Should employers be able to discrimate against body piercings/tattoos?

[Alvito]

Anyone that chooses to be Christian is a fool, and employers should treat them as such.

See how easy that is?

Those have nothing to do with each other.

Employers are able to have dress codes and tattoos, piercings and several other things fall into those. On top of that depending on the work and piercing they are safety or health code issues. Anybody that doesn't have the sense to think how a tattoo might effect their life before they get it ends up paying for that down the line.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't even know what Hot Topic is...Im from Canada. Im guessing its a store in the US.

EDIT: Just looked up Hot Topic, looks like some retail store that sells crappy T-Shirts.

And a bunch of other junk. They are almost always in malls leaching money out of wannabee trendy kids and posers.

[williedabull]

Absolutely they should be able to "Discriminate" against people with tattoo or body piercings. BUT they do so at their own peril.. I have worked in construction for many years and a few years ago (Before it was acceptable) we had a new guy come in and we all judged him right away by his appearance..we called him Pincushion we all "Thought" we knew him and had him pegged. He turned out to be one of the nicest guys you every met was a family man and would literally give you the shirt off his back.

That being said we work around a lot of people and homeowners so when we asked him to remove them he did with no complaints. I really don't see why we (Employers) should have to "accept" your point of view or way of expressing yourself if we don't want to. if the business fails you will walk away and find a new job..we don't have that luxury. So yea a certain amount of "Discrimination" as you put it in my opinion is acceptable IN THIS CASE

[Henock]

Unless said Christian has a cross tattooed on their forehead, you won't know until they tell you.

In my culture that is actually very common. lol

[Tinykong]

A lot of you are throwing around race, gender, religion, etc. like they're the only things you can discriminate against. Sorry, but I can discriminate against you and not hire you because you have shitty taste in shoes.

What point are you trying to make with this argument over semantics? That's because it's "technically" discriminatory to not hire someone based on a particular quality or characteristic, that we should change our laws to include them?

[Deleted]

IT'S. STILL. DISCRIMINATION.

I would think the general issue here is though is that the discrimination regarding tattoos is justified discrimination based off of company image/whatever reason. Much like how you would not hire sized 12 females to wear your size 8-10 dresses as even if you are discriminating against them it's justified based off of practicality issues.

Although company image is a bit more of a gray area than pure practical examples of justified discrimination I'd imagine it is seen in the same light by most when it comes to employees looks.

[Repefe]

So what are you proposing. That ppl stupid enough to get over the top tatoos and piercings should be a protected group ? And would that be based on the tatoos or stupidity ...

[Frozenbeef]

They judge you on everything else under the sun so why not? >.<

[Tumble]

Unless it comes to race or religion, right?

This guy trying to turn this into a race/religious debate.By your reasoning its discrimination for a Catholic church to not hire an atheist for its pastor. Get over your self.

On topic. Hiring people based off looks is important considering that's how everyone is first judged. If I went to a nice 5 star restraunt and saw the chef was out back with a tank top on long un kept greasy hair and was a big sweaty guy, I wouldn't feel comfortable eating there. Same guy fixing my car, no worries. Performing surgery , no thanks, working road construction driving a bulldozer, you bet your ass. In a world with eyes people will always judge you first based on looks.

[Todd Duval]

Whether there's a law or not, employers are going to discriminate people based on their looks.

Should employers be able to? It's kind of a moot point if there's no way to enforce such a law or policy.

If I was going for a technical job interview, and if I had a nose ring and tattoos, it's pretty safe to say I would not get the job. Google images "professional" and you won't see any nose rings or tattoos there.

[williedabull]

In my culture that is actually very common. lol

What culture has tattoos of crosses on their head..

[Deleted]

The line must be drawn somewhere, if we were forced to accept anyone of any appearance it is only a matter of time before nudists and furrys in costume turn up for job interviews.

[Dakia]

I don't think working at Hot Topic is a fair comparison when talking about interacting with the general public for a business.

Holy crap I couldn't stop laughing at this.

[DEATHETERNAL]

Employers should be allowed to discriminate against potential employees as they wish to just as people seeking to become employees are allowed to discriminate against potential employers.

[Deleted]

The line must be drawn somewhere, if we were forced to accept anyone of any appearance it is only a matter of time before nudists and furrys in costume turn up for job interviews.

Sweet Jesus.

I hope i die before that day...

[Deleted]

Anyone that gets a tattoo that cannot be covered by a shirt is a fool, and employers should treat them as such.

Indeed.

I will never employ someone with visible tattoos for a public-facing job. Same goes for ridiculous piercings.

[Deleted]

Sweet Jesus.

I hope i die before that day...

Its my body and my choice, if I want the general public to gaze upon my flabby body and small penis it is my right and they should be forced to comply.

[Frozenbeef]

Its my body and my choice, if I want the general public to gaze upon my flabby body and small penis it is my right and they should be forced to comply.

I don't know why more attractive people don't take this view on life >.<

[THE Bigzoman]

In certain job positions and sectors, displayed tattoos and particular piercings is considered unprofessional. If you get a piercing or a tattoo that is displayed, don't expect a job in those particular areas. It's that simple really. Everything else is just hogwash.

[frumper]

Everyone discriminates everyday. To discriminate is just to recognize a difference. We make decisions on those differences all day every day. We discriminate on what restraunts to pay money for food based on our tastes, the customer service offered, the location, the mood we're in. We discriminate in hiring people that we don't feel can do the job, lack intelligence, have improper manners, odd behavior, etc.


In the US there are, I believe, 8 federally protected categories, and some states add a few more. Tattoos are not a protected class. Piercings are not a protected class. If you don't get hired solely because you have a tattoo, there is no legal recourse you can take. The employer may be missing the forest for the tress, but that is their choice.

That all goes out the window if the rules in place are not applied equally though. There is also legal issues if they hired you knowing you had a tatto then fired you for it.

[Deleted]

In certain job positions and sectors, displayed tattoos and particular piercings is considered unprofessional. If you get a piercing or a tattoo that is displayed, don't expect a job in those particular areas. It's that simple really. Everything else is just hogwash.

Pretty much. Bound to be someone going to a corporate job with face tattoos and fucking huge things in his earlobes crying discrimination for looking like an idiot.

- - - Updated - - -

People like this fucking genius...

I can haz lawyer jerb?