Tattoo discrimination to be illegal?

[LucreLout]

If I start a successful business, then it is I that will choose who is hired and who isn't.

The law may prohibit me from telling you I don't like your religion or other attribute, but all that can ever truly accomplish is forcing me to lie to you and give another reason. Don't like it? Start your own company then. (note: I don't own any businesses)

Larger companies might struggle a bit, but then you'll always find teams that the manager runs however they like, gambling that hr won't notice.

[voyds9]

Would you trust a tattoo artist with no tattoos

[jonah35]

Its strange isnt it.

Why wont Manchester United employ me as their striker? Is that not discriminatory?
How about me not getting a job as a catwalk model? Discriminatory?

Everything in life is discriminatory to a degree.

Promo girls, models, boxers, salesmen, everyone is employed because of a particular skill or look.

Could you sue your employer if you had a fully tattooed face and, as a result, perhaps made fewer sales than a non tattooed car salesman? Would that be your employers fault or your own?

Could you sue a woman if she didn't want to date you because you were ugly?

How about fat ism being a legal employment law?
What about height ism?
Accentism?

[Jasandjules]

julian64 said:

So the question is, will tattoo get protection under discrimination laws?

I hope not.

Discrimination should be reserved for important issues IMHO. Otherwise it gets too dilute.

Oh and I have a tattoo.....

[Pit Pony]

Coming from white middle class professional parents, with social liberal Christian views on the world, I have been taught that everyone is equal to their particular GOD. I was also taught that only Criminals and Lowlife and Sailors and Labourers have tattoos, because they are a bit "skummy". Whilst I know this is a very old fashioned view of the world I still struggle not to see tattoo's as something to be avoided. One of my nieces has numerous tattoos and it doesn't help my stereotyping that she lives her life like erm DEE from benefits street.

However, I'm also very pragmatic. When I used to interview people, I focused on their skills and personalities, and achievements, and if they had a spider tattoo of their face, I'd try to forget that.

[Rovinghawk]

If I'm hiring a bricklayer then a couple of tattoos is no biggie.

If I'm hiring someone in a customer-facing professional position then it's more of an issue.

I see it as no different to a company enforcing a dress code.

[anonymous-user]

Rovinghawk said:

If I'm hiring a bricklayer then a couple of tattoos is no biggie.

If I'm hiring someone in a customer-facing professional position then it's more of an issue.

I see it as no different to a company enforcing a dress code.

This.

The correct answer is 'it depends', and like RH says above, it depends on the job.

If you had a business such as a tea/cake type Cafe whose prime customer base was little old ladies in the afternoons, you wouldn't employ someone with visible tattoos and piercings all over them.

[mybrainhurts]

Can't we just ban tattoos, aka walking graffiti...?

[paranoid airbag]

Miguel Alvarez said:

I wouldn't want to work anywhere where I am just there to fill a quota. I can't really make it any clearer than that. If a company wants to employ someone because they prefer their look for whatever reason then I hold no malice towards them and wish them luck as by the sounds of it they are going to need it. They'll probably be out of business if they make choices like that. I'm not shy of hard work I went to school, passed my exams and consider myself to be reasonably intelligent so I won't be out of work long if a situation arises.

It also may shock you but there ARE white people in positions of power who ARE NOT racist.

I know right. Zany isn't it.

What's the world coming to?!?!?

So, to reiterate, you'd rather be on welfare? Not only does this mean that, outside of a Mail reader's mind, you won't have money for anything more than survival - it'll mean most people will think you're a lazy who deserves that life as well.

If so, fair enough - that's a genuine question, not a rhetorical one.

Then again, my experience of people who like the phrase "what's the world coming to" says there's not that much point listening to the rest.

[Ian974]

I'd say similar to above with dress code type stuff. What would be acceptable will vary case by case.
If you want tattoos, fair enough, knock yourself out. What I don't understand is why there now seems to be an expectation for everyone else to like them.
If an employer doesn't think 'drop dead' tattooed across your knuckles would be appropriate for someone working at a care home, I'd say that's a fair assessment.

[BJG1]

julian64 said:

Should the freedom to express yourself with tattoos be on the same footing as the freedom to express your religious identity?

No, it should be way ahead of it.

[mybrainhurts]

BJG1 said:

julian64 said:

Should the freedom to express yourself with tattoos be on the same footing as the freedom to express your religious identity?

No, it should be way ahead of it.

What, exactly, TF does "express yourself" mean?

[jimbop1]

paranoid airbag said:

Miguel Alvarez said:

I wouldn't want to work anywhere where I am just there to fill a quota. I can't really make it any clearer than that. If a company wants to employ someone because they prefer their look for whatever reason then I hold no malice towards them and wish them luck as by the sounds of it they are going to need it. They'll probably be out of business if they make choices like that. I'm not shy of hard work I went to school, passed my exams and consider myself to be reasonably intelligent so I won't be out of work long if a situation arises.

It also may shock you but there ARE white people in positions of power who ARE NOT racist.

I know right. Zany isn't it.

What's the world coming to?!?!?

So, to reiterate, you'd rather be on welfare? Not only does this mean that, outside of a Mail reader's mind, you won't have money for anything more than survival - it'll mean most people will think you're a lazy who deserves that life as well.

If so, fair enough - that's a genuine question, not a rhetorical one.

Then again, my experience of people who like the phrase "what's the world coming to" says there's not that much point listening to the rest.

I really don't see why you are having a go at him?! The guy obviously has standards and something about him.

[Chlamydia]

I have tattoos on my hands. They aren't offensive but they are clearly visible even if I wear a suit that covers up my (many) other tattoos. As an ex-rugby player I've also got slightly cauliflowered ears and a broken nose - a face maybe best described as 'lived in'. I'm also a high-ranking and extremely qualified electronics engineer and am frequently in meetings with clients to discuss multi-million pound projects. Admittedly I wouldn't be the ideal candidate to model bikinis, but the way I look has no effect on my ability to do my job and while I have on occasion noticed new clients glance at my tattoos they have all ended up concentrating on what I had to say.
If I had a swastika or offensive word tattooed in plain sight then fair enough I doubt anyone would be able to look past that, but a 'normal' tattoo shouldn't be a hindrance.

[Miguel Alvarez]

jimbop1 said:

paranoid airbag said:

Miguel Alvarez said:

I wouldn't want to work anywhere where I am just there to fill a quota. I can't really make it any clearer than that. If a company wants to employ someone because they prefer their look for whatever reason then I hold no malice towards them and wish them luck as by the sounds of it they are going to need it. They'll probably be out of business if they make choices like that. I'm not shy of hard work I went to school, passed my exams and consider myself to be reasonably intelligent so I won't be out of work long if a situation arises.

It also may shock you but there ARE white people in positions of power who ARE NOT racist.

I know right. Zany isn't it.

What's the world coming to?!?!?

So, to reiterate, you'd rather be on welfare? Not only does this mean that, outside of a Mail reader's mind, you won't have money for anything more than survival - it'll mean most people will think you're a lazy who deserves that life as well.

If so, fair enough - that's a genuine question, not a rhetorical one.

Then again, my experience of people who like the phrase "what's the world coming to" says there's not that much point listening to the rest.

I really don't see why you are having a go at him?! The guy obviously has standards and something about him.

I'm glad someone gets the point I'm trying to make. Since whatever age you have to be to have a paper round I have been employed for all but about 2 months. I tried the dole realised I wouldn't be given anything as I had savings and thats my experience of being welfare. Touch wood I don't have to go on the dole but I'd like to think I have the right ethic that it won't be an issue.

Back to the question.....

Not every employer is racist.

If a racist (but spineless one at that) wants to hire me to fill his quota then fine.

If a racist employer passes me over with some made up excuse that I lacked the skills he needed then fine.

There will be by the law of averages be an employer out there that will be happy to hire me.

I do not want to be working anywhere I'm disliked.

I spend the best part of 40 hours a week on a good week at work. I do not do this for my enjoyment so at the very least I would like to get on with the people I work with. So anyone passing me over for whatever reason is doing me a favour in the long run.

Hopefully that makes my view on the subject crystal clear.

[Lost soul]

Miguel Alvarez said:

I do not want to be working anywhere I'm disliked.

That's how I feel

[BJG1]

mybrainhurts said:

BJG1 said:

julian64 said:

Should the freedom to express yourself with tattoos be on the same footing as the freedom to express your religious identity?

No, it should be way ahead of it.

What, exactly, TF does "express yourself" mean?

Why are you asking me? I think that discrimination against someone based on what they choose to decorate their bodies with should be more important than what silly delusion they choose to believe in. I don't think either are very important as they are both choices.

[Smiler.]

Chlamydia said:

I have tattoos on my hands. They aren't offensive but they are clearly visible even if I wear a suit that covers up my (many) other tattoos. As an ex-rugby player I've also got slightly cauliflowered ears and a broken nose - a face maybe best described as 'lived in'. I'm also a high-ranking and extremely qualified electronics engineer and am frequently in meetings with clients to discuss multi-million pound projects. Admittedly I wouldn't be the ideal candidate to model bikinis, but the way I look has no effect on my ability to do my job and while I have on occasion noticed new clients glance at my tattoos they have all ended up concentrating on what I had to say.
If I had a swastika or offensive word tattooed in plain sight then fair enough I doubt anyone would be able to look past that, but a 'normal' tattoo shouldn't be a hindrance.

No ragrets then.

[paranoid airbag]

jimbop1 said:

paranoid airbag said:

Miguel Alvarez said:

I wouldn't want to work anywhere where I am just there to fill a quota. I can't really make it any clearer than that. If a company wants to employ someone because they prefer their look for whatever reason then I hold no malice towards them and wish them luck as by the sounds of it they are going to need it. They'll probably be out of business if they make choices like that. I'm not shy of hard work I went to school, passed my exams and consider myself to be reasonably intelligent so I won't be out of work long if a situation arises.

It also may shock you but there ARE white people in positions of power who ARE NOT racist.

I know right. Zany isn't it.

What's the world coming to?!?!?

So, to reiterate, you'd rather be on welfare? Not only does this mean that, outside of a Mail reader's mind, you won't have money for anything more than survival - it'll mean most people will think you're a lazy who deserves that life as well.

If so, fair enough - that's a genuine question, not a rhetorical one.

Then again, my experience of people who like the phrase "what's the world coming to" says there's not that much point listening to the rest.

I really don't see why you are having a go at him?! The guy obviously has standards and something about him.

I'm not (except the "what is the world coming to" part, but in that case, it's my experience that that phrase is rarely followed by anything insightful).

Would you prefer being on the dole to being in a job where you are not liked or appreciated?

I am not trying to force anyone into one answer. OTOH it is the sort of statement where it's easy to say "I wouldn't do it" whereas in real life, faced with the sacrifices you'd actually have to make, it's not so easy.

[Miguel Alvarez]

paranoid airbag said:

I'm not (except the "what is the world coming to" part, but in that case, it's my experience that that phrase is rarely followed by anything insightful).

Would you prefer being on the dole to being in a job where you are not liked or appreciated?

I am not trying to force anyone into one answer. OTOH it is the sort of statement where it's easy to say "I wouldn't do it" whereas in real life, faced with the sacrifices you'd actually have to make, it's not so easy.

The what is the world comment was a joking throw away remark at the end of a semi serious post.

Perhaps you should read the rest of the thread see my reply and then comment. If you still can't see my clear answer then I don't really know what else to say on the matter We will probably never agree.