Got tattoos? Sorry, you're not allowed to work for us

page: 4
29
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   
i live in hipsterville brooklyn where everyone and their mother has a tattoo. except me of course. i think body modification and self-mutilation are signs of a person in desperate need of attention




posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by tonypazzohome
 


We have a radio host here in Cleveland that felt the same way. He felt that tattoos were a sign of depression and a cry for help. I was less than ecstatic about this point of view.

While I can see a slim percentage of people who may use that as a reason for tattooing, I just dont buy it. Tattoos are something that are usually deeply personal and are meant as a form of self expression. Every tattoo I have has to do with a event in my life, not because I feel the need for pain. In some cultures tattoos are a right of spiritual passage.




Tattoos have served as rites of passage, marks of status and rank, symbols of religious and spiritual devotion, decorations for bravery, sexual lures and marks of fertility, pledges of love, punishment, amulets and talismans, protection, and as the marks of outcasts, slaves and convicts. The symbolism and impact of tattoos varies in different places and cultures. Tattoos may show how a person feels about a relative (commonly mother/father or daughter/son) or about an unrelated person.
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org...]

I just dont buy the argument of attention and whatnot. If your trying to hurt yourself...there are alot more painful ways to do it that tattooing. Either you get it, or you dont...
edit on 1/24/2011 by kyleisboss because: double link to wiki



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by kyleisbossRemember...to assume just makes a ass out of you and me
edit on 1/24/2011 by kyleisboss because: forgot the assume part


While that is a cute anecdote it is not going to hold water in today’s employment climate.

Remember it is you who must “sell yourself” to the company not the other way around. If there were surplus of labor currently that might be the case; or if you had some uniquely qualifying skills/education that could counterbalance the stigma of the tattoos.

One cannot on one hand cry out in their manner of dress, conduct, diction, mannerisms or body markings – look at me I am a special and unique person who rebels against the societal norms and on the other had cry “gosh I don’t seem to be fitting in” – where “fitting-in refers to being successful at gaining and maintaining employment.

Sorry, there are consequences for every action and in this case when reviewing many people for a job anything can be a discriminator.

Maybe they had someone who was just as qualified with no tattoos – they chose to go with the safe bet. The other guy can’t forget to cover his tats one day or offend someone inadvertently with his inks if he does not have any...



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes

Originally posted by Sly1one
I understand your frustration and it is completely warranted. I myself am covered in tattoos and every time I even slightly feel discriminated against because of them I get pretty defensive. I work for the state and I have had no issues regarding my tattoos because I think ultimately they know its a lawsuit I would win in a second, and yes I would go there.


I can guarantee you that you'd have absolutely no chance of winning this lawsuit.

You'd have as much chance as someone who sued their employer for not allowing them to turn up for work wearing nothing but a posing pouch.

Companies are quite rightly legally allowed to not employ someone because of tattoos that cannot be covered up.


I work for a government entity that is non-profit they don't have the same rights as corporations etc. Also I have read the discrimination policy and it would be very easy to present in court a legitimate case that any decision based on tattoos violates their non-discrimination policy.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Out of curiosity I did a quick search, it looks like there is quite a bit of cover makeup specifically designed to cover tats and I even found a product that is waterproof and adheres to the skin and hides tats. Just do a Google search on "How to conceal hand tattoos".

Cover it up and go back.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Golf66
 


I do agree with you. I guess people without tattoos appear safer than people who do not. I do not agree with your assertion that they are a cry for attention or help, as I previously stated in a reply. Maybe you choose to express yourself in what style shoes you wear. I, and many other people, choose tattoos. I think more understanding needs to go into people's thought processes today.

ill be around, probably still waiting for employment, if that day comes



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:08 PM
link   
We live in a free country.

I think that businesses can set policy on things like tats. If you cannot cover them during working hours then that's a problem that you created.

For all the younger viewers of this post. If you're going to get a tat, make sure that later in life you can keep it covered so this doesn't happen to you.

Sorry for your problems during this tough economic time but I still think that a business has the right to say, before you are hired, that you have to be able to cover your tats while you're on the clock.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by dr_strangecraft
 


Everything you have said relating to "tattoo culture" is the perfect example of what exactly discrimination is. Ignorant assumptions and stereotyping. There is the exception to every rule.

Swastika does not = Nazi....so lets get that straight. That symbol has existed long before Germany was even established and has several different representations and meanings. Its no different then relating box cutters solely with terrorism...



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Sly1one
 


Do you know any good lawyers?


I could pay them back in payments stretched out over the next 15 years



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by sezsue
 


The Worldwide famous product for covering up scars and tattoos etc is called Dermablend!

Easily available, even online and cheap, you would never know you had them with this stuff.

No, I don't work for them or anything, just seen it's fantastic results on friends!



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by tjack
Well, you did say the tats are on your hands, and that Valvoline's policy requires tattoos to be covered at all times. How would you envision keeping tattoos on your hands covered on a job that requires the use of your hands? Maybe it was just the unfortunate location of the tats that lost the job for you.

Should have gone for the tramp stamp! (ha ha, just kidding)
edit on 24-1-2011 by tjack because: the reason MUST be filled out!


How can tats be covered up on hands?
piece of cake....wear fingerless gloves...

Can still use your hands and nobody sees the
backs of your hands.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by kyleisboss
reply to post by Sly1one
 


Do you know any good lawyers?


I could pay them back in payments stretched out over the next 15 years


Really

He made the decision to get tattoos. it is not the fault of anyone except him.
The fact that the company does not want people with exposed tattoos is really not anyone to decide except those that own or are in charge of the company.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   
OP sounds like an articulate individual. I wish him luck. But I think he is overstating the case by blaming the entire culture and country for the sins of Valvoline. Plenty of people here have suggested you would be hired by them, so Valvoline's attitude is not universal. Having said that it might be constructive to scrutinize why Valvoline might be pursuing this path, mis-guided though it may be.

My analysis is colored by my own experiences. I no longer patronize those types of places, but I noticed when I did that they were very focused on the "ritual" of changing oil. There would be a cadence to their "spiel" while working on a car. They were obviously required to yell out certain phrases as they performed them. It was like public perfomance art. Employees were dressed impeccably, and, of course, there was a significant effort to "up-sale" customers to buy more than they originally anticipated.

Now why would they do that? My take on it is that it is because the Jiffy-Lubes of the world are bottom feeders. They are grease monkeys performing a very low level job that is necessary, but often avoided by the public. Jiffy Lube makes sure they can do it as fast as possible, which is what we customers want. And (and here it comes) they want to project a "professional" image. You will never see a grease spot on the employee who greets you. They need to emulate a dealer's service shop to maintain competiveness.

An employee covered with tattoos does not present a professional image. Somehow he or she has been immersed in a culture that deems tattoos on hands is an okay thing. Tattoos on your hands? What were you thinking?? By doing this you placed yourself in a lower class--permanently. That lack of foresight shows an element of your character that does not reflect well on your choices. Now I know OP thinks this is "crap" and okay, that's what he thinks. Valvoline does not. It's rather subjective to suggest Valvoline is wrong and OP is right and the entire culture is condemned as a result.

It's also a good example of how we attempt to apply anti-discrimination ideas to voluntary issues. If you are Black, you can't help it (unless you are Michael Jackson). Anti-discrimination statutes were designed to prevent people making judgments on based on non-voluntary physical characteristics. They were never designed to protect people against voluntary actions, unless you maintain religion is 'voluntary.'

The point is that they call it a "tramp stamp" for a reason. Tattoos are associated in the public mind with, for want of a better term, low-life trailer trash. And, yes, that is discrimination, pure and simple. But it's legal.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Holly N.R.A.
 



Yeah, those, a long back trench coat in July and a 100 yard stare is what is needed for any good job interview.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by minkey53
reply to post by sezsue
 


The Worldwide famous product for covering up scars and tattoos etc is called Dermablend!

Easily available, even online and cheap, you would never know you had them with this stuff.

No, I don't work for them or anything, just seen it's fantastic results on friends!


I have an aunt with a large port wine stain birth mark on her face.. dermablend WORKS. Its also waterproof.. changed her life in a positive way too!



WHomever said people get tats for attention.. LOL! Yeah, get something that everyone has for attention. Be an individual, just like everyone else.


I got my bracelets because #1 I like flowers and #2 I dont like bracelets and given my career, I couldnt wear them anyway! Mine are very feminine roses on vines around my wrists done in fineline. I happen to like them even after all of these years and have taken care of them. In fact, I was in New Orleans when I got them.. born and raised there.. and tats were pretty damned common. There are plenty of body modifications that yes, Id agree its for attention.... but making the statement that tats are for attention makes you sound judgmental and uneducated.
The husband got tats from the places he was stationed and certain events connected to his career. Just like a majority of other men did. I doubt he is getting much attention for them! The military has a long history of tatting for life events. I suppose a very young person or not very well read person wouldnt know that. IN fact, throughout history people were tatted for that exact reason. We ALL can identify gang tats and prison tats. I dont think thats the reason either.
edit on 24-1-2011 by Advantage because: forgot a letter



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by kyleisboss
reply to post by Sly1one
 


Do you know any good lawyers?


I could pay them back in payments stretched out over the next 15 years


Really

He made the decision to get tattoos. it is not the fault of anyone except him.
The fact that the company does not want people with exposed tattoos is really not anyone to decide except those that own or are in charge of the company.


Yes mate but we live in modern times- everyone has tattoos these days. In fact i think that you are somewhat unique if you do not. Unless the tattoo displays an offensive image or wording then there is absolutely no reason why they should hinder someones ability to perform a job.

I did a job for an old girl the other day, she must have been 70- and she has just recently had a tattoo done on her hand. Sweet as pie she was aswell.

The view that tattoos mean you are a trouble maker is an outdated stereotype these days.
edit on 24-1-2011 by KingDoey because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by KingDoey
 


Stereotype or not.
It is the prerogative of the business as to what standards they place.
If I don't want someone in my house because they have tats or glasses, then have the right to make them leave or not come in.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by schuyler
That lack of foresight shows an element of your character that does not reflect well on your choices.


Harsh, but accurate. There are thousands of people out there looking for work. When places start doing what they do to winnow the candidates down, they start looking for reasons to thin the pile. It makes things easier for them.

Unless you're a stellar, outstanding, one of a kind candidate with an extremely unique skill set, anything's fair game to eliminate a potential employee. And yes, a valid legal reason can always be found by a potential employer with a quarter of a brain.

The fact is, it doesn't take a unique skill set to work at a quick oil change shop. Secondary fact is, having tattoos that require measures beyond wearing a shirt and pants to cover, really doesn't reflect well on your choice making ability. No, it's not particularly "fair" and I would also hope that an employer would be able to look at the bigger picture beyond a visible tattoo.

You and everyone else have the right to get whatever you want tattooed, pierced, and modified. The flip side is, everyone you encounter has the right to make a judgment based upon your decision to do so. You can't go all figuratively in-your-face, then become indignant upon someone reacting to it.

Maybe there's a better opportunity down the road, with an employer who can look beyond the superficial. I hope so. And I further hope that in your future dealings, you're given some prompt feedback about the possibilities. But I wouldn't count on it. Keep plugging until you accept an offer. Anything prior to that is air.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by tonypazzohome
i think body modification and self-mutilation are signs of a person in desperate need of attention

What a curious, timid, space to occupy. I suppose that applies to wearing white after Labour Day as well?



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


Yes, you have that right.

And everyone around you has the right to call you out as being an ignorant ass for that decision.

Works both ways





new topics
top topics
 
29
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join