Should anti-tattoo discrimination be illegal?

[seeder]

Should anti-tattoo discrimination be illegal?

Tattoos are more popular than ever, but workers can be dismissed from or denied jobs because of their body modifications. Some want protection under employment law. Should they get it?

You're perfect for the job. You have all the skills and experience the company is looking for, and you've turned up for the interview in your smartest attire.

But there's a problem.

If you have a tattoo that incurs the displeasure of the boss, you might find any offer of employment is swiftly rescinded.

In July Jo Perkins, a consultant in Milton Keynes, had her contract terminated because a 4cm image of a butterfly on her foot contravened the no-visible-inking policy of the firm for which she worked. The company said she had failed to cover it up.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-28758900

[+and-then]

If they allow exceptions then they cannot cry foul if some fine lad with horns tatooed on his head and face tatted solid red asks for employment. It's the way of things these days - all or none.

[Stubbly_Dooright]

I'm in the States, so I hope you don't me posting my thoughts here. Tattoos are also getting very prominent here too. I think this is a touchy situation. Well, it is art, I think, and a lot of them are considered personal. Working in retail all my adult life and married to a retired Air Force guy, I always felt you have to be careful of what you wear while on the job. In retail, where your appearance represents the company, I think it's reasonable to have an appearance that invites a customer in. There are some people I know who have tattoos all over their back and their arms, but it is just beautiful, and there are others who have all over and it just looks I'm sorry to say this, messy. It also depends what the tattoo says. That is permanent to a degree. What is personal to the wearer could be offensive to others, and I'm sure an employer will be thinking about that in an interview.

In the military, it was, if it can be covered up by the uniform, then it is ok.

In short, I think you can't discriminate but if your appearance will drive away clients, I think employers have a right to not hire you. I don't think it should be illegal to have tattoos, you should have the right to do what you want to yourself. But you should also be aware what you are doing when you go for a job, because it's what you give a job an employer is thinking about.

[Keel M.]

I think it's within a company's rights to request (not demand) that tattoos be covered while at work. However, I do think it's ridiculous in this case because it's on the woman's foot. I may be in the minority, but I don't really look at someone's feet very often. I may notice a woman's shoes here and there, but I don't walk up to someone with my head down, eyes staring at their feet as I say, "Good morning! How are you today?" or anything else I might say to them during the day.

Edited August 18, 2014 by Child of Bast

[+and-then]

I think it's within a company's rights to request (not demand) that tattoos be covered while at work. However, I do think it's ridiculous in this case because it's on the woman's foot. I may be in the minority, but I don't really look at someone's feet very often. I may notice a woman's shoes here and there, but I don't walk up to someone with my head down, eyes staring at their feet as I say, "Good morning! How are you today?" or anything else I might say to them during the day.

True enough but here in the states we have a carnivore class called attorneys....

[Mr.United_Nations]

I think it's within a company's rights to request (not demand) that tattoos be covered while at work. However, I do think it's ridiculous in this case because it's on the woman's foot. I may be in the minority, but I don't really look at someone's feet very often. I may notice a woman's shoes here and there, but I don't walk up to someone with my head down, eyes staring at their feet as I say, "Good morning! How are you today?" or anything else I might say to them during the day.

i think its to do with how clean is the person, you don't wanna go to a spa where the staff wear tattoos on their feet i guess. I have seen people cover up most of theirs when working, most don't seem bothered about it. Infact what is the point of getting one, where you are going for a job that does not allow that. It seems the media, the BBC are trying to stir things up, with "free rights" etc. But how thats taking away freedom of speech, we can't say anything hateful nowadays before it gets mentioned on the media

[Mr.United_Nations]

Should anti-tattoo discrimination be illegal?

Tattoos are more popular than ever, but workers can be dismissed from or denied jobs because of their body modifications. Some want protection under employment law. Should they get it?

You're perfect for the job. You have all the skills and experience the company is looking for, and you've turned up for the interview in your smartest attire.

But there's a problem.

If you have a tattoo that incurs the displeasure of the boss, you might find any offer of employment is swiftly rescinded.

In July Jo Perkins, a consultant in Milton Keynes, had her contract terminated because a 4cm image of a butterfly on her foot contravened the no-visible-inking policy of the firm for which she worked. The company said she had failed to cover it up.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...gazine-28758900

well thats really her fault, she should of asked that before she got the job or early in

[rashore]

Tats can indeed be covered, and if an employer requests it, it should be covered. Employers can otherwise implement a dress code, tats are something I consider within the dress code.

[spartan max2]

I think people would tattoos should be allowed to work. But i dont think a law needs to be made, your business your choice who to hire.

I think in a few decades this will be commonly accepted anyways

[Neognosis]

No law.

I am heavily tatooed and I cover them during work.

I'll get my neck tatooed when it means that I depend on nobody but myself for my wages.

A private company should be allowed to fire you if they don't like how you look.

[Duke Wellington]

Should anti-tattoo discrimination be illegal?

Tattoos are more popular than ever, but workers can be dismissed from or denied jobs because of their body modifications. Some want protection under employment law. Should they get it?

You're perfect for the job. You have all the skills and experience the company is looking for, and you've turned up for the interview in your smartest attire.

But there's a problem.

If you have a tattoo that incurs the displeasure of the boss, you might find any offer of employment is swiftly rescinded.

In July Jo Perkins, a consultant in Milton Keynes, had her contract terminated because a 4cm image of a butterfly on her foot contravened the no-visible-inking policy of the firm for which she worked. The company said she had failed to cover it up.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...gazine-28758900

In customer facing roles its important to have employees without visable tattoos as it gives out the wrong impression to punters. The same is true for other forms of body modification and ridiculas hair styles.

In back office operations I want staff that conform to rules and the organisations acceptable standards of behaviour. In my opinion that isnt normally people covered in tatoos, peircings and bright green hair. They usually cause problems. Sterotypes very much hold true over this issue (90%) as far as my experiences go.

Edited August 18, 2014 by RabidMongoose

[Mr.United_Nations]

I think people would tattoos should be allowed to work. But i dont think a law needs to be made, your business your choice who to hire.

I think in a few decades this will be commonly accepted anyways

well hes fine becasue he can cover it

[+OverSword]

You know what? If I'm a sales manager at a nice department store selling people pricey clothes and a perfectly qualified person applies who has a tattoo on their neck, I want the right to not hire that person. There are certain companies where the business's owners and managers are going to want to maintain certain standards for their clientele and the government should have no say in this beyond racial or sexual discrimination. People with tattoos on their face made a choice when they elected to disfigure themselves, so let them deal with the consequences.

[+OverSword]

I think people would tattoos should be allowed to work. But i dont think a law needs to be made, your business your choice who to hire.

I think in a few decades this will be commonly accepted anyways

I think in a few decades it will be a passed fad. Younger people coming up will want to be different than their parents and since their parents will largely be covered in ink the kids want to be different..

Also, I'll bet that guy isn't a doctor.

Edited August 18, 2014 by OverSword

[Neognosis]

Also, I'll bet that guy isn't a doctor.

You were doing OK before you dropped a great big pile of ignorance into your post.

[Wickian]

It's all about professional appearance. Just like you can't work at some companies without at least business casual clothing or a Grizzly Adams beard, you can't work at some companies with spiderwebs dripping venom on your neck or hands.

[+OverSword]

You were doing OK before you dropped a great big pile of ignorance into your post.

Why, can you prove he is? I'm just going to assume he posed for those pics for the purpose of creating a meme.

[Neognosis]

Why would you assume he's not? Because a heavily tattooed person could not POSSIBLY have an advanced medical degree?

You illustrate your bias of ignorance in this case.

Here's another:

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20131027/HEALTH_CARE/310279999/for-dr-david-ores-tats-not-all-folks

I am heavily tattooed. I have a master's degree.

Do I really have to waste time posting pictures of people who are heavily tattooed (or pierced) who have advanced degrees, or can we just agree that it is silly to assume that the two are mutually exclusive?

[+OverSword]

Why would you assume he's not? Because a heavily tattooed person could not POSSIBLY have an advanced medical degree?

You illustrate your bias of ignorance in this case.

Here's another:

http://www.crainsnew...s-not-all-folks

I am heavily tattooed. I have a master's degree.

Do I really have to waste time posting pictures of people who are heavily tattooed (or pierced) who have advanced degrees, or can we just agree that it is silly to assume that the two are mutually exclusive?

LOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!! My bias? Do you think you know me? I know many people with bodies including faces covered in tats and I also know highly educated professionals. Some highly educated professionals have a bit of ink but not many. Who is more highly educated or professional than a doctor? I'd say thats a pretty good indicator that it's a fake. For someone who denies bigfoot's existence you sure believe some other stupid things don't you? That is a meme on the internet you're assuming is real. Doctor with both arms sleeved. Right. Edited August 19, 2014 by OverSword

[Skep B]

**EDIT**

Just realized this is a UK thread, and has nothing to do w/ me. My bad, carry on

Edited August 19, 2014 by Scheming B

[Neognosis]

Oh well, I guess you didn't bother to click on the link.

Now I have to decide whether correcting your ignorance is worth the time it is going to take me to look up some tattooed and pierced people with advanced degrees.

I'm a highly educated professional and I am heavily tattooed.

Here's another article on that guy, who is a real doctor. His name is David Ores.

http://www.neatorama.com/2007/09/23/the-tattooed-doctor/#!bF7iW9

I'll await you to concede that the gentleman is a real doctor, and this is not just a fake internet meme.

[+OverSword]

I apologize and stand corrected. I could blame the beer but why bother. Dr. Daves website

Interestingly he does laser tattoo removal.

Edited August 19, 2014 by OverSword

[Neognosis]

Now you went and took the fun out of it!

lol

[some new guy]

Why would you assume he's not?

maybe for the same reason he doesn't assume Gene Wilder is really Willy Wonka?

BEST - Ron

[Neognosis]

I don't assume that Gene Wilder is really Willy Wonka because he's an actor, and Willy Wonka is a character.

I don't make an assumption that a man with a colorful wardrobe could not possibly own a candy factory.