Should Tattoos Be Acceptable In The Workplace?

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.

Twenty-three percent said it would depend on the number and location of the tattoos and/or the role being fulfilled" (Workopolis, 2014, para. 4). Workopolis asked people “Would a candidate having tattoos affect your decision to hire that person?” and the data added up to seventy-seven percent of employers will not hire an employee with tattoos (Workopolis, 2014, para 4). This is just wrong. Whether a future employee has tattoos or not does not mean they are not an expert in their field or highly qualified for a position. As long as the tattoos are not on the head, face or throat and they are not inappropriate, having tattoos should not deter anyone from getting hired for a job.

If the tattoo is distracting from it being on their face and you can’t have a conversation with the person without starring at it, or if the tattoo is vulgar and offending, I understand why that would be an issue. There is a limit, but people are so quick to judge because it’s against their beliefs or views. People should have the right to put tattoos on their body if they want to. If tattoos aren’t getting in the way of the quality of the work, then there should not be a problem having them. Employers wouldn’t tell an employee they can’t wear a cross necklace to work because that is their right to express their belief in Christ and it would be the same for someone with

Tattoos have been around for quite some time now, and they have always been a symbol of belonging, cultural expression or for religion. These days, individuals choose to tattoo themselves because it is part of their lifestyle or personal image. While continuing to grow in popularity and becoming a lifestyle, people are facing issues with having visible tattoos in the workforce. Although it is a form of free expression, employers have a right to enforce certain rules about tattoos in their company because they have a public image to uphold. How you present yourself to the public is solely important, which is why tattoos should not be allowed to be seen in the workplace, since it may appear offensive or unconservative.

Today in America there is less problems having tattoos in the work place. As tattoos proliferate, some employers’ are becoming more accepting of body ink peeking through work place attire but the level of acceptance varies depending the industry and the corporate cultural. The work force is more interested in your educational skills and skills for the job. Tattoo policies can vary from one office to the next the argument being that tattoos and certain hair do’s or certain garments can be a very big distraction to many coworkers and customers. Depending on how visible and how offensive the tattoo is. When it comes down to tattoos in the workplace it just really come

People who have tattoos or piercings should not be denied jobs. For an example, the persons tattoos or piercings may define their characteristics or personality. A person may have a tattoo sleeves that symbolizes a band, a family member or an object that they like. Piercings however can be all over a person’s body and they might like the placements of their piercings. At this point, discussions between the customers and employees on tattoos and piercings are being made. These discussions can range between “Why did the person decide to get a tattoo or piercing?” or “Does the employee really think they are going to qualify for the job because of those things?” According to Andrea Johnstone and Laurel Buskirk, editors of an article called “Tattoo, body piercings rules can lead to discrimination claim,” the reason why companies have policies that ban tattoos, piercings and other body modification is to maintain a dress code and other appearance requirements (29A). If tattoos define an employee’s characteristics or personality and can be used as a discussion topic between the employee and customers, then people who have tattoos

Dave Kimmelberg, a Boston lawyer, wrote a book called INKED Inc., which is about people who go to work with concealed tattoos. He feels that in many businesses, it is like a “don’t ask, don’t tell” understanding between the workers and their bosses. Now that he has written the book, many people know that he has tattoos that cover most of his arms, but he still chooses to cover them when dealing with anything professionally (Goodman). Similarly, a Starbuck’s employee named Ron Carter has tattoos on his arms. He gladly covers them up with wristbands in order to keep his job. He understands that in a business relationship, he must follow the rules set by the company, so that they can gain the most profit, and he can keep his job (Feldstein).

Discrimination from people have a tattoo are completed accepted and sometimes are not. Because of their what looks like or act, but anyways employers have options, on what they want to do for their care. That’s why some enthusiast for painting, their skin is bad for some employers to look of them with tattoos. For example, they have recognized that it’s no bad thing if their staff mirror the appearance of their customers.

A woman who is a physical therapist has dreadlocks and noticeable tattoos was accepted by her patient despite her contrasting outward appearance. A runway model with a neck tattoo was accepted by the company and the brands she models for. A woman with a prominent clavicle tattoo is seen as no different by the young girls her agency tends to. Although there are cases of the polar opposite where others are discriminated based on the art they have tattooed on their arms or the body modifications they choose. Trebay used the case of Kimberly Cloutier as an example, where Ms. Cloutier wanted to wear her piercings but was denied due to appearance rules at her

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.

Only 32% of students surveyed in Arkansas, California, and Ohio believe that having visible tattoos would hinder a person’s chance of getting a job. (Bevill, Bracy, Dale, Glasgow, & Roach, 2009) It is just what they believe, not what is true.

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

“Today, a prejudice still exists within corporate America about tattoos. These people do not understand that a tattoo may effectively prohibit them from pursuing some professional careers, regardless of their other qualifications.” (Burleson)

We live in a world of people being very subjective to one another. If you do not look “normal”, there must be something wrong with you. One of the defining characteristics of “normal” can be someone without body modifications. People with tattoos have been viewed many different ways. If you have a tattoo, you must be a drug user or convict; you must be unstable if you have tattoos; most people with tattoos are completely unintelligent. I am not the tattoos on my body. I am more than what others view; I am better than that.

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.