Dear Springfield Police Department,
Are tattoos in the workplace a distraction? Some people agree and some disagree. Are tattoos just something that people get for attention? Sally Pearman once said, “I think that there is a different perception of people with alternative looks in the workplace.” There seems to be more behind tattoos that people do not see. Some specific jobs do not allow visible body art while doing business because it can affect their company in a negative way. Specifically, in the police force, it all depends on the city or state your department is located and their guidelines. I am writing to you to explain the good value behind body art. Springfield police have very strict when it comes to the tattoo policy. If anyone has a tattoo that is visible after the point of being hired, they can be terminated. No tattoo can be visible as of November 15th, 2008. If you had a tattoo that was visible before this date, you are allowed to have it but you have to cover it with bandages or extra clothing. You must show them all your tattoos and you are not allowed to have any that are offensive or inappropriate, even if they are covered during business hours. These are just a few rules stated in the Springfield Police Department Addendum. In my opinion, tattoos can have significant meaning. It is understood that some people have gang related or derogatory art, however, a good portion of them are related to something that once happened in somebody’s life. Businesses
People must accept the fact that employees represent the public face of a company, so it is important that they follow the employer’s guidelines to respect their company image. Your tattoos may or may not be an issue to the employer but it all depends on the location and size. With visible body piercings, they can ask you to remove them when you’re at work. Although tattoos cannot be removed like piercings, your employer can request that visible tattoos be covered at work (Whickson). If the tattoo can be hidden, then it shouldn’t be burdensome for the employee to simply cover it up to comply with the guidelines. In a 2001 study done by Vault.com, a research and employment information services company that profiles U.S. companies, almost 60 percent of employers said they would be less likely to hire someone with visible tattoos or piercings (Dellavega). Consider yourself lucky if your tattoos can be covered, because having a job is better than being rejected due to visible body art. Some may feel that people with tattoos are treated differently, but the employer is avoiding discrimination by giving you a chance to conceal them, which is a way for them to accommodate tattooed employees.
To begin, Leanne Padowski has personal experience with this area. According to the article, "Our company's policy states that anyone who works in customer service cannot have a visible tattoo." Ms. Padowski deals first hand with the restrictions of visible tattoos, and therefore, this is a credible piece of evidence to support her argument. Mr. Johnson, on the other hand, is bias since
Over 45 million people in the United States have at least one tattoo on their body. Many don’t realize how a tattoo can affect their lifestyle. Leeanne Padowski who wrote “Think Before You Ink” article has made a very interesting point on how it affects people’s lives. Tattoos can affect you on the job marketing, your appearance and your health.
Although there is history that proves tattoos were used for many reasons, some people still fell into groups that are considered stereotypes. The stereotypes of people with tattoos were considered to be criminals, drug addicts, or habitual underachievers. There is somewhat of a statistical truth to that slander. Sadly when it came to people who had chosen to show their tattoos in public, the stereotype is all too real. That is no surprise though; people with tattoos are treated poorly by the majority. Traditionally, tattoo clientele was considered to be that of bikers, bad-boy personalities, and truckers; however all that seems to be changing. There is still the tough guy image to contend with. However, it is mostly just with the older population. Chris Weskamp told the Denver Business Journal
A large number of businesses do not allow tattoos that are visible. Many also prohibit piercings, other than single earrings on women. Some industries even take their policies to the extreme of not allowing any tattoos that take up more than 25% of a body part, and if a pre-existing tattoo is too large or obscene, it must be removed (Powers). This even applies if a uniform can easily cover the tattooed area.
In Jon Kelly’s article he brings more information on the stance taken against tattoos in the work place by potential employers. Kelly discusses how employers tend to discriminate
Tattoos have been dated back to 5000 BCE. Tattoos have played the role of being badges of honor, ceremonial markings, signs off social rank, forms of punishment, and of course ways for people to beautify themselves (The Cultural History of Tattoos). Over the past years, tattoos has increased and continues to increase significantly in popularity. According to statistics, 36% of American adults in the U.S. between the ages of 18-25 and 40% of American adults in the U.S. between the ages of 26-40 have at least one tattoo (Seth). While the trend of getting tattoos are increasing, the concerns of the employers starts to increase. People who have tattoos should not be discriminated because it is unethical, a form of self-expression, and art.
While tattoos have become more and more acceptable over the years, the question still lies on whether tattoos or any other kind of body modifications in the workplace should be allowed. It's beyond easy to make cases showing the negative impacts of discrimination against tattoos and piercings in the workplace. Plastic surgery, drawing on your eyebrows, getting fake nails, and coloring your hair are also examples of body modifications. Though not everyone agrees with or thinks they’re beautiful, employees are not told to cover up these modifications. Tattoos and piercings are purely another form of beautification and what makes each person their own unique individual. Beauty is personal.
Three-fourths of businesses require employees to have no visible tattoos or piercings. A majority of companies agree that tattoos and piercings detract from a personal appearance and are irrevocable. In a recent article on Fox News a Starbucks’ employee faces firing for a small tattoo on the hand. Kayla told Fox News her managers informed her she has thirty days to begin a removal process or she would lose her job. Discrimination of professionals is very typical.
CATO Corporation states in their employee handbook under what associates are to wear that, “No tattoos that may be considered offensive to our customers or other associates should be visible.” (CATO: The Cato Corporation, 2005) This is beginning to happen in many other companies, so that they may still be able to hire that qualified worker, without needing to dismiss that person because they have a visible tattoo. In 2010, a research poll found that 72% of those polled with tattoos had them in a place easily hidden. (Gasper, 2010) Also, there is a new was to have that tattoo, easily visible, but still not be able to see it. UV tattoos. UV Tattoos, or black light tattoos have been recently introduced into today’s tattoo market. It is applied the same as any other tattoo, it just has to be done under a blacklight in order for the tattoo artist to see his artwork in progress. The FDA has not yet given a 100 % ok of this UV ink to be safe because the phosphorus present in the ink can cause irritation to the skin, but some tattoo parlors are making organic versions and make UV tattoos
People argue that tattoos should never be shown in a professional setting. Most places of employment even have a dress code that requires you to cover them while working. Employers, in some settings, say that tattoos would or could be offensive or obscene. It was hard to find any article that was against tattoos in the workplace. After a while of searching the internet and databases, I found an article titled “Tattoos in the Workplace: The Research Forbes Was Too Lazy To Do” by Annie Singer. Written on February 26, 2016 and updated February 26, 2017, Singer’s research found that “consumers showed a preference for non-tattooed front-line staff.” She also found that “visible tattoos had a predominantly negative effect on employment selection, driven by the hiring manager’s
Tattoos are often times gang affiliated for members to show loyalty to the gang. Simply having a tattoo could potentially raise eyebrows from peers and employers.
As someone that has been in a position of a hiring manager, and someone with tattoos, I have been on both sides of this debate. While I do appreciate that my employer does not require it, I personally keep my tattoos covered most of the time. I want to be judged by my skills and not what someone thinks of my body art. When someone does notice my tattoos, I often get the “Wow, I would have never thought you would have tattoos” comment. I understood many perceptions of me could possibly change when I decided to get tattooed, therefore I chose to get them where they can be easily covered. This has been a personal choice on how to approach this subject. I would be much more comfortable with having them visible; I see them as much a part of me as I do my hair color.
Tattoos and piercing have become increasingly more common over the years. Obvious issues within the workplace have surfaced. Some would argue that tattoos and piercings in the workplace are inappropriate,
There are many employers that have the opinion that having visible tattoos is unacceptable for the professional work environment. Someone with a tattoo is seen as uneducated and possible dangerous. However, there is no solid evidence to support either of those beliefs. The stigma of sporting a visible tattoo has no validity. A person with tattoos is just as knowledgeable and capable of working as a non-tattooed person. Tattoos, whether visible or covered, do not change a person’s individual work ethic or how educated they are.