I did a little more research with my HR department. The wording excludes attire worn to and from the office as part of the dress code. So I am free to wear my biking clothes to and from the office. According to the dress code I am required to be in appropriate attire while on the clock, but anytime before or after that I am allowed to wear anything as long as it is within reason and in good taste.

**C.V.** Riding to work in the bib shorts and jersey is a personal preference because of my commute. I find it to be more comfortable for my individual needs. I dont find that my biking clothes get very nasty or stinky as I guess I have pretty good hygiene habits. Although your comment about the nasty and stinky comment sounded just like the woman that made the complaint. It was still funny because of the font and the emoticons after it and had me ROFL. I thought of a 12 y.o. girl saying the sentence the way you wrote it...LOL

Yea.........I meant it to be humorous. I have skin tights and I have used them but they aren't that versatile to me or comfortable for that matter. Maybe my bibs are bad ones but all that gel pad bunching up caused me discomfort at about mile 30 all the way to mile 56 and I was never so glad to peel them off. I have a pair of cheap shorts but they always slide down my tiny backside exposing the proverbial plumbers crack. I have found wicking undies to stay in place and I cover them with cheap shorts or sweats in colder weather. La La La la Laaaaa!

I live in the rainy rural Northwest. And yes its true some of us are overweight and don't want to visually subject others to their flab. I'm not sure about the threat thing, that sounds more like what a woman might think. You are right about the double standard but I've got to tell you without going into too much detail. I once had the pleasure of viewing a highly attractive female wearing really tight lycra and the effect was quite breathtaking but still, it would have been distracting at work and it wasn't really appropriate for public dress regardless of the fact that she was riding in a cycling event. Its all a matter of what someone it willing to be seen in I suppose and we can all relate to the unsightly view some people give us. Community and personal standards aren't always the same either and if some had their way we'd all be running around naked. Thats not something I'd be comfortable doing or seeing.

That's awesome.

And on that note I think it's time to close this thread.