Tattoo discrimination...thoughts on it?

[candyman]

Well after getting a start on another upper arm piece this weekend my Sgt informed me that with a new Army policy coming into play I probably won't be allowed to reenlist. When the war started they needed more troops so policy allowed them to be everywhere...including the arms and neck. Now, unless you had them before you enlisted you can't have anything visible beyond the decently short work sleeves...it used to be that it couldn't go past the wrist. Frankly I don't give a fuck...if they want to play like that I will just leave. I have been praised by my unit for the work I do and have ASVAB and GT scores is the top tiers so while I may not be the second coming of Christ I can damn well do my job...by they will let me go because of tattoos.

I know THAT will not change if they approve the move but I do have questions for both that tattooed and non-tattooed people out there. While tattooing is a personal choice can it be considered discrimination if you are not hired based on that fact? Covering them up is one thing, its easy to deal with. I mean people preach at me about accepting this and dealing with that and "oh if you say something to them about it you can get sued" and on and on and on about this coexist stuff. Yet, if I smoke with short sleeves on I get so many people that must consider me the Devil for both the smoking and the tattoos! Why are some personal choices ok but others are just beat on? What people say to me...as in the way they say it...gives me the impression that they are really saying "hey why are you so stupid? you must be an idiot".

I just want a little input on this because all through high school, college, the Army, and even as a regular civilian I always hear "acceptance" and "don't discriminate" and yet it seems like these same people make little cutouts for things they don't like...which seems pretty fucking two faced if you ask me.

Also, and this is not actually how I think just something brought up in a discussion I had. Personal choice or not the key is that it is all about perception...buy both parties. Not all tattoos are good but, just like EVERYTHING, tattoos can be abused by people...like offensive artwork. Shit, people abuse the most basic, every day items. And when it comes down to the perception thing that also factors into...oh, people seeing someone of Hispanic origin and thinking about illegal immigrants right away, or seeing someone of Arabic origin and thinking about a terrorist. So why do we have to give people a pass? Perception has proven itself wrong so many times...with racism and thinking they are lesser human beings, sexism and thinking women are weaker a dumber...but even with the rise in people with tattoos its still OK to perceive them as...well whatever these people think.

No argument starter or anything...no anger involved...just brought on by recent events in the Army at least and because I always hear stories from friends in the civilian world...

[torn asunder]

personally, the line, as i see it, is pretty clear - *in general* (because i can't possibly consider every single imaginable scenario), if it's something about which you have no choice (handicap, race, gender, age, etc) if you're denied something due to that, it's discrimination. again, *personally*, i feel if it's something you choose (tattoos, piercings, hair style/color, wardrobe, etc) it's well within any entity/company's rights to choose to hire a candidate that they feel better represents their personal business image/philosophy.

[Fierce Critter]

When I worked in corporate jobs for companies like AAA and a Dearborn company that basically provided white-collar contract personnel to Ford Motor Company, I was called on the carpet a few times.

At AAA (circa 1992), it was for just barely skirting the rules of "proper business attire." (Things as tame as capri leggings with tunic tops for instance, or red suede boots with a skirt.)

For the FMC contractor (circa 1996), it was my hair. Over a vacation, I got my natural dark blonde hair cut into a layered shag, and dyed the underlayer (including bangs area) vermilion. I'd hoped that it wouldn't be an issue. For one thing, it actually looked very attractive, and tasteful. It's not like I had a mohawk or shaved half my head. But first day back on the job, I was called into a meeting. I'd already got wind that they were going to give me grief about it, so I went in and told them I was already planning to have the color removed. I ended up stripping the color myself to a nasty shade of muddy pink, which looked infinitely worse. So I ended up getting it all dyed strawberry blonde until it could grow out.

I've long had the attitude that if appearance isn't a direct factor in a business, it shouldn't be made a major issue. In the AAA/clothing situation, I was an in-house secretary for an attorney who did nothing but refer cases to others. No clients ever came into the building, period. I would never be in a position to go out of the building to a courtroom, clerks office, NOTHING. In the hair situation, I was in-house desktop publisher/newsletter editor. I was not one of the contractors who might be sent out to Ford, or anywhere else for that matter.

I was far from being the "face of the company" in either situation.

Where tattoos are concerned, I don't have any and won't have any. I just prefer myself a blank canvas. But so long as a tattoo isn't in some way obviously risque (tits, dicks, Minnie giving Mickey a blowjob) or controversial (swastikas, middle finger salutes, etc), I think the time has come to stop making them anathema in the workplace. I do realize that what is considered risque, controversial or offensive is up to debate (I don't have a problem with a pentagram but a Baptist bookstore might), and would be a cause for misunderstandings and debate, or worse. So that would still be cause for some amount of discrimination and censorship.

Basically, I think people need to get over it and be realistic about what does and does not wreak havoc in the workplace.

Oh, and if you have a problem with this, I saw this the other day (there is some possibility the parent company does animal testing, that's up to you to work out):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeO8RthMANg

[candyman]

personally, the line, as i see it, is pretty clear - *in general* (because i can't possibly consider every single imaginable scenario), if it's something about which you have no choice (handicap, race, gender, age, etc) if you're denied something due to that, it's discrimination. again, *personally*, i feel if it's something you choose (tattoos, piercings, hair style/color, wardrobe, etc) it's well within any entity/company's rights to choose to hire a candidate that they feel better represents their personal business image/philosophy.

I understand that to an extent. In the case of the Army though it is something different. They have allowed it before but are constantly wobbling back and forth on the regulations...and people get denied reenlistment because of that in some cases. But then again it is a different case in a way...however I have heard of other companies adopting policies like that and NOT grandfathering people in that already had stuff...so long time workers were fired.

The other thing is that many of the positions denied to people I know were either not glorious jobs or were jobs that kept them from the eyes of the customers...like dock workers, truck loaders, and other stuff where the only people that see you at work are your fellow workers.

I think part of the problem is that people are still kinda...I guess you would say afraid of tattoos? And more and more companies are losing the right to say what goes on in the workplace with regulations and such because of forced action telling people what to do with their business that THEY own...usually because of things like lawsuits and union action. Also, personal choice or not the mental processed used is still the same...like a quest to control what is normal and right with proper people. People want peace, to coexist, and all that other happy shit but frankly that all unravels with something as little as a tattoo or any other little detail in the whole scheme of things. I just think easing up on it would be a step forward...

[torn asunder]

hey don't get me wrong, i personally believe that you should be able to have a blue mohawk, and piercings all over and be a lawyer or a politician, or a tax accountant, etc... i think the entire US is too uptight about stupid shit like this, but i do think it's their right as a business to make those choices. the govt? well, they're just fucking stoopid...

[Soulrev]

Yeah it's not just your tattoos man. It's because the Army is over strength now. They're trying to kick people out as much as possible before they start cutting down on ranks. For example, here on Fort Carson if you want out of the Army just get a DUI.. First offense or not, doesn't matter.. DUI, and you're out no excuses. They're cracking down on shitbags before they have to discharge good soldiers.. The tattoo policy is just another "excuse" to thin out the ranks, though a shitty excuse I will admit, but that's what they're doing. Nobody wants to get out right now because of the economy, so this is how they're handling that.

[Vater Araignee]

Your employers dress code is you employers dress code as is their right.

I had to destroy a silver septum ring that cost me $100 to have put in because it was 30 gauge wire with multiple pass through's and wrapped around its self when I became a welder because of a no metal jewelry policy for welders listed under the dress code instead of safety. That also included earrings regardless of sex. One fem got caught with a nipple ring and was fired, an arch jumped to it blowing a hole in her uniform and burning her.

We also could not have more than 2 square inches of tattoos that could not be covered up by the minimal uniform, button up with sleeves removed nor could we have them from the neck up. I heard a dude got fired because of a tat and a receding hair line.

I suspect that what is happening with TAF is what happened in the 90's when my father got forced into early retirement over 10 lbs that he couldn't keep off, they are looking to reduce the numbers.

Wile I agree with a reduction I can't agree with superficial methods to do it and will never agree with reduction wile mercenary's are on our payroll.

There ya go, you can probably get a job as a merc fast with Xe Services.

[bean]

When I first started working for my current employer, I covered up my tattoos. Once I proved myself as a good employee, I stopped covering most of my tattoos. Nothing has been said to me about it, but I know it would have when I first started working there, because the owners and some of the other workers are rather conservative. I cover my tattoos up when I see clients, and I plan on continuing to do so because I am aware that some people have preconceived notions about tattoos and the people that choose to have them. Plus, I don't want my art to influence anything that goes on in session. Therapy is about the client, not me, so that part of me stays private.

I agree with what Torn wrote. Companies have the right to have their own policies. If you don't like it, don't work there. Does it suck? Yes, but that is the way it is.

There is another aspect to all of this too. It's all how you present yourself. People generally look more negatively at someone who has tattoos and acts like a pompous ass, than someone who is pleasant, but also has tattoos. On the nice person, the tattoos aren't really even noticed. On the asshole, the tattoos add to the dickishness.

[candyman]

Well being a mechanic helps with this...because no matter where I work my arms are covered...either by long sleeves of short ones with forearm protectors. Luckily the discussions in the military are really bearing down on the fact that IF they pass something on tattoos then those that got them before the new regulation shouldn't be punished.

And what gets me even more than the jobs part is the stupid questions people ask...like I am a 2 year old. Yes I know it is permanent, when I get old and wrinkly who cares if there is in there too, and I didn't get them for you so stop talking to me. I don't get it...I don't like a ton of other personal choices but unless they make you an unproductive asshole I usually don't say shit to the average person...almost punched my uncle who is a fat drunk that constantly speed with no seatbelt and is almost always broke from buying new electronics and other things for his drug addicted son...yet he always calls me out at family gatherings for my smoking and tattoos. I am starting to think that I just really REALLY don't like people all that much.

[Rayne]

Luckily, the six on my back are covered up most of the time and easily.

My other two are the Japanese Kanji for "rain" on my inner right wrist and a radiation symbol on my inner left wrist. Not as easily covered, but I haven't had any issues with any prospective employers. I'm in the Criminal Justice (law) field and have met with three county's agencies around the area so far and no one has been opposed to my tattoos ... and I asked. They did say anymore visiable would probably start to count against me

[candyman]

I guess it might just be luck in who you talk to or when you talk to them. I know people of very high rank that are literally covered from head to toe in tattoos...a First Sergeant of a company with full sleeves, torso, and full legs and there are 2 Captains and a Colonel with the same. One thing I seem to notice is that they seem a bit nicer, as in more personable and ready to take on problems for individuals that they could ignore, than the ones that comment on people having too many tattoos. Not ALL non-tattooed people are like that I just find that there are too many people that think if they don't like it then the people with them should damn well know how big of a "mistake" they made.

[phee]

[Guest Megalicious]

I wear long sleeved scrubs for a reason. I wear NON V necked scrubs for a REASON. But most of my stuff is covered up anyway on any given day. The only ones that are really visible some of the time are my feet/tops of my feet. When I wear flip flops or ballerina flats (which is ALWAYS).

On the strange occasion that I wear short sleeve scrubs, rarely,if ever, do get discriminated against. I have found as long as I approach work/school knowing what I need to know and treating others with respect (though we may be polar opposites) I don't have issues in the slightest. In my line of work people know we do what we do be cause we love it, we have big hearts and we are, for the most part, good people.

It does start many conversations though. *nods*