# Kilts in the kitchen?



## macstrat (Jun 18, 2010)

Hello All. So I have a question about wearing kilts in a kitchen. 

I was talking to a friend of my mothers and she mentioned that her son was working in a kitchen, and then she brought up the fact that they were wearing kilts in the kitchen. After hearing this I was not only taken aback, but also voiced my concern for health, safety, and the sanitation of it. I would find it hard to believe a health inspector would pass that (I know mine wouldn't) 

If any of my staff showed up in kilts to work, they would be sent to change. I can understand the airflow aspect of it, but it just seems very unsafe and gross, tbh.

Has anyone else heard of wearing kilts in a kitchen environment? What are your thought on it?

BTW, this is a kitchen in America


----------



## someday (Aug 15, 2003)

I dunno, there are probably some minor-ish safety concerns, like the kilts getting stuck in oven doors, snagging, etc. I think it's unlikely to be a danger for catching fire or something like that. Maybe a small danger of skin exposed on the legs and oil or hot water splatter...probably not a HUGE risk. 

I don't think there are really any sanitation concerns...I don't get that. 

I've seen/heard of female chefs wearing skirts in the kitchen before, doesn't seem really any different than that. Obviously talking calf length skirts, not mini skirts or anything. 

Kilts probably wouldn't be my choice but I don't think I have a huge visceral negative reaction like you seemed to. Not really a big deal to me. I don't think I'd allow it in my kitchen but if it is the uniform at the place he works I don't see why not.


----------



## brianshaw (Dec 18, 2010)

Never heard of it before and never thought about it. I don't see why not either. But it does sound a bit too formal.


----------



## chefross (May 5, 2010)

I would view kilts in the same manner as I would shorts.
Someday, I do not understand your casual concerns. Being scalded by hot oil or water is not a minor-ish concern.
Also the fact that hair is hair whether it is on the face or legs. It falls off, gets picked up by the wind and flies everywhere.
For me, kilts or shorts do not belong in a kitchen.


----------



## foodpump (Oct 10, 2005)

Back in the day when women did wear skirts in the kitchen, some kind of leg covering ( ie pantyhose, etc) was required as well.

If you've ever splashed hot oil, steam, demi glace, caramel ( effin napalm, that stuff is, roux too) on your legs, you'll know why you don't wear shorts in the kitchen, and I see no difference between shorts and a kilt.

If I see anyone in shorts/kilt draining out the fryer or the 80 qt steam kettle, I'll send them to the locker room to change


----------



## macstrat (Jun 18, 2010)

someday said:


> I've seen/heard of female chefs wearing skirts in the kitchen before, doesn't seem really any different than that. Obviously talking calf length skirts, not mini skirts or anything.


from what I gather, these are standard utility kilts, not much longer than knee length, top of calf


----------



## foodpump (Oct 10, 2005)

Oh, and I forgot to say, its pretty standard for most employers to insist on some kind of stocking/panty hose for f.o.h staff wearing skirts as well. Matter of fact most health inspectors insist on this, as well as no open-toed footwear.


----------



## pete (Oct 7, 2001)

foodpump said:


> Oh, and I forgot to say, its pretty standard for most employers to insist on some kind of stocking/panty hose for f.o.h staff wearing skirts as well. Matter of fact most health inspectors insist on this, as well as no open-toed footwear.


Actually it is a common mistake to think that most health codes prohibit the wearing of open toed shoes. Most do not mention shoes at all. Now, I don't know what OSHA has to say about it, and I know my insurance company would probably have issues, but health codes that I know of, don't touch on the subject.


----------



## someday (Aug 15, 2003)

chefross said:


> I would view kilts in the same manner as I would shorts.
> Someday, I do not understand your casual concerns. Being scalded by hot oil or water is not a minor-ish concern.


Being scalded by oil is not minor. Just to clarify I never said anything about being "scalded" or anything, I was talking about platter like from a saute pan or saucepan. I don't think I'm more likely to drop a pot of oil on my legs wearing a kilt vs wearing pants. If you go full on "scald" mode with something, i.e. you drop a bucket of boiling water or hot oil on your legs, you are probably f-d whether you are wearing pants or a kilt. A thin piece of cloth isn't going to stop that much oil or water. If I accidentally step in a stock pot of boiling oil up to my calf, probably won't matter too much if I've got a kilt or pants on.

What I'm saying is the likelihood of it happening is a minor concern, i.e. it can happen, and might happen, but the likelihood is low. Kind of like a fatal car accident...we all drive everyday, and we all might die at anytime in a car, but I don't have it in my mind every time I leave the house.



chefross said:


> Also the fact that hair is hair whether it is on the face or legs. It falls off, gets picked up by the wind and flies everywhere.
> For me, kilts or shorts do not belong in a kitchen.


I don't see what is different about leg hair vs arm hair. Short sleeves/t shirts are worn in many kitchens. I don't think they are less sanitary than others. Is leg hair more likely to fly around than arm hair? Or beards?



macstrat said:


> from what I gather, these are standard utility kilts, not much longer than knee length, top of calf


OK? I did't picture the kilts being halfway down the thigh...not "mini" kilts. My point was that plenty of female chefs wear skirts in the kitchen, and it is no big deal. A kilt, for all intents and purposes, is a skirt, so it shouldn't be much different. I agree that it is a different style for the kitchen, and I don't really see the point unless the owner has a Scottish fetish or abundance of pride or something, but I don't think it is really harmful or otherwise dangerous or inappropriate. Again, I wouldn't do it, personally, but in my mind it is NBD.


----------



## chefbillyb (Feb 8, 2009)

Well if tradition has it men don't wear anything under the Kilt. That being said, I don't want the news people coming to my restaurant filming " Man burns pecker in fryer" More at 11......case closed!


----------



## foodpump (Oct 10, 2005)

Hi billyb,

What would be protocol on a burn like that? Do you strain the oil, or throw it out? Does the supervisor have to apply burn cream, or does the kilt wearer apply it himself?

So many unanswered questions......much easiser to just wear pants and a long apron........


----------



## chefbillyb (Feb 8, 2009)

foodpump said:


> Hi billyb,
> 
> What would be protocol on a burn like that? Do you strain the oil, or throw it out? Does the supervisor have to apply burn cream, or does the kilt wearer apply it himself?
> 
> So many unanswered questions......much easiser to just wear pants and a long apron........


Foodpump, going back years ago I was asked to setup and hire employees for a Waterpark. It was a high volume deal and all I could get for seasonal work was high school kids. In most cases that was fine, but they always had to be managed. On occasion, a mother of my fry cook came to me complaining about her son coming home with blisters on his fingers. After further drilling to get the truth from him he admitted to picking the floater fries out of the fryer with his fingers. He thought he could do it fast enough and not get burned.

Back to the oil, it depends if its Peanut oil or Soy oil.


----------



## brianshaw (Dec 18, 2010)

Have any of you guys worn a kilt before? I would be comfortable doing almost anything in a kilt except ride a motorcycle or climb a ladder. The thick fabric of a kilt may be even more protective than a pair of trousers when exposed to grease splatters, falling knives, etc.... underwear or not. By the way, I know enough cooks (male and female) who go commando to know that underwear wearing should not be assumed.


----------



## someday (Aug 15, 2003)

chefbillyb said:


> Well if tradition has it men don't wear anything under the Kilt. That being said, I don't want the news people coming to my restaurant filming " Man burns pecker in fryer" More at 11......case closed!


I know that you are joking, but the situations in which one would burn their "pecker" (haven't heard it called that in a LONG time) are pretty much identical wearing a kilt or pants...unless someone wants to teabag the hot oil. That person would have issues beyond fashion choice.


----------



## Chrisopotamus (Jul 12, 2017)

pete said:


> Actually it is a common mistake to think that most health codes prohibit the wearing of open toed shoes. Most do not mention shoes at all. Now, I don't know what OSHA has to say about it, and I know my insurance company would probably have issues, but health codes that I know of, don't touch on the subject.


I can't find the rule (it's late) but I'm certain that Florida has a no open-toed policy in the kitchen. It's possible that it might be an OSHA requirement though.

But... have you SEEN some people's toenails and feet? My body - I would require all that to be covered.


----------



## Kiltedchef (Aug 10, 2017)

As my name would suggest, I do, in fact wear my kilts in the kitchens in which I work and have been for the last 7yrs. Firstly, there are no heath codes in which it would violate and as far as the issue of safety, its quite simple, don't be an idiot. I mean most professional cooks and chefs are always safe in our environs. Lastly, as far as sanitation, I do not understand your concern but I will say that I find your overall attitude toward the matter to be quite closeminded and puerile. I would suggest that you look more closely at the culture of the kilted masses and perhaps give wearing one a try some day.


----------



## foodpump (Oct 10, 2005)

Ummm.... accidents happen because they ARE accidents. I burnt my leg pretty badly because the rivets popped and the bail failed on the s/s bucket designated for fryers. I like to think I took every precaution, but sh*t happens. I can kick off my shoes and yank off my pants pretty darn fast, but if I don't have pants to yank off, the burns on my leg will be worse and take longer to heal......


----------



## meezenplaz (Jan 31, 2012)

One also needs to consider the type of material being worn. Cotten for instance, will wick oil and water pretty instantly. 
My understanding is that kilts, and the over-the-calf socks often worn with them are made of wool which wicks quite poorly. I would consider that a safer material to wear in the kitchen albeit probably hotter.


----------



## foodpump (Oct 10, 2005)

Knee length woolen socks? I wear those for outdoor winter activities. There goes the arguement for whsts cooler to wear in the kitchen.

Wonder ehst Gorfon Ramsey's take is on this? He didn't move out od Scotland until he was in his late teens....


----------



## meezenplaz (Jan 31, 2012)

well what can I say, in the commercial inferno environment, maximum safety
and maximum comfort are often on 
opposite sides of the arena.


----------



## Chrisopotamus (Jul 12, 2017)

foodpump said:


> Back in the day when women did wear skirts in the kitchen, some kind of leg covering ( ie pantyhose, etc) was required as well.
> 
> If you've ever splashed hot oil, steam, demi glace, caramel ( effin napalm, that stuff is, roux too) on your legs, you'll know why you don't wear shorts in the kitchen, and I see no difference between shorts and a kilt.
> 
> If I see anyone in shorts/kilt draining out the fryer or the 80 qt steam kettle, I'll send them to the locker room to change


I can't imagine someone wearing pantyhose in the kitchen. Synthetic fabrics (plastics, etc.) actually melt into your skin if there's a fire or extreme heat. I'll never forget this happening to an older lady in my neighborhood. She reached into the cabinet over her gas stove while a kettle was on to boil and the front of her nightgown melted into her chest. She had to have skin graphs for like 2 years. It was horrible.


----------



## harrisonh (Jan 20, 2013)

Seems we have a few millenials trying to make an excuse for an affectation and pretend it's mainstreamed somewhere when we all know it's not.

Kilts have a purpose. That purpose doesn't exist in a kitchen.


----------



## brianshaw (Dec 18, 2010)

“Millennial “... are you using that term descriptively or in a demeaning manner? How do you know who here is a millennial or not?


----------



## hookedcook (Feb 8, 2015)

Its a kilt! What's the big deal. Do you fear all the guys in skirts are going to rub their balls in the customers food?


----------



## meezenplaz (Jan 31, 2012)

No, but personally I would offer that any type of open bottom garment 
(kilt, dress, skirt, nightgown) worn without an undergarment would be 
kind of unsanitary. But that's me.


----------



## brianshaw (Dec 18, 2010)

I dare say that poor handwashing is much more unsanitary than kilt wearing.


----------



## someday (Aug 15, 2003)

Lol, oh god this thread again.



harrisonh said:


> Seems we have a few millenials trying to make an excuse for an affectation and pretend it's mainstreamed somewhere when we all know it's not.
> 
> Kilts have a purpose. That purpose doesn't exist in a kitchen.


That's quite an assumption. I don't think anyone made the argument it was mainstream, just that it's honestly not that big a deal. And I didn't see anyone making excuses, just that it's a personal fashion/clothing choice (that I personally wouldn't make) that most likely wouldn't affect anything meaningful in the day to day work in a kitchen.


----------



## someday (Aug 15, 2003)

Whoops, double post.


----------



## pete (Oct 7, 2001)

hookedcook said:


> Its a kilt! What's the big deal. Do you fear all the guys in skirts are going to rub their balls in the customers food?


I have no problem with guys in kilts, but not in my kitchen. Now before you get your knickers in even more of a bunch, I wouldn't let female cooks wear skirts either. It's a safety issue, as far as I'm concerned. Everyone should be in pants to protect your legs. Stuff splatters, stuff spills. It's about appropriate clothing at the appropriate times. BTW, I do not allow shorts in my kitchens either.


----------



## hookedcook (Feb 8, 2015)

Hi pete, I get what your saying but I might have to bend the rules with a girl in a skirt. If she gets burned then she can join the club


----------



## r.shackleford (Jul 16, 2009)

Besides all the money you could save on Gold Bond think about how practical a sporran would be, you can store your tongs, knives, seasonings, oil, cigarettes, so many options


----------



## macstrat (Jun 18, 2010)

r.shackleford said:


> Besides all the money you could save on Gold Bond think about how practical a sporran would be, you can store your tongs, knives, seasonings, oil, cigarettes, so many options


Thats not a bad idea...The dishwasher-safe sporran


----------



## SnikleChickChef (Mar 9, 2018)

I personally love working in a skirt, so much airflow! Knee length, not flowy, just a good utilitarian skirt. Though most of the kitchens I've been in also allow shorts, maybe due to hot weather? Idk But it's definitely not something to get in a twist over.


----------



## kognqk (Apr 6, 2014)

Centerpiece in the modern kitchen this days are around food -safety initiatives. To identify and PRIORITIZE and control potential problems including chemical , microbial , physical damages , must be for every restaurant , hotel etc.
Food /Safety , Health /Safety law are imperative about improper care , cleaning , uniforms , handling , stop hairs , fibres , contents of pockets getting into the food . All that are Dress code policy .
One of the requirements are uniform to be long sleeved , pants, light colored/ to show the dirt / and prevents skin from touching food .
Next few word are only for curious mind , or for people who care for real what they do in the kitchen.
Fecal bacteria founded in the KITCHEN , kitchen sink drain are more than will be found in the toilet.
wearing Kilts does not fit at any professional kitchen .
but professionalism is as much as people who practice are professionals


----------



## pete (Oct 7, 2001)

SnikleChickChef said:


> I personally love working in a skirt, so much airflow! Knee length, not flowy, just a good utilitarian skirt. Though most of the kitchens I've been in also allow shorts, maybe due to hot weather? Idk But it's definitely not something to get in a twist over.


I don't allow shorts either. Again it is a safety issue....and a business decision. If you spill something, and it will happen, it can very easily splash up on your legs. Now if this is hot soup, hot grease, etc. if your legs are exposed they are going to suffer much more greatly is bare, or in the case of a longer skirt, has the ability to splash up underneath, than if you are protected, by cloth on your legs. By requiring pants, on all kitchen staff, I am not only helping to ensure their safety, but I am looking out for the financial well being of my business also. Any injury one of my staff sustains, is going to cost me money, so it is my financial responsibility to, not only try to lessen the number of accidents, but also try to impact of those accidents that do happen. As someone that was involved in a kitchen accident where I had a number of gallons of boiling water poured onto my leg, and seeing the damage done, when I was wearing pants, I can't imagine the damage had that water poured directly onto my skin. So, while I don't get "in a twist over" it, I certainly don't allow exposed legs in my kitchen.


----------



## someday (Aug 15, 2003)

pete said:


> As someone that was involved in a kitchen accident where I had a number of gallons of boiling water poured onto my leg, and seeing the damage done, when I was wearing pants, I can't imagine the damage had that water poured directly onto my skin. So, while I don't get "in a twist over" it, I certainly don't allow exposed legs in my kitchen.


In your scenario of having a number of gallons of boiling water poured on your leg (sorry, that really sucks BTW), what protection do you think a few MM of cloth provided you?

If there is a bucket of fryer oil on the ground, and somehow I step directly into it, it won't matter if I'm wearing shoes/socks or not. In fact, in that scenario, the shoes/socks might be less of a benefit because it would allow the oil to "stick" to my foot even longer.

Also, my understanding is kilts go down past the knee, and you wear heavy knee length socks with them. So the area of exposed skin is limited.

Anyways...I'll say again. I'm not really personally in favor of kilts in the kitchen, but I don't think there are massive safety issues like the rest of you seem to think.

Fecal matter? Get outta here...kilts are no less sanitary than other forms of clothing.


----------



## foodpump (Oct 10, 2005)

I just don't get it with the kilt thing....

Look, every kitchen I've worked in, either the employer provided uniforms, or, in Europe, the employer had a dress code you adhered to--which was pretty much the same thing, cooks jacket and pants. In any case you wore that uniform or were subject to discipline. No, you can't wear your favorite ball cap, a sweat rag, a "party till ya puke" t shirt, high heels, or long uncovered unmanageable hair. 

The whole idea of a uniform is that--uniform. everyone might dress the same, but you are identified by the quality of your work, not your clothing choices.

The cooks uniform--contrary to what many clothing designers believe-- has developed out of neccesity, common sense, and protecting as much surface area of your skin as possible.

So I wonder, what do cooks wear in say, Glasgow, or the Shetland islands? Pretty sure it's a standard cooks jacket and pants.


----------



## pete (Oct 7, 2001)

someday said:


> In your scenario of having a number of gallons of boiling water poured on your leg (sorry, that really sucks BTW), what protection do you think a few MM of cloth provided you?
> 
> If there is a bucket of fryer oil on the ground, and somehow I step directly into it, it won't matter if I'm wearing shoes/socks or not. In fact, in that scenario, the shoes/socks might be less of a benefit because it would allow the oil to "stick" to my foot even longer.
> 
> ...


It's not thick, but it still offers some protection. In my case, it probably didn't offer much, as the amount of water was significant, although I still feel that without pants, that water hitting my bare leg would have done a lot more damage, but in more regular scenarios where a cook might drop a sauté pan with oil in it or a smaller sauce pot with a quart or less of sauce, those pants will protect, not only as the stuff falls but after it hits the ground and the liquid bounces back up. I agree, that if a kilt is properly worn, with the proper length socks, it does limit the amount of exposed skin, but when I was in the punk scene, and lots of guys were wearing kilts they were wearing them with combat boots and socks that just barely come above said boots. As a chef, I don't want to have to do "sock" patrol also. As for your shoes and sock comment, we can always come up with scenarios where protective equipment and clothing can cause more damage (the "what if my car stalls on the train tracks and I can't get my seatbelt unfastened in time" argument) but those are the exception, not the rule. And in my instance, I would have been better off in open toed shoes as my shoes filled with water and kept burning until I could get them off. Luckily, for me, I got my shoes and socks off, before skin cooked enough to come off with them.

I agree, that they are necessarily a "massive" safety issue, but I do feel that they are less safe than pants, and I am not willing to allow my cooks to put themselves in a situation they will regret, nor am I willing to pay higher medical bills, because my cooks want to wear something that I believe is less safe. And, yes, I know it somewhat hypocritical of me as I don't require my cooks to wear cut gloves.


----------



## kognqk (Apr 6, 2014)

cooking is enjoyable, depending on whoever practices , but before that must be safe . There is nothing more important than your own health .
a lot of people this days are involved in to this wonderful craft because of wrong reasons , attributed to TV shows, shiny cooking , fancy knifes etc. gives impression how wonderful kitchen life is . Today we will use this and that and we will make a fusion today ,inspired by another shiny idiot from another absurd tv show.
Кitchen is a dangerous and hostile place .
Chefs, like many professionals, wear their uniforms practically every day ,to be PROTECTED from every day kitchen dangers. Hot spills , splatters , burns …etc….Specific design apply for / talk about real uniforms . No cheapest junk that companies buy just to tick the boxes Work Done/
Chef uniform are barrier can potentially offer some protection starting from temperature differences ,thermal hazards to unpredictable one .Multiple layered fabrics with increased insulation , water impermeable barrier , pants , comes up to increase the level protection. 
Тoday there are wonderful fabrics, light, comfortable , for all-day comfort and Real protection.
Cooking is not a game , work in the kitchen are not that safe as many people think .
I still remember 20 years ago, how 40l of hot glucose took off the skin of a young woman 27y who decided to work on a short sleeve and shorts / because kitchen are hot place /. lawyers, courts for about 2 years …………………..nightmares . another question is that , she become cripple.
*the problem is not in to wearing a kilt.
the problem is in the one , the person who allows it that to happen*


----------



## someday (Aug 15, 2003)

Nobody has described a scenario in which a kilt, with the possible exception of some minor splatter burns to the legs, is more dangerous than any other form of lower body covering. In the scenarios which are described above the results would be the same, i.e. someone spills boiling water or scalding oil on a leg. Apart from some industrial style protection, there isn't anything practical in the kitchen that would help against that. You're f-d either way.

I also remembered this little clip from the wonderful (and far superior to the American version) Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares...


----------



## foodpump (Oct 10, 2005)

O.k. Just for arguments sake.

You have a kilt, which if I understand correctly is made of heavy-ish material. Then you have knee high socks, which are knitted, maybe not wool, but definitely keeping your legs nice and toasty.

So on a hot summers night behind the line, what comfort advantages does a kilt and knee high socks have over a light weight fabric pair of pants and ankle length socks?


----------



## foodpump (Oct 10, 2005)

P.s., thanks for the link, got a blast out of that--a spoon shoved down your sock "for emergencies". Then again Ramsey IS Scots, born in Glasgow.

But bagpipe music in the kitchen IS NOT up for discussion.....


----------



## foodpump (Oct 10, 2005)

P.s., thanks for the link, got a blast out of that--a spoon shoved down your sock "for emergencies". Then again Ramsey IS Scots, born in Glasgow.

But bagpipe music in the kitchen IS NOT up for discussion.....


----------



## jay lancaster (Aug 26, 2016)

The FDA Code does not specify attire that I am aware of. So no infractions there. Local codes may be different.


----------



## tombrooklyn (Feb 19, 2003)

I had planned to look at a lot of men wearing kilts today, but I wasn't able to make it to the parade. Many kilts are pleated and would therefore be subject to billowing. They would seem hazardous in terms of getting caught in and on things.


----------



## cstanford (Jul 3, 2008)

One endeavors to expose less skin in a kitchen rather than more and hopefully for obvious reasons. Kilts in the kitchen is an idea absurd on its face. The inevitable very bad 2nd if not 3rd degree burns will convince management that it was a bad idea. Maybe it would work in an ice cream shop.


----------



## someday (Aug 15, 2003)

cstanford said:


> One endeavors to expose less skin in a kitchen rather than more and hopefully for obvious reasons. Kilts in the kitchen is an idea absurd on its face. The inevitable very bad 2nd if not 3rd degree burns will convince management that it was a bad idea. Maybe it would work in an ice cream shop.


Explain to me in what situation you would get 2nd or 3rd degree burns wearing a kilt that you wouldn't get by wearing a normal pair of pants.


----------



## cstanford (Jul 3, 2008)

someday said:


> Explain to me in what situation you would get 2nd or 3rd degree burns wearing a kilt that you wouldn't get by wearing a normal pair of pants.


Chefs' attire is loose (but not overly so) for a reason. Now you know why. Any close-fitting apparel like jeans, tight fitting shirts, etc. or none at all (shorts, kilts, or whatever exposes bare skin) will result in the worst burns, especially hot grease splatters and the like. It holds the hot grease or whatever right next to your skin.

This is basic shit that everybody ought to know.

One of about a kajillion references on the subject:

*Why are Chef Pants Baggy?*
Chef pants are baggy to help keep chefs cool in the kitchen, which can be an extremely hot environment. As well, the loose pants give cooks room to move around with ease, bend over, etc. Chef's pants often have large pockets in them to accommodate kitchen tools or hand towels. Loose fitting pants also help protect from burns.

Today, you can purchase houndstooth or black and white checked chef pants from a number of manufacturers. Pants can also be bought in many solid colors, striped patterns, abstract, food or kitchen-ware patterns.

Lightweight cotton or mixed synthetics are used, sometimes with a Teflon coating, to resist stains and protect from burns. Tight fitting pants, would be very dangerous in the case of a hot oil spill, as the fabric would hold the heat right against the skin. Loose fitting trousers help keep the hot oil from contacting the skin. At the same time, an overly baggy style is sometimes worn by chefs in the U.S. and this can present its own safety hazard. If the material is too loose, it might catch on kitchen equipment, or even catch on fire.


----------



## someday (Aug 15, 2003)

cstanford said:


> Chefs' attire is loose for a reason. Now you know why. Any close-fitting apparel like jeans, tight fitting shirts, etc. or none at all (shorts, kilts, or whatever exposes bare skin) will result in the worst burns, especially hot grease splatters and the like.
> 
> This is basic shit that everybody ought to know.


Again, explain to me a situation that you would get 2nd or 3rd degree burns wearing a kilt that you wouldn't get by wearing pants. Grease "splatters" don't result in 2nd or 3rd degree burns.


----------



## ktanasy (May 6, 2010)

I’m an American Chef and a professional. I believe that kitchens should be operated in a professional manner, this includes staff wearing proper attire. Makes no difference what your hobbies might be. Even women wear pants in the kitchen, much of this has to do with kitchen safety. 
Besides why would anyone want to wear a kilt in the kitchen?


----------



## someday (Aug 15, 2003)

ktanasy said:


> I'm an American Chef and a professional. I believe that kitchens should be operated in a professional manner


I'm pretty sure we all think that, don't we? I don't personally think that a uniform choice dictates how professional or not a kitchen is.



ktanasy said:


> Even women wear pants in the kitchen


Unreal, right? Women do all sorts of crazy things now-a-days.



ktanasy said:


> much of this has to do with kitchen safety.
> Besides why would anyone want to wear a kilt in the kitchen?


Again, I'd ask what safety issues you imagine would happen with kilts that wouldn't happen with pants. What is someone more likely to do or have done to them wearing a kilt?


----------



## foodpump (Oct 10, 2005)

HI Someday,
,
Well, yah, you make a good point. However, a few posts ago, March 10, I asked if there was an "edge" or any bonus into wearing a heavy material kilt and heavy knitted knee high socks in a hot, chaotic kitchen on a muggy August afternoon.

Is there?


----------



## someday (Aug 15, 2003)

foodpump said:


> HI Someday,
> ,
> Well, yah, you make a good point. However, a few posts ago, March 10, I asked if there was an "edge" or any bonus into wearing a heavy material kilt and heavy knitted knee high socks in a hot, chaotic kitchen on a muggy August afternoon.
> 
> Is there?


I don't think, nor have I ever said, that there are advantages to wearing a kilt. I'm only saying that the potential negatives in wearing a kilt aren't as bad as a lot of people seem to think or are arguing about.

I'm arguing against the idea that it is MORE dangerous (again, it might be, but I would argue only marginally), not arguing that it is in any way beneficial.


----------



## foodpump (Oct 10, 2005)

Fair enough...

Actually, I' m a bit jealous of your way of thinking, in some ways it's a luxury I never had.

There's a difference between the American expression of " the squeaky wheel gets the oil" and the Japanese expression ( loosely translated) of " the nail that sticks out gets pounded".

Growing up in the praries, my life was governed by the Japanese expression. Bring an umbrella to school, you get the ( deleted) beat out if you, wear red, same thing, if you didn't wear Levi's--or God forbid, you wore Wranglers or Lee jeans, same thing. High school was even worse, and compounded if you didn't belong to ( preferably) a) the jocks, b) the stoners, the c) drama geeks, or d) the egg heads.

Getting my first job as a dishwasher at 16 was an escape from this crap. You simply went to housekeeping and got a uniform, same as everyone else. You were judged by your peers on your performance and output, not clothing, and this is one of the main reasons why I continue to work in kitchens for over 35 years now.

Matter of fact most jobs in my life so far the employers provided a uniform and you never thought twice about wearing something different. And it's because of this I just can't wrap my head around wearing something different in the kitchen.


----------



## someday (Aug 15, 2003)

Asian cultures generally celebrate interdependence and conformity and tend to ignore the exceptional/outliers. They find their role in society and look at their respective role as it fits into the larger ideas of country, family, etc. 

Western cultures generally celebrate individual achievement above anything else and recognize the self identity of the individual above most other things. Independent thought, not being a "sheep," etc are all valued above most other forms of identity. 

Your point is a bit lost on me though, since the OP was stating that kilts were the uniform in the kitchen he worked at. It sounds like the OP friend's kitchen is providing them with the uniform that they all wear...so in that kitchen, if you wore something other than a kilt, you'd be the one wearing something "different"


----------

