Mao Zedong: The Unified Minister of Finance

When we are in a critical transitional phase, witnessing positive developments across all sectors, and time is not on our side, it is essential to prioritize better and avoid being distracted by secondary matters. * * * The Deputy Minister of Finance issued a circular regarding the “uniform” regulations for employees of the Ministry of Finance. The term “uniform” drew my attention to the attire worn by hundreds of millions of Chinese during Mao Zedong’s era: a simple, practical cotton jacket in gray, blue, or khaki, with a closed collar, no tie, and four pockets, paired with trousers of the same color, and similar attire for women, based on the principle of visual equality. However, the state soon abandoned that absurd circular after Mao’s departure. The Ministry of Finance justified its circular by stating it was issued to reinforce a professional work environment and eliminate “any ambiguity or confusion” among employees regarding what constitutes an “official uniform” suitable for the workplace. The circular focused on female employees’ attire, specifying that the “uniform” is the abaya. It reiterated that the “uniform” is the shila, which must be in calm and formal colors (!!). It further stated that the “uniform” could be a thobe or a modestly long dress, below the knee, or a jacket or shirt that is covering and appropriate. It emphasized the need for moderation in the use of jewelry and makeup, consistent with the formal work environment. Consequently, all male and female employees are prohibited from wearing tight, torn, or shorts of any kind, as well as short, transparent, or excessively slit dresses, sleeveless shirts, short jackets and blouses, open-chest clothing, sportswear, or wearing hats at work. Tattoos must be covered, and shirts or clothing containing inappropriate phrases or images are forbidden. The statement warned violators of disciplinary penalties. * * * Our questions: 1. Is priority given to productivity, loyalty, and honesty in work performance, or has “clothing become the measure”? 2. Who decides the length of a woman’s clothing? Should department heads carry a measuring tape? 3. What if two or three millimeters of a large tattoo appear? 4. Who decides, fairly, that a female employee’s makeup is inappropriate? Are there known standards, or is it left to the mood of the department head? 5. Should department heads conduct daily rounds among female employees to monitor them and ensure compliance with the decision, and to verify that they are not wearing “excessive” makeup after daily inspections? 6. Since the department head is the one who will enforce the decision, this implies it does not apply to him or to those above him, leading to disparities in “skirt lengths.” 7. To ensure a female employee’s dress is not tight, must the department head walk around her, or must she turn around in front of him? Finally, who decides that the color of the shila is calm and “formal”? Is there a decision explaining what “calm and formal colors” mean? Can the logic of this circular be justified? Should a vital ministry spend the entire workday on matters of control, reprimand, warning, and admonition regarding employees’ clothing, printing and stamping violation memos, halting promotions, deducting salaries, and applying disciplinary measures? What about employees’ ethics, their level of discipline in work, and their dedication to fulfilling their duties? Amid all this preoccupation, will there be any time left for the department head to perform his actual job? And who will hold him accountable if he acts arbitrarily? Finally, “You are a nuisance with all this fuss,” has any authority confirmed that ethics in the ministry were low, work performance was poor, and ethics were declining to the point that this circular was necessary? Ahmed Al-Sarraff