Corporette.com

Updated: Nov 1, 2018 95 Comments · by

Wednesday’s TPS Report: Bi Stretch Dress

Fashion

This post may contain affiliate links and Corporette® may earn commissions for purchases made through links in this post. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.

Our daily TPS reports suggest one piece of work-appropriate attire in a range of prices.

Bi Stretch Dress A good A-line sheath dress can be oh so hard to find — which is one of the reasons we like this dress from Anne Klein. We also like the pleat detailing at the neckline, the pleating on the skirt itself, and the stretchy fabric — and the fact that it comes in black, a dark gray, and red in sizes 2-16. It's $119 at Anne Klein. Bi Stretch Dress

Seen a great piece you'd like to recommend? Please e-mail editor@corporette.com with “TPS” in the subject line.
(L-2)

About Kat

Kat Griffin is the founder, publisher, and editor-in-chief of Corporette. You can read more about her here.

Comments

  1. Corporate Tool

    This has one too many details for me. Take off the ruched collar, pleated skirt OR the belt. I like the general shape, but it’s a little too busy.

    • Va Gal

      I love Boden! Generally I find their sizing to run slightly large in the same way that Banana Republic, Ann Taylor or other malls stores do. So, when I order Boden, I tend to order my BR or AT size.

      • D

        Yes, please reply about white for fall. I just put away my summer white rain trenchcoat, thinking white is not fall-appropriate.

        • Cat

          Re: white — I think this would look fine for fall, between the dark detailing and the grayish tint in the white. A creamy white also looks nice in cooler weather. If it were a brighter white with say, light tan trim, I would see it as spring/summer.

      • Hildy

        Love that coat. I’ve actually found Boden sizing to be a little snug in the bust and have to order one size up from my usual size in tops and dresses. Not sure if that would also be the case with jackets.

      • Chicago K

        Well I don’t control people’s response time, but I would definitely categorize a 1-2 sentence question as “quick” when compared to a 3 paragraph story outlining something in depth and asking for specific recommendations.

        Just sayin…

      • C2

        I don’t really get all this grumbling about/apologizing for “threadjacks”. Do you really need to read 100 comments about the same dress? I come here for the exchange of ideas and advice.

        • anony

          Agreed. 85 opinions about featured dress=boring. I skip over half of those comments looking for the other discussions, and I’ve learned A LOT. If you don’t like the threadjacks, just skip them!

    • s

      re: sizing, i find that they’re really not for the petite. i’m 5 3, and the jackets i’ve tried from them are too off even for alterations to fix.

    • michelle

      I normally run a 12 in jackets as I am busty and found the 12 from Boden fit fine, certainly not snug.

    • jcb

      I love that coat, have been eyeing it in the teal. I think it could work fine for fall, with purples and grays and blues. Could maybe work with browns, too, you’d just have to try it out and see.

  3. E

    Impossible not to read the product name without thinking “it’s aimed specifically at the equal-opportunity-love demographic, eh?”

  4. CJ in CA

    I usually try to save these questions for Friday, but here goes.

    I’m going to be starting in a job where suits aren’t the norm, but I look better and feel more comfortable with a “third piece” like a cardigan or jacket over a top. I THINK this sweater looks more professional than a regular cardigan, but it might look less professional. What do you think? (Gap Shawl Collar cardigan)

    http://www.gap.com/browse/product.do?cid=8993&vid=1&pid=772007&scid=772007032

    • Chicago K

      I like the cut, but it’s hard to tell if the material may be of a sweatshirt type, which would make it look a but more casual than a cardigan IMO.

      It looks like you are going for one of those sweater blazers I have seen others mention here – which I completly agree is generally more formal than a cardigan.

    • JJ

      I actually just saw that cardigan in the store two nights ago. It’s pretty casual and it’s even displayed in the “casual clothes” section (as opposed to the “work clothes” section). I liked the sweater, but it was too boxy for my figure and the knit is actually pretty thick, also not good for me. I think it will still work with pants, etc in a biz casual work environment, but it is much more casual than other sweater-type blazers out there.

    • Res Ipsa

      It may not be your style, but Lands End has a ton of really nice, professional looking cardigans in their collection this fall. (Sadly for me, the trade-off seems to be that they aren’t offering any suit separates.)

      • kjf

        RE: Lands End

        I went last night to replace my wool pants from LE and noticed they have absolutely NO suit separates this fall. What’s with that?!? I love their pants because I am very tall and can order my inseam exactly where I want it. I then spent the next hour in a search for tall navy dress pants.

        • Res Ipsa

          Very strange, isn’t it? I’m actually going to send them a letter about it. It’s not even listed as a category any more. I don’t know if they have tall sizes, but I recently ordered a pair of reasonably priced navy dress pants from Eddie Bauer. Waiting for them to arrive.

        • Eponine

          Call them. Their customer service is great. It’s possible they just haven’t rolled out their full fall selection yet.

          • kjf

            Great suggestion, thanks. I did just call them and my suspicious seemed confirmed. He said that men’s and women’s suit offerings have been significantly reduced. I’m afraid I am going to have to find another source as my go-to staple lined trouser.

          • Corporate Tool

            Check Lands End Canvas, too. Some of their stuff is suitable as suit separates (no pun intended).

        • mille

          What????? I’m going to die. I can’t find suits anywhere else. I’m a size 22w and that’s where I get my suits now. Why can’t they warn us before they do this????????????

          NOOOOOOO!

    • UnSub

      I saw this in the store last week and it definitely has a more “sporty” vibe. It is a sweatshirt material and I’d use it more for a weekend or casual Friday topper than for biz casual. I did like it a lot, but not for your use, I don’t think.

    • CJ in CA

      Thanks all! Not for me, you’re right, but I’m checking out the ON and Nordy’s ones.

      Kat, if we had a mid-week “Open thread” it might get some of these comments more organized. A lot of people want to update, or ask questions like this. Perhaps it could be an accessory, Etsy, Sales themed post, or just make the 1 year ago on Corporette Post an official “open thread”?

      • MelD

        Target always seems to have a good selection of cardigans as well. I think I’ve gotten 4-5 from there, so they’re good if you like some sort of covering but also like to mix it up and wear different ones!

  5. Elle

    I like the conservative nature of the dress. I don’t *love* it, but would definitely try it on and *consider* it – there’s potential.

    On a more whismical note, the fly-away skirt reminds me of several Disney princess dresses (e.g. Cinderella, Snow White, and even Fiona from Shrek – even though, I know, she’s not Disney). I would have to try my hardest not to bat my eyelashes, faint, curtsy, or break into sing-song throughout the workday.

    • anon

      Reminds me of the skirt of my old Girl Scouts uniform — green with an inverted pleat…

    • Shayna

      The skirt reminded me of a Disney Princess too — once I got past the name which was an attention-getter all on its own…

      But hey, maybe it comes with some singing woodland creatures to help with your work

  7. R.S.

    I thought a sheath dress, by definition, did not have an A-line skirt? Does anyone have a definitive definition for “sheath”?

    Regardless, it’s a pretty cute dress. I think it might work well with boots for fall.

    • jcb

      I had the same thought. I think this is just a dress, not a sheath. But, either way, it is pretty cute! I am thinking tights, booties (finally bought a pair from Cole Haan, black and cut across the top of the foot rather than at the ankle) and a belted cardigan.

      Though now that I think about it, I will probably wear flat tall boots for work and save the high-heeled booties for after/weekends.

  8. Blonde Lawyer

    Quick review on the White House Black Market skirt (item 570003263) posted the other day – the black pencil skirt with the chain. The cut is very flattering and I like how it sits lower on my waist. The chain is detachable and can also be reattached in other configurations. I like it hanging from one button straight down or from a front button to a back button so that it is a side chain intead of a belly chain. Brings me back to my grunge high school days of rocking the big wallet chain.

    Anyways – I am, however, disapointed in the material. I have other cotton/spandex items that are very soft and almost a sweatshirt material. This on the other hand is a crunchy material that reminds me of board shorts or mens swim trunks. It is a much more casual material than what appears in the picture.

    I work in a casual office so I am going to keep it for Friday attire. However, if I saw it in the store, I definitely would not have paid $50 for it.

  10. A-non-lawyer

    I have an update and another question!

    A couple of weeks ago, I asked whether I should call my Dream Firm bc I got an offer from a Good Firm. I did, and Dream Firm is making hiring decisions next week. My contact was glad to hear from me, and I’m very glad I made the call (so thanks for the advice and gentle prodding!). In the meantime, I have gotten an offer from another Good Firm. I’m very very excited! I’m also trying to make some decisions, obviously.

    Good Firm 2 has a billable hours requirement of 1800/yr. Does anyone bill around that amount and have any thoughts on work/life balance for billing that amount? My boyfriend is afraid that we will never see each other and I will become a crazy workaholic person. I assume I’ll want to bill a bit more than that, especially my first couple of years.

    • anon

      Perhaps I have lost all perspective, but 1800 sounds extremely reasonable to me, depending on what they count as billable (huge). Say they define things such that you are able to bill 90% of your working time — then you are working 2000 hours a year. If you take four weeks of vacation, that’s 41.6 hours a week. Now some weeks will be 60, for sure, but maybe others will be 30. It’s a full time job for sure, but it’s less than many full-time lawyers work.

    • Anonymous

      Most BigLaw firms in NYC require 2000 billable hours a year (though some allow some portion of that to be non-billable pro bono, strategic planning, etc). 1800 sounds very low to me.

    • anon

      1800 is pretty reasonable, as far as billable hours requirements go. I always used to divide the annual hours requirement by 11 months (the 12th month is taken up with vacations/holidays.) This works out to about 165 hours a month. (FWIW, I started to notice a big drop off in personal happiness in months where I was billing over 180 hours).

      If you billed 165 hours/month, you will probably feel like you were working reasonably hard, but that it wasn’t crushing. Likely occasional late nights, some weekends, but probably you’d be home for dinner much of the time.

      The thing to figure out is what people actually bill. At my old firm, the billable hours “requirement” was fairly low, but in reality people were expected to bill at least 2100 hours. That does get kind of crushing/depressing.

      Another thing to figure out is how predictable your hours will be. In my opinion its better to have slightly longer hours that you can plan around, than to have a lot of down time coupled with sudden fire drills. But, canceling plans at the last minute is my personal pet peeve.

      But, the big caveat here is that people have different work styles and thresholds for when they start to feel overworked/unhappy. So others may have quite a different take on this.

      • C2

        Yes, this is what I was going to say. My firm requires 1850, but I’m on track (and in the middle of the herd) for 2400. My work/life balance is poor, despite what our marketing materials may suggest. I highly recommend trying to find out the median annual totals.

        • anon

          There is really good advice above. 1800 is a very reasonable. 2000 is the minimum at my last two firms. Plan to stay ahead of your hours so you allow for vacation, illness, slow months etc.

    • Eponine

      1800 is billing an average of 35 hours a week (assuming you work 52 weeks a year), which probably means being at work for 40-45 hours. Since most people take a total of about four weeks off in a year between sick days, holidays and vacation, you’ll need to average 37.5 hours per week, which probably means being at work for 45-50 hours. Of course, that’s a minimum and in reality you’ll almost certainly be expected to bill more. And of course, some weeks or months you’ll have almost no work, and other weeks you’ll bill 70+ hours.

      Anyway, my short answer is that it’s hard to tell whether you’re actually expected to bill 1800 hours, or whether you have to bill 1800 hours in order to not get fired but you’re really expected to bill 2000. In the latter case you’re not going to have much balance. I certainly wouldn’t want to have to be at work more than 45-50 hours a week. But that’s why I no longer work in a law firm.

      • M

        I work in a small law firm that insists on 160 billable hours a month (that’s 2000 billable hours a year) and pays me $45,000/year.

        I’m also the highest-paid non-partner attorney here. The other four get paid less.

        I’d gladly bill 2400/year for a six-figure salary at this point. If you can get a job in anything that’s not a law firm, take it.

        • Eponine

          Yikes. I’m sorry. I hope you’re getting good experience that will allow you to transition to government soon!

          • M

            Thanks! Its certainly turned me into a networking fool – trying hard not to get too bitter before I can get out of here. I’m not sure how this happened – my law school grades were good, scholarship recipient all 3 years, on law review. Just took the first offer I got out of panic (bad choice). But I certainly don’t see myself working in a law firm environment ever again.

    • NYC

      Agree with everyone’s comments above. It also depends at how good you are at managing your time and what percentage of hours in the office you are able to bill. I am pretty efficient, meaning 165/month would be not bad (not work on the weekends and leave by 8 pm much of the time), but it would be harder for my hubs. I am on track to bill 2,000 hours this year and that has been a combo of hard (over 200 hour) months and much slower months. Keep in mind, I will have probably 200 non-billable hours in addition: treatise work, writing articles, recruiting, firm meetings, etc. If you firm expects you to spend a lot of time on those activities in addition to the 1,800, it can add up.

      • BigLaw Refugee

        Right – see if you can talk to some junior associates and get a sense of how much non-billable stuff they are expected to do. Also talk to people involved in the practice you think you’ll be in, and find out how predictable the work is in that practice. If you have to write articles and/or prepare marketing or CLE presentations for partners to give, that takes a huge amount of time. Also find out whether pro bono or any other activities are included in “billable.” Having pro bono included is good because pro bono cases can give you opportunity to do things you might not get to do on your billable cases (like argue in court or at least take depositions). You don’t want that to have to be in addition to meeting your billables requirement.

        I think my old firm may have had a billables requirement of 1900, but I was told shortly after I arrived (as a midlevel) that junior associates in my group should be billing at least 200 hours in a typical month (i.e. could be less if they took vacation or got really sick in a particular month). I think I may have been below 1900 one year, and I did get a surprised comment from the partner I worked with, but when I reminded him of the several hundred hours I’d worked on non-billable projects, he said “oh, ok.” I still got my market bonus. So I’m not sure minimum hours really means anything.

    • Fiona

      I worked at a firm with an 1800 billable requirement for a while. Generally people were in the office from 9 til 6:30-7:00, with weekend work being extremely rare.

      As others have noted, if you can, I’d try to find out from associates there what they are actually working, rather than what the target is. At my firm, 1800 was the true expectation, with even the all-star associates billing around 1820. I personally think 1800 is reasonable and would let you have a healthy work-life balance, but for me, anything tipping 2000 starts becoming unsustainable.

      • D

        Check on what the non-billable requirements are. My firm is 1800 billable but for lawyers my level, we are required to put in 400-500 nonbillable, so it’s more of a 2300 hour committment.

        • v

          Yeah, mine is similar – I certainly cannot bill 90% of my time at the office. 80% is a very good day.

          • anon

            I really think what all this comes down to is what percentage of your time you are able to actually bill. That’s what makes the difference, and job-seekers often don’t know the right questions to ask to find out. Now, some of that is within your control (efficiency, learning to say “no” to optional things). But not always. Almost everyone I know who left BigLaw was in a firm that made it impossible to bill 85-90% of working time — I’d quit such a job too.

    • RR

      1800 is an extremely reasonable billable hour goal. Basically, 1900 is billing 37.5 hours a week. So, understanding that you may or may not really be able to bill just under 8 hours a day (I’ve always had luck with being able to bill most of my time at the office and not getting stuck with a bunch of non-billable crap), even 1900 is reasonable and fine for a good work-life balance. Where it starts to get crazy is in the 2000 range. What you do want to know is what does 1800 mean – 1800 required? 1800 aspirational? 1800 as a floor but they really want 2100?

    • Cat

      To add to the “1800” doesn’t mean “1800 hours at the office” chorus — do you know whether the 1800 is the time that you bill, or the time that actually ends up billed to the client? Some firms force your time to track your realization, which (obviously) can only go one way…

    • Makeup Junkie

      I bill around 200 a month, so 1800 seems like a walk in the park to me. However our firm requires 2000, and if that was all I billed, I’d be out of a job..So find out what the *actual* requirement is, not just what the marketing materials tell you.

    • A-non-lawyer

      Everyone, thanks SO MUCH for your thoughts. 1800 in my area is on the high end. Dream Firm requires 1600.

      I do have an offer, so I know I can ask more direct questions than I could if I didn’t have an offer, so would it be strange for me to ask what average billing looks like? I do know that they do count pro bono in that, and they do not require that you have 1800 hours of work that is actually billed to the client. So, if you work 6 hours on a project, but the partner only bills 4 hours to the client, you get credit for the full 6. (I hope that makes sense.) BUT, I don’t know how far over 1800 is really expected to get bonuses and promoted and whatnot.

      The fact that a lot of you are able to bill that in only slightly more than 40 hours of work per week makes me feel a lot better.

      • Blonde Lawyer

        That sounds pretty good then. We are expected to hit 1800 after write offs, plus do our CLE’s, marketing, pro bono, etc. The other thing to consider is how attentive you are. I CAN NOT work for 8 hours straight even if it is all billable. I have to stop and check facebook, cnn, go for a walk, etc. In any given day, I probably lose 1.5 or 2 hours do to time I chose to not spend billing. I’m working on fixing that. Leechblock helps. Using a tracking program (manic time) helps to keep track of what was billable and what wasn’t. But it is really hard to be honest about your billing and bill for 8 straight non-stop hours.

        • cbackson

          Yeah, ours is 1800, but you’re also supposed to bill 150 horus of “firm time” (CLEs, marketing, etc.), so 1950 in practice. We’re allowed to count some of our pro bono and our written off time goes into the 1800 (but shows up on another performance metric as a negative).

      • Eponine

        It’s fine to ask these questions directly of the firm. If you know some associates on the firm, have coffee with one and ask her in detail.

        • BigLaw Refugee

          I would ask them if you could meet with some associates at the firm. You don’t want to have the partners thinking of you as “not committed” when you arrive, and they won’t give you straight answers anyway. When I joined my BigLaw firm, I met only partners in the interview process, so I asked that I be able to come and speak with associates. They arranged it and I was able to get straight answers on that kind of thing. Or if you interviewed with associates already, just call them up and ask if they could tell you a little more about the firm.

    • divaliscious11

      I haven’t been in BigLaw for several years, but its been at 8 or 9 since 1800 was the standard, and 1800 is reasonable – get on a couple big deals or trials and you’ll hit your billables pretty easily.

    • Bill to the Gill!

      My firm has an 1800 billable requirement. It is a requirement/floor/ceiling. Everyone, senior partners to junior associates bills 1800. This includes time that gets written off for clients and 150 hrs of pro bono work per billable year. I think 1800 is a good number…anymore and I think work life balance would be difficult to achieve. I work “normal” business hours and usually end up putting in one weekend day per month. “Vacations” are difficult because in order to take one you have to bill more before you go and more when you get back…for me, its just not worth it… I stick to 150 hrs per month.

  11. anano

    OK, I just typed a long response and got the “you are posting too quickly” message, even though I haven’t posted anything else today.

    Anyway, 1800 is pretty reasonable. If you work 50 weeks of the year, that’s 36 h/week, or 7.2 hours per day. But keep in mind that 1800 may be a minimum, and you may be expected to do more to be on track for partner, get a bonus, etc. And if you are staffed on things that have deadlines, you will inevitably be working long hours sometimes. But overall 1800 billable sounds good. I would recommend talking to some of the current associates about the hours they work, if you have not already done so (maybe wait until you have an offer to have these conversations though).

      • Lana Lang

        London.

        Yes, yes, I know. It doesn’t count. But if it helps I’m at a BigLaw-aspiring US Firm and the US target is only 1800.

        • anon - chi

          Seriously? I had NO idea that the billable targets were that low other places. Even 1800 sounds crazy low – our *part time* people are expected to bill 1750!

          • v

            A lot of us sacrifice a lot of money for the lower billable hour requirements, though!

  15. S

    Following up on the post from several days ago re: Gap’s Perfect Trouser Pant…

    I tried on the Perfect Trouser Pant this weekend and was somewhat pleased. Although they’re described as sitting at they waist, they didn’t sit quite that high on me (and I don’t consider myself to have a particularly long rise.) They weren’t inappropriately low or anything, but just low enough that if wore them with my shirt tucked in I’d look really boxy (whereas if I tuck a shirt into pants that sit at or closer to my waist I look fine). The quality isn’t super, but it’s better than I had expected.

    I’d love to hear from anyone who owns them and has washed them – how did they hold up? Did you hang or machine dry? Was any ironing necessary?

    • dm58

      I actually purchased them a few weeks ago and (gasp) washed them this past weekend. I let them hang-dry and then threw them in the dryer to smooth out any wrinkles and soften them up. They look perfect to me and I didn’t experience any shrinkage. I washed them inside out . . .

      I’m pretty happy with the pant. Not the softests fabric, but okay and looks good on casual friday at my office.

    • Kandis

      I got mine yesterday, and they have to go back because they’re not long enough. The story of my life.

  16. 75

    I believe “sheath” and “A-line” are both styles from the 60’s. (Mad Men?) I think “sheath” came first. It is a fitted dress with princess seaming (no waistline seam, all fabric runs from shoulder to hem) and typically sleeveless. An A-line dress is from a little later in the 60’s It might have no waistline seam (“Trapeze”) and be kind of short. I think you more frequently hear of an A-line skirt, which flares out slightly from the waist, ather than an A-line dress.

    I think the combination of a somewhat fitted top, a belted waist, and a pleated skirt that hits above the knee is very awkward looking. I don’t want to wear it. I was wearing a knife-pleated skirt earlier this week, but I wore it with a loose top that fell to the hip. I thought that was a nice balanced silhouette.

    I think it is fun to rush the season a bit right now and get into something that looks a bit more like “fall” rather than lie “summer dress”. Especially if you work in the city.

  18. Anonymous

    I actually just bought this dress in red. It’s a great dress, especially for pear shaped women.

  19. Ru

    Tech threadjack: Just got an email from Borders about affordable tablets (under $300!) and different kinds of e-readers. After all that discussion we had earlier, I’m seriously considering one but there are just too many options out there. I may just wait til the end of the year to see what gets released during the holidays.

    If you’re interested in what Borders sells, you can view them here: http://www.borders.com/online/store/MediaView_ereaders with a comparison chart here: http://www.borders.com/online/store/MediaView_ereader-comparison-chart

    • Ms. Basil E. Frankweiler

      I think I am going to take the plunge and buy their Kobo. It’s similarly priced to the Nook and Sony readers ($150), but it comes with 100 pre-loaded books and if you purchase from Borders you get a $20 gift card and $10 in Borders Bucks. I like free things. A downside I can see for a lot of people is that you can’t download wirelessly, but that doesn’t matter to me. And it’s yet another electronic I can charge with my computer, so no never ending hunt for an electrical outlet.

      • Ru

        Hmmm, that’s $30 I could spend at Borders…towards e-books! If you do wind up getting it, please report back!

    • Blonde Lawyer

      FYI – I was just checking out the nooks and they now have a “lending” feature where you can let one person “borrow” your e-book. Just like a real book, you can’t read it while it is out. Also, they have a browser to let you check email, etc. when connected to wifi. Looked pretty cool to me.

      • Ru

        That does seem cool. I was speaking to my brother last night and he said that a new screen is being developed, which can be backlit and once the setting is changed to turn the backlight off, it turns to regular e-reader ink. Which sounds awesome. Devices with this screen may be released next year. I may just wind up finding some ultra cheap e-reader while waiting to invest in a newer generation e-reader. Not sure. Oh the conundrum…

Back to Top

About

Work with Corporette®

Serious Stuff

work fashion blog press mentions