Opinion: Are office thermostats gender biased?

My husband is jealous of my summer dresses.

For men, business casual office attire requires the standard collared shirt over an undershirt, tucked in to full-length slacks, with an optional tie or sport-coat as needed. He wears the same outfits when it’s 95 degrees in August as he does when it’s 25 degrees in December.

Summertime business casual means something entirely different for women. Temperatures nearing the century mark mean tank tops, sandals and flowing, airy summer dresses – a much better option when trying to beat the heat.

But what he doesn’t realize is summer dresses make women a casualty of office thermostat wars.

The journal Nature Climate Change recently published a story saying most office buildings set temperatures based on a decades-old formula using the metabolic rates of men. Developed in the 1960s, it makes sense. There were far more men in the workplace.

Today, everyone knows at least one woman in their office who sits huddled next to the space heater tucked under her desk, has multiple cardigans hanging on the back of her chair or keeps a Snuggie in her desk drawer just in case.

The study offered up a handful of additional reasons for the office afghan party, and most are pretty common sense.

Men typically have more hair on their bodies, which traps in heat, and they typically have about 30 percent more muscle, which generates heat.

Add it all up and it’s logical to keep the office cooler. The men need it.

The study’s release prompted an interesting column from a Washington Post reporter titled, “I wore shorts to the office and nothing will ever be the same.”

Right now, I imagine our president, Dianne Elizabeth Osis, cringing at the thought of men wearing shorts to work – it’s not the traditional business casual.

But if you think about it a minute, it makes a bit of sense.

Shouldn’t people dress to suit the situation, both social and environmental?

The Post’s Christopher Ingraham wore a button-down shirt, lightweight cotton chinos and loafers. Based on the photo, he looked completely appropriate for an office environment, and he reports he was a lot more comfortable, too.

“Which is more off-putting: an uncomfortable sweaty dude in pleated-front khakis, or a cool and comfortable one in shorts?” he writes.

“Thermal discomfort,” as Ingraham terms it, isn’t professional in any situation – be it sweat spots on a guy’s shirt or a lady wrapped in a Snuggie.

According to an in-depth report by the New York Times, the Nature Climate Change study concluded buildings should “reduce gender-discriminating bias in thermal comfort” because setting temperatures at slightly warmer levels can help combat global warming.

According to the study, energy consumption of residential buildings and offices adds up to about 30 percent of total carbon dioxide emissions. Reducing even a fraction of that could help preserve this rock we call home.

Aside from personal comfort and saving the environment, there is a widely held misconception that colder temperatures make workers more alert and productive.

In fact, people make more mistakes when cold, based on a study of 19 workers performing comparable sales order-entry tasks. The correct keystroke rate was higher in warmer temperatures.

So, what’s the new and improved optimal office thermostat setting?

Anywhere between 71 and 74 degrees should do the trick.

I’m frequently hotter at my cubicle than I am cold, but maybe I’m an anomaly. Upon my check just now, the newsroom is set at 73 degrees and, as predicted by the study, I feel pretty fantastic.

Springfield Business Journal Features Editor Emily Letterman can be reached at eletterman@sbj.net.