SIR: I was somewhat surprised by your recent leader denouncing the dress code element of the Job Seekers Allowance as 'an arrogant and unacceptable attack on civil liberties' (BEN October 8).

In claiming the Job Seekers Allowance an individual has to prove that they are actively seeking work to receive their full benefit entitlement. Yet in a world where first impressions count, many, many employers will not employ someone who radically departs from the normally accepted codes of dress (ie a neat haircut, clean, smart clothes and a well-scrubbed appearance).

Any individual who arrived at an interview looking unwashed, with various parts of their body adorned with tattoos or body piercing not only insults the prospective employer, but also proves just how unsuitable applicants they are for the position on offer.

It is easy to say that an employer should look beyond the outward appearance of an individual, but if presented with two similarly qualified individuals both capable of doing the job, who do you really think they would employ - the conventional dresser or the individual who appears scruffy and unkempt?

After all, it is surely not too much to expect that someone relying on a benefit only paid to those actively seeking work, conforms to the basic standards of dress and overall appearance that will place them in a far better position to find the job they desire.

To claim that the right to dress in a manner that is unacceptable to the vast majority of employers is of more importance than the opportunity to find a worthwhile job is a far bigger threat to the civil liberties of the few individuals concerned and ultimately undermines the foundations of a society built on mutual respect and understanding.

Graham Kay

Langham Close, Astley Bridge

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.