{"id":13167,"date":"2010-06-18T05:07:55","date_gmt":"2010-06-18T13:07:55","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/198.46.88.49\/?p=13167"},"modified":"2010-06-18T18:23:14","modified_gmt":"2010-06-19T02:23:14","slug":"dov-charney-on-hiring-gawker-and-larger-sizes-at-american-apparel","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/198.46.88.49\/style\/dov-charney-on-hiring-gawker-and-larger-sizes-at-american-apparel","title":{"rendered":"Dov Charney Answers Our Questions on Hiring, Gawker and Why Larger Sizes Seem to be Disappearing at American Apparel"},"content":{"rendered":"

$\"\"$ When we read Gawker’s recap of American Apparel’s head to toe hiring policy<\/a>, we thought that checking out someone’s body from top to bottom rather than their resume was a cringe worthy way to do business. Not to mention unprofessional, even if not illegal.<\/p>\n

While he defends the practice of using photos as part of store hiring decisions, Dov Charney insists that American Apparel isn’t checking out anything more than they should (personal style and presentation) when it comes to photo submissions. And you know – he’s believable, even if we don’t agree with the practice 100%.<\/p>\n

Nearly all jobs – particularly retail, have uniforms or appearance standards. And while demeanor, experience and other qualities might be bigger concerns if you were responsible for hiring someone, the fact is that style matters. That’s not to say that the policy isn’t extremely superficial – it is. But Charney challenges, if you’re running a business based on appearances, shouldn’t the superficial things play a role?<\/p>\n

For more than an hour, we spoke with the American Apparel CEO about the photo based hiring process, Gawker’s coverage of the matter, the company’s attitude towards plus sized shoppers, why those down sales numbers are overblown\u00c2\u00a0 and the trouble in trying to pin down bon go\u00c3\u00bbt<\/em> (good taste, in French).<\/p>\n

On Hiring Based on Appearances<\/a><\/p>\n

The Fine Line Between Judgment and Targeting<\/a><\/p>\n

The Business Effects<\/a><\/p>\n

What About Those “Off Brand” Customers?<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

On Hiring Based on Appearances<\/h3>\n
YMO<\/strong>: Do you feel your appearance requirements for employees have been unfairly targeted?<\/p>\n
DC<\/span><\/strong>: Yes.<\/p>\n
YMO<\/strong>: Do you understand why people are under the impression, from these standards, that physical appearance is the predominant hiring qualification – more so than previous experience, skill or ability?<\/p>\n
DC<\/span><\/strong>: There’s no evidence that physical appearances are the predominant hiring qualification. The emails that Gawker published don’t reflect the hiring concept that we’re pursuing. We’re trying to hire people that are trustworthy, that are tasteful, that wear the clothing in such a way that it presents an efficient communication to the customer.<\/p>\n
That doesn’t mean excluding people of different shapes or sizes. If someone were missing an arm and they have good style, they’d be welcome.<\/p>\n
YMO<\/strong>: How far up the ladder do the appearance requirements extend?<\/p>\n
DC<\/span><\/strong>: It’s about taste. Some of the emails [from Gawker] were doctored. Some were communications between managers and employees not designed for public consumption or to be permanent declarations for the company as a whole. They weren’t part of the constitution of the company. They may relate to a particular store, or a particular employee or a particular problem.<\/p>\n
[ed. note: I asked Charney to elaborate on which emails were doctored or false, but he couldn’t recall a specific message. He did insist that on at least one unspecified email words not in the original were inserted.<\/em>]<\/p>\n
YMO<\/strong>: Why do you think Gawker would alter anything?<\/p>\n
DC<\/span><\/strong>: Because it keeps you reading, and coming back to their site for more. Let’s be clear who the pawn is – possibly the victims of their gawking. It’s a site to embarrass and shame people at all costs. They have the power to use the force of satire and the force of the media to intrigue people. I think they’re reckless with it and I was disappointed with Gawker because I feel they could do something better with their force.<\/p>\n
YMO<\/strong>: But should a photograph be such an important part of hiring?
\nDC<\/span><\/strong>: Photographing people head to toe is the right thing to do if you want to see how people present themselves to customers. It’s not for a beauty pageant like Miss America where we’re looking at someone’s breast size. We want to see their style.<\/p>\n
The vast majority who work for us weren’t hired off of a photograph though. We want to hire people who wear our brand well and sometimes photographing someone is a matter of memory. If I interview 100 or 200 people and someone stands out, a photograph can make it easier for me to remember them.<\/p>\n
YMO<\/strong>: But if someone had good retail experience, was good with customers, but didn’t intuitively dress in a certain way?<\/p>\n
DC<\/span><\/strong>: If they were really good at retail, but they worked at a bondage store, maybe not. Look, someone who works at Hot Topic may be really good at retail, but Brooks Brothers wouldn’t hire them.<\/p>\n
YMO<\/strong>: So if they’re not “90’s Vogue Chic”…<\/p>\n
DC<\/span><\/strong>: That was a young worker’s way of describing the style.<\/p>\n
YMO<\/strong>: So it’s not an official policy?<\/p>\n
DC<\/span><\/strong>: Trying to describe a fashion sensibility – it’s difficult to put into words. Our customer is getting older, they’re getting more mature.
\nMadonna started wearing safety pins then became an elegant lady. She goes from punk to haute class, and our customer is going through that. In the same way that Levi’s followed the boomers, we’re following their kids.<\/p>\n
That’s why we’re trying to regulate what people are wearing. We sell hooded sweatshirts, but we had people who looked like they were wearing their pajamas in the store. The sweatpants were American Apparel, but 2 sizes too big. Or someone would wear an old t-shirt…
\n<\/p>\n
The Fine Line Between Judgment and Targeting<\/h3>\n
YMO<\/strong>: For you, where is the line between being judgmental, and simply targeting customers?<\/p>\n
DC<\/span><\/strong>: I think any time you make a hiring decision for a position – for any position at any company you’re being judgmental. Our hiring practices are ethical and that can be felt if you walk into our stores. The authenticity of our stores is real.<\/p>\n
I think this is an inauthentic false crusade. The fact that we’re concerned about what our employees look like… You run American Apparel and they’re wearing old clothes, or you see someone on the sales floor with their pants below their underwear or they look like they just rolled out of bed and you’re not supposed to have a problem with it?<\/p>\n
So we use the internet to do something that wouldn’t have been possible 10 years ago, and efficiently monitor the presentation of employees in our stores and it becomes a big issue. Efficiency is a part of this business, and Gawker’s portrayal of American Apparel employees as some kind of an exploited class is ridiculous. By trying to regulate their appearance we’ve committed some atrocious act? That’s preposterous.<\/p>\n
YMO<\/strong>: I don’t think anyone is unsupportive of the working conditions for people who are hired.<\/p>\n
DC<\/span><\/strong>: We had 2500 workers who lost their jobs because the government couldn’t get a solution to immigration reform in place. People are so focused on this narcissistic issue that we’re taking these photos to evaluate these employees… it’s all about tasteful presentation. The majority of people who receive paychecks from American Apparel are people of color – some who weren’t even born in this country, of all different shapes and sizes who receive above standard wages and benefits.
\n<\/p>\n
The Business Effects<\/h3>\n
YMO<\/strong>: But do you think the heavy focus on style over previous experience, skill or ability for employees has contributed in any way
\nto your quarterly same-store losses?<\/p>\n
DC<\/span><\/strong>: I think that the issue of the sales – many retailers are having problems with same store sales. For every two stores who are showing gains, there are 50 that are still having a tough time. There’s a major economic meltdown in Europe that was a delayed reaction to the meltdown here.<\/p>\n
Plus, young people are out of work, and we have a young customer. These are the people we sell to and if they don’t have jobs they won’t be shopping like they did last year.<\/p>\n
And while 7% is a big deal to stakeholders, if you sold $100 worth of shirts last year and you sell $93 worth of shirts this year… I wouldn’t be in a panic. I’m not crying over that. I think again because American Apparel is a lightning rod for media attention it becomes something bigger than what it is.<\/p>\n
YMO<\/strong>: But you don’t think hiring has played any role?<\/p>\n
DC<\/span><\/strong>: We had an intervention by Homeland Security that caused us to lose 2500 workers. As far as our reputation I don’t think the immigration matter hurt us, actually I think it could have helped us.\u00c2\u00a0 Homeland Security didn’t find any wrongdoing on our part. But Obama has failed Latino people because he made a promise that he would end the apartheid conditions for Latino workers who’ve worked here [in the United States] for 10-15 years.<\/p>\n
But for a while, we couldn’t make the sophisticated garments we wanted to make and respond as quickly to trends and changes. Things like button down shirts, that take more skill than a basic t-shirt. We’re bringing in new people, but there’s a learning curve. We’re still hiring more than 1000 people right now.
\n<\/p>\n
What About Those “Off Brand” Customers?<\/h3>\nYMO<\/strong>: Finally, I wanted to ask about customers who wear large sizes. Jezebel noticed that not all of your merchandise is available past a size Medium. {Jezebel<\/a>} Are Large customers “off brand”?<\/p>\n
DC<\/span><\/strong>: No. That’s a misleading statement. We support people in a variety of shapes and sizes. Our men’s line in particular has been geared towards smaller men, because when I’d go shopping I couldn’t find anything for my body type. The Gap and many American retailers focus on the 175-pound male. We service the 145-pound male, but we have larger sizes too.<\/p>\n
We sell probably 5 million garments – about 10% of our production in size XL or above. But we also have a very small store and [our production facilities] were invaded by Homeland Security. We’ve hired 1000 people in the last 6 weeks, but we haven’t had the production capacity for a full range of sizes in all of our products.<\/p>\n
YMO<\/strong>: Just out of curiosity, is there really such a big difference in fabric costs for a size L versus a size S?<\/p>\n
DC<\/span><\/strong>: The cost of a larger size isn’t just the cost of fabric, but the cost of it not selling. When I look at our inventory of unsold items, a lot of times it’s the size L that’s left over. There could be any number of reasons for that. Is it because we alienated them? Is it because the large didn’t capture the market? Is it because that style isn’t designed for someone 5’11” and 200lbs? Should we represent the style in a different setting?<\/p>\n
Online we get crazy with big sizes, but we don’t offer them in the store. And I had a woman who was irate with me because we don’t offer more plus sizes clothes. I hired her to work on the plus size section of the site.<\/p>\n
We’re hiring web developers, we’re hiring product managers, because even just creating a plus size section for the site is a project that can take 6 months. But I want to be in that market.<\/p>\n
This is a company that started with me selling t-shirts locally in Montreal, and I’ve been growing this thing and I’m exhausted. I’m getting punched in the face for the slightest mistake, but it’s going to be fun and we’re going to do the great things.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
When we read Gawker’s recap of American Apparel’s head to toe hiring policy, we thought that checking out someone’s body from top to bottom rather than their resume was a cringe worthy way to do business. Not to mention unprofessional, even if not illegal.<\/p>\n
While he defends the practice of using photos as part of store hiring decisions, Dov Charney insists that American Apparel isn’t checking out anything more than they should (personal style and presentation) when it comes to photo submissions. And you know – he’s believable, even if we don’t agree 100%. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6839],"tags":[3380,3546,3545,3544,3401,3400],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/198.46.88.49\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13167"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/198.46.88.49\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/198.46.88.49\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/198.46.88.49\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/198.46.88.49\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13167"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"http:\/\/198.46.88.49\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13167\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":13235,"href":"http:\/\/198.46.88.49\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13167\/revisions\/13235"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/198.46.88.49\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13167"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/198.46.88.49\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13167"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/198.46.88.49\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13167"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}