Woman turned away from job interview after being told her style ‘wasn’t appropriate for Boots’

A woman claims she was turned away from a job interview at Boots because of her ‘inappropriate’ appearance.

Rosie Reilly, 26, from Colchester, tweeted the company to express her disappointment at the experience at the Richmond branch of Boots Opticians, writing: ‘Hi @BootsUK. I wasn’t allowed to continue with my interview today because I wasn’t dressed “conservatively enough”. I thought I looked nice!’

She also shared two pictures of the outfit she wore to the interview, which showed her in a knee-length black skirt and buttoned-up polka dot blouse.

Rosie had already met with the brand and was preparing to move on to the second stage of the interview – a trial on the shop floor – when she was told that her ‘look’ wasn’t suitable.

‘I always check what to wear and explain about my hair and piercings,’ she later explained.

‘Boots didn’t tell me to dress in any way but smart casual and that’s what I did. The interviewer said he did like my style but it it wasn’t appropriate for Boots.’

‘When you’re unemployed you’re already not feeling 100 per cent, then something like this can really knock your confidence.’

She added in a later tweet that the criticism has mainly focused on her hairstyle, ‘which does grow over time!’

However, Rosie’s post has been shared over 1,000 times, and she’s received hundreds of supportive comments from people saying that there was nothing wrong with her presentation, with many declaring that they would offer her a job if they could.

‘I think you look beautiful & if you were giving advice on the makeup counter, I’d listen!’ one wrote, whilst another said: ‘You look great! Hope Boots apologise to you.’

A third agreed: ‘You should have at least been allowed to continue the interview and given a chance to prove how capable you are’.

A spokesman for Boots Opticians told Mail Online: ‘We’re disappointed to hear about the candidate’s experience in her interview and we are investigating the matter further.’