Why do some employers ban tattoos while other doesn’t mind them? If a person is trying to get a position that interacts with the public or with people from other companies, those other people could be judgmental about tattoos that are visible outside the clothes.
There's probably a variety of reasons but I think a common one is that some companies feel that their employees project their company image and they'd like some say in the image that they have. This is obviously truer when the employees are dealing with the public.
Now in some industries, the company image of employees having tattoos is benefit, a but in others, especially in certain more conservative markets, tattoos are viewed as a blemish on the image. Keep in mind, too, that some companies pay marketing and PR firms quite a lot of money to develop and reinforce the chosen image for the company and with those companies, it's an important thing that they want to project and they want to protect it.
Employers tend to cater to their customers. If their customers are more conservative, they probably won't want to deal with a tattooed and pierced salesperson/clerk, and they may ask someone to remove their piercings and cover their tattoos with long sleeved clothing, for instance.
Some employers don't care, it's the quality of the person and his/her work that matters. As long as you dress safely (i.e., sturdy shoes if you're working around heavy machinery and pull long hair back if you're around moving equipment) it doesn't matter.
And some employers - those who are trendy and catering to a younger and more edgy crowd may encourage it
Because some of us think tattoos are a sign of less than upstanding type of person. Some don't want to have their customers think that the business is not upstanding, and having employees with tattoos will make their business look bad.
I personally associate tattoos with drug use, as many who use drug cover the marks with tattoos, and therefore would not really like to have food served to me by a tattooed server, out of fear of disease associated with intervenes drug use.
Tattoos are not a civil right. A company has a right to control the dress, hairstyles, and overall appearance of their employees. A company probably wouldn't ban a tattoo, but if someone has "Evil Satan" on their forehead that is probably not going to go over in a job interview!!
Because for certain job like those higher up it’s not healthy. Say you're in the doctor’s office && your doctor has tattoos all over even on his face...would you think he knew what he was doing. To me they give off a bad image in the work place...I love tats don’t get me wrong but getting them in ridicules places seem unprofessional. Sure it doesn’t affect your ability of how you do the job but other pals opinions would not get you any high up job nor business.
Should it be illegal to allow tattoos to be a factor at all in the hiring process? I think it should be frowned upon, but not illegal. If you have a company and you have people representing you, then you can choose what kind of image those people have. There's a lot of stigma related with tattoos culturally (whether founded or unfounded isn't the point), and if there's an industry or position where that stigma could affect business, then that's the boss's decision. It's not like people who've gotten tattoos didn't know that it might be an issue later on, you should get them where you can cover them up. They make people take piercings out to work (some little old lady at the supermarket may be offended by a septum piercing etc.). The issue isn't whether it should be illegal to not hire because of tattoos, it's that we should all just get over it as a society.
Depends ...do they have an Hate Kill tattoo across their knuckles, an tattoo of an Nazi flag on the forehead, or an naked men/women on their skin? Any place where they work at is an professional place. So thus they need to look professional and...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document