Really?
I’ve seen plenty of professional women, in fact I’m married to one. The most onerous thing they have to do is wear a stupid jacket. They virtually always have the right to an open neck and pretty jewelry – no burqa/necktie.
BTW, the form of the word you need here is “in”, not “inn” – unless, of course, you’re living “inn” a fantasy world… 😀
Yeah well said – lets not fool ourselves here
Even though Tattoos are more accepted in western society than ever before there are still many jobs where they are not accepted at all.
I have seen 2 articles in the last few days on people getting their Tattoos removed due to problems getting employment.
Right now in the USA its hard enough to get a job as it is without having hand , neck and face tattoos
I’ve been reading through this thread and i can see a lot of very good points. It is true that when someone decides to tattoo their face neck hands etc they have to expect a certain reaction from people, especially in a work environment.
I work for a huge chain of pubs in the UK and when i started there a couple of years ago, the rule was, no visible tattoos. the end. now however they have recently altered our contracts and employee handbook and it states no offensive tattoos to be on show. (this of course opens a whole new can of worms because what would be offensive to one person, e.g. a suit and tie to zorba, may not be offensive to others. Christmas trees could be offensive or crosses etc etc depending on someone’s beliefs)
However at least this shows that they have come into the 21st century and realised that in this day and age, to expect people (expecially the young people that bar work generally attracts) not to have any tattoos in any visible places, is unrealistic.
I have never had a problem getting a job but then one of my tattoos is on my ribs and so only shown in a bikini and the other the inside of my wrist, (and i wear a very large watch most of the time, not to cover it just becuase i have a bit of a thing with watches! lol) saying that most people are interested when they spot it, not disgusted, though saying that its not a full sleeve of the reincarnation of jesus so that may change things somewhat!
(Just for the record i think men in nice, well tailored suits are REALLY sexy and both my husband and brother really enjoy wearing them even though neither of them currently work in a job that requires them to wear them so i guess its just a matter of different tastes… just like our tattoos 🙂 )
In the state of Connecticut it is against the law to turn someone away because the have ink, that said if it is showing durring the interview they will find someway to not hire you. If you cover them and the go to work and they fire you on the spot, they can be held on lawsuit and will lose.
Discriminating about body art, is as bad as discriminating about race or colour!
I personally haven’t had anything like that happen to me, but one off my good friend’s applied to work under me at a care home for the elderly & disabled.
He had more than enough qualifications & 3-4 months prior experience, along with a shining reference!
He went through the whole interview fine, all was well. Then the interviewer noticed a band off star’s going round his neck (like a half moon, gap at the front).
Needless to say, she said that she couldn’t hire him due to his tattoo’s, she then proceeded to belittle him in saying that only scum scar there body with tattoo’s.
He came back to the flat & he explained all that, he was in tears, sobbing through his hand’s telling me how she had been to him.
After i heard it all, I drove directly over to my work & gave her a very large, very smart (and angry) peice off my mind. I quoted some law, told her about the contract & it not saying anything about body art not being allowed etc…
In the end my friend got the job, after i talked to her supervisor’s, she got a leave off absence & demoted (not fired sadly).
I know that was long but i wanted/needed to share it with you all!
Did you think i did the right thing? Would you do the same?
If this has been off some inspiration to you, feel free to let me know :).
As always <3 Big Andy
There is not a single state in this country where it is illegal for an employer to refuse employment to someone on the basis of a tattoo that the applicant cannot, or is unwilling to, cover. Furthermore, there is no law in any state that would preclude an employer from terminating an employee from an “at will” (e.g. no labor contract) position for any reason he or she deems fit, or for no reason at all.
As a business owner, I strongly disagree. As long as someone is able to cover their tattoos at work, I don’t think it’s anyone’s business. However, if you can’t or won’t cover your ink at the employer’s request, then the employer has every right to refuse employment or terminate you if they feel that it will negatively impact their business. I’m an agnostic that strongly borders on being an atheist, but I wouldn’t wear a t-shirt depicting Jesus and the Easter Bunny playing poker to work because I am certain that it would harm my business. At the end of the day, a business owner’s right to ensure the success of their business trumps an employee’s right to freedom of expression.
If this has been off some inspiration to you, feel free to let me know :).
As always <3 Big Andy
If more people would stand up for themselves – AND stand up for others as you did – there sure would be less BullShit in the world.
If I see pierced/tattooed/whatevered people working in a place I go into to do business – I immediately raise my opinion of the business (from what ever it had been before) as they are clearly not only non-discriminatory, but “with it” and believe in freedom of self-determination.
Good on you Andy!
If I see pierced/tattooed/whatevered people working in a place I go into to do business – I immediately raise my opinion of the business (from what ever it had been before) as they are clearly not only non-discriminatory, but “with it” and believe in freedom of self-determination.
Good on you Andy!
You have not, and cannot, provide a single, valid explanation why any employer should be forced to employ an individual that is going to negatively impact his or her business. If you truly support the freedom of choice as you claim, then you should support a business owner’s choice to do what he or she believes is best for his or her business. The number one objective of any business is profit and a businesses’ primary responsibility is to its stakeholders. Grow up.
Oh please…
YOU are the one who needs to “grow up”.
I’m probably twice your age. I’m certainly DONE with anyone denying me my Goddess given right to self determination in any event.
A tattoo/whatever isn’t going to negatively impact 99.999999% of the businesses out there. Even worse are those idiot employers who have stupid dress codes for jobs that have no customer contact whatsoever. This is 2011, not 1911. Who do these people think they’re fooling?
Employers are increasingly finding that they can no longer hire or retain qualified help from the younger generations with nonsense like this – nor does having white bread employees give the oh-so-sacred “professional” image it once did, quite the opposite. I make it my business to patronize establishments that show a little bit of progressiveness in these areas – and I’m hardly the only one. Needless to say, my employer encourages diversity – its good for our image!
On the other hand Zorba, I work in the complaint department for the second largest grocery store chain in the world after Wal-mart, and you would be amazed at the frequency of absolutely vicious and vile complaints I get from customers offended we employ tattooed and pierced associates for in-store work.
While there’s less of them than there were twenty years ago, there’s still a large number of people with a searing hated for tattoos and feel that anyone who has them is unclean. I’ve seen my company lose business over this more than once when we’ve refused to fire someone for having ink.
And honestly, isn’t that part of the point? Tattoos are still somewhat taboo. While it’s trendy for sorority girls to go get a dime sized rose on their hip, or a cute little swallow on their shoulder, heavily tattooed freaks like us are still outsiders and outlaws. It”s part of what gives the art form it’s mystique. It’s knowing that we know something the uninked don’t, that we’ve experienced something they haven’t, and that some of them hate us for it.
While it doesn’t make it right, a business who refuses to hire heavily tattooed and pierced individuals does have a point when it says it loses them business, especially if they operate in the conservative parts of America (see anywhere that isn’t on a coast).
I think we can all agree on one thing though: While Zorba and D3FiANC3 both make sound points, both of them are phrasing it in a way that’s deeply unflattering to themselves (God damn is it hard to phrase that in a way that won’t get me rebanned).
Bottom line: the more tattooed you are, the more doors you’re going to close for yourself. Regardless of right/wrong, it’s just a fact. It’s the price we pay for who we are.
And that ain’t changing in our lifetimes.
Also, Big Andy, I can’t help but feel that anyone who compares the mild inconveniences us tattooed folks have to the struggles of women, minorities, homosexuals, and the transgendered are self-righteous and self-pitying. There are people out there who face real and pervasive discrimination and by claiming that mantle for us when it simply isn’t true, you minimize their struggles while making us all look like self-sastified children. By all means, don’t stop fighting to open the doors closed to us by our choices if that’s what you believe, just don’t go off and think you’re freaking Rosa Parks over here.
Love. Peace. Metallica.
amen kighthawk……………..
you chose to get tattooed folks……………….you deal with the consequences
you will be judged by others, human nature, its getting better but is not going to go away…………
there is no law to protect you,,,,,,,,,aint gonna happen, you chose remember…………..
if you do not set your career path before getting all that ink that the whole world can see you will be dealing with the consequences on your own………..
zorba is lucky enough to live in california, a very socially liberal state, have lived there myself, for those of you who have not,the 49 states are not quite as accepting (Ive lived in more than a dozen of them)
I’m always amazed at people who essentially go around with a chip on their shoulder LOOKING to be offended. What someone else chooses to do isn’t offensive to anyone – at least anyone sane – as long as it doesn’t hurt them. People seriously need to get a life and mind their own business. Sigh!
We see this in Taliban (and those who think like same) controlled areas of the world – we don’t need/want this in the USA. But we’re getting it, all the same. Beware of anyone pushing their BOOK on everyone else!
Speaking of Grocery store chains – here’s a brief story (as I remember/understood it):
Several years ago, there was a guy who worked for Winn Dixie – I forget in what capacity. He often wore dresses when NOT at work. He was NOT representing Winn Dixie in any way. They fired him over it. As I remmeber it, he sued but they WON! Un-friggin’ believable. Shows how screwed up our court system is. Anyway, I was VERY glad when I heard that they declared bankruptcy a couple of years later – serves them right.
More here:
Its bad enough when employers control people’s self determination on the job – its downright criminal when they get away with it in people’s personal lives. Shades of the 1950s – a friend’s grandfather was even told what kind of car to drive!
You sir, are correct. I tend to (over)react to ranty, self righteous prose with similar.
Very true. Which is why I live here. Of course, social liberalism goes hand in hand with fiscal liberalism – which as a fiscal conservative, drives me nuts!
Still, California leads the nation in many ways when it comes to personal freedoms. Being relatively free of Bible thumpers and other Talibanesque types is wonderful. OTOH, California is also pretty bad as a nanny state and its hard to be a gun owner here.
I carefully planned my ink along with my career………being a rebel is cool, Im a rebel, but I like to eat well also and drive nice cars and own a large home
realizing that employers know ink is a choice, they know they can discriminate and even impose their own moral judgements.
I got half sleeved and covered my non visible body first
when things were looking real good career wise, I got sleeved, knowing I was going to have to wear long sleeve shirts in 95 degree Atlanta heat.
the big question is what does your boss do when he finds out your covered…………..I made sure I hit some record setting dsales and margin numbers with my fortune 500(at the time) and then I let all the VP’s and department heads see me after hours covered……….at that point they usually dont care, they may not like it, but they have already made a judgement on you based upon your performance and work ethic without seeing any ink
At the risk of creating a semantic argument (I hate semantic arguments!), I’ll go out on a limb here and say that I don’t believe in “morals”, only “ethics”. Think about the definitions of each. They often overlap, but not always.
We get ourselves into trouble when we attempt to legislate morals – we should only legislate ethics. Blah, blah…
“Morals” are frequently unethical.
Laws are too!
You must be logged in to create new topics.
