Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(HR Grapevine)   Think any tattoos are work acceptable? Think again   (hrgrapevine.com) divider line 110
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

5818 clicks; posted to Business » on 23 Jul 2014 at 1:15 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



110 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-07-23 07:48:36 AM  
tattooadvices.com

He's a lifeguard.
 
2014-07-23 09:37:57 AM  
She couldn't just use a bit of concealer?
 
2014-07-23 09:46:30 AM  
Or wear boots? It sounds like a stupid policy but she also sounds annoying too. A butterfly tattoo? How unique.
 
2014-07-23 09:49:58 AM  
I'm so glad the article included a stock picture of a woman's feet without any tattoos. Because that's really helpful for those of us who may have difficulty imagining what they may look like.

For those who might actually want to see the tattoo in question, here's a pic from a much more useful article
i.dailymail.co.uk

It's also interesting to note that the "no visible tattoos" rule was put in place just last month, shortly after this woman was hired. I'm sure it was completely honest and professional, and not in any way a pretext created just so they could fire her.
 
2014-07-23 10:18:48 AM  
timetrabble.com
 
2014-07-23 10:23:51 AM  
You have to be able to "pass" as normal in the business world. (Goffman)

I agree with the pic above.
 
2014-07-23 10:32:27 AM  
Business executive as opposed to being a hobby executive.
 
2014-07-23 10:53:02 AM  
Multi-million pound firm?

Sooooo jealous.

I usually start chafing after a couple hundred thrusts and have to stop for an ice soak and moisturizer break.
 
2014-07-23 11:11:24 AM  

Ctrl-Alt-Del: It's also interesting to note that the "no visible tattoos" rule was put in place just last month, shortly after this woman was hired. I'm sure it was completely honest and professional, and not in any way a pretext created just so they could fire her.


My best guess is that she had it covered when she interviewed, then started to show up without it covered.  They didn't like that, so they implemented a policy that would cover not just this situation, but situations in the future in a uniform manner.  She "made no effort" to cover it up according to TFA, so she was fired.  I have no problem with that for 2 reasons.  1) She apparently thought it was more important to be herself and and show off her tattoo than to wear something that covered her tattoo, and 2) if you mark your body permanently, you should know there might be consequences.  I also seriously doubt it was a pretext created just to fire her.  She was a contractor, not an employee.  The rules might be different over there, but I doubt that they had to keep a contractor on for any reason.  I'm sure they could have let her go for no reason at all unless she had a time-dependent contract, which isn't mentioned in TFA at all.
 
2014-07-23 11:17:34 AM  
She said: "The only way to cover it would be to wear a sock. I'm a businesswoman and I wear smart dresses to work, so that would look stupid.

1) your tattoo already looks stupid
2) did anybody say you have to wear a "smart dress" instead of pants like a normal person?

/ for the record I think dress codes are stupid, but this woman's obstinate refusal to follow them offends me.
 
2014-07-23 11:21:26 AM  
I would not want to work for a company that thought a bit of ink was more important than the competence of the employee.  That just doesn't bode well.
 
2014-07-23 11:24:53 AM  
I could forgive it if it wasn't so pedantic. What an awful tattoo!
/and those SHOES!!
 
2014-07-23 11:27:41 AM  

jylcat: I would not want to work for a company that thought a bit of ink was more important than the competence of the employee.  That just doesn't bode well.


Would you just not work for the company, or would you sue on behalf of all of the poor tattoo individualists who are similarly discriminated against?
 
2014-07-23 11:31:52 AM  

Three Crooked Squirrels: jylcat: I would not want to work for a company that thought a bit of ink was more important than the competence of the employee.  That just doesn't bode well.

Would you just not work for the company, or would you sue on behalf of all of the poor tattoo individualists who are similarly discriminated against?


Obviously being tattoo'd he would throw a Molotov cocktail through the window and headbutt anyone who tried to escape the fire.
 
2014-07-23 11:32:42 AM  
TFA says she's been at the company for 5 months. Standard UK employment contracts have a 6-month probationary period, during which the employee can be terminated at any time without cause.

Sorry, butterfly gal. You lose. You get nothing. Good day, Madam.
 
2014-07-23 11:41:00 AM  
I think anybody has the right to get whatever they want put on their own body, obviously. I also think that almost all tattoos are stupid looking and someone in a professional position can be required to cover up.

/farking common sense, how does it work?
 
2014-07-23 11:42:48 AM  
I recently vacationed in Myrtle Beach.  That place was the tattoo and cigarette capital of the world.  I don't think I want to see another tattooed person...ever.  So, yeah, I might not use the service of a company that had a tattooed person as receptionist, etc...
 
2014-07-23 11:48:07 AM  

James!: Obviously being tattoo'd he would throw a Molotov cocktail through the window and headbutt anyone who tried to escape the fire.


That sounds more metal \M/ than tattoo'd.

You seem like a culturally diverse guy. Do you accept that tattoos are representative in a multitude of cultures?

www.hotfreetattoos.com

So why not this culture?
 
2014-07-23 11:48:46 AM  
The only way to cover it would be to wear a sock. I'm a businesswoman and I wear smart dresses to work,

Not anymore.
 
2014-07-23 12:10:09 PM  

Because People in power are Stupid: James!: Obviously being tattoo'd he would throw a Molotov cocktail through the window and headbutt anyone who tried to escape the fire.

That sounds more metal \M/ than tattoo'd.

You seem like a culturally diverse guy. Do you accept that tattoos are representative in a multitude of cultures?

[www.hotfreetattoos.com image 249x285]

So why not this culture?


You're making assumptions.
 
2014-07-23 12:17:08 PM  
They should have created a rule stating all employees must be male and fired her for that because they'll be just as successful in court either way.
 
2014-07-23 12:17:31 PM  

James!: You're making assumptions.


I'm glad you agree with me. We as a society (and as employers) should be more tolerant of other's faux pas. Why, just the other day my assistant farted in the office and explained that in her culture, it was a blessing.

So I had a blessed day.

i.imgur.com
 
2014-07-23 12:18:55 PM  
While it is certainly within the company's rights to terminate the lady, my opinion is that their reason for doing so is stupid. If she was doing a good job & not even in contact physically with clients or the public, how would a foot tattoo matter? It doesn't prevent her from doing her job. If it was really that big of a deal, why didn't they ask her about it in the interview?

I can't wait until the old guard dies out & these antiquated "values" go away. So much stupid shiat is criticized as being "unprofessional" when it really has nothing to do with getting the job done. Tattoos, facial hair, & open-toed shoes (in an office environment, I mean come on) are all things I've heard thrown around as unprofessional.
 
2014-07-23 12:21:29 PM  

edmo: They should have created a rule stating all employees must be male and fired her for that because they'll be just as successful in court either way.


Yeah, because "tattoo'd" is right there next to "gender" in the anti-discrimination laws.

/but it's written in invisible ink. Only shows up under black light. And you've gotta believe.
 
2014-07-23 12:25:57 PM  

Di Atribe: While it is certainly within the company's rights to terminate the lady, my opinion is that their reason for doing so is stupid.


I think she was let go because she had an attitude about covering it up. She was given options and refused. Whether or not the tattoo rule is stupid is besides the issue. I think she was canned because she's a biatch.
 
2014-07-23 12:33:04 PM  

Di Atribe: While it is certainly within the company's rights to terminate the lady, my opinion is that their reason for doing so is stupid. If she was doing a good job & not even in contact physically with clients or the public, how would a foot tattoo matter? It doesn't prevent her from doing her job. If it was really that big of a deal, why didn't they ask her about it in the interview?

I can't wait until the old guard dies out & these antiquated "values" go away. So much stupid shiat is criticized as being "unprofessional" when it really has nothing to do with getting the job done. Tattoos, facial hair, & open-toed shoes (in an office environment, I mean come on) are all things I've heard thrown around as unprofessional.


I remember an interview with a nice young lady.  It went well until she asked about our policy on face piercings.  Turns out, there are lots of other applicants out there that do a great job and don't try to be all edgy with nose rings and the like.  She had taken it out for the interview, so she knew it was kind of a bad idea to try to be a law firm receptionist with it.
 
2014-07-23 12:33:44 PM  

Mugato: Di Atribe: While it is certainly within the company's rights to terminate the lady, my opinion is that their reason for doing so is stupid.

I think she was let go because she had an attitude about covering it up. She was given options and refused. Whether or not the tattoo rule is stupid is besides the issue. I think she was canned because she's a biatch.


Well thank goodness we don't all get fired for being a biatch. Unemployment would be through the roof. It's just so.... irrelevant. And it was the employer who made a big deal out of it first. When both parties are being douchey, I'm more apt to criticize the actor than the reactor.
 
2014-07-23 12:35:31 PM  

Chris Ween: She had taken it out for the interview, so she knew it was kind of a bad idea to try to be a law firm receptionist with it.


Right. I totally get that. And in that interview, it should be made clear that either you leave the face piercing at home or you don't get to work here. Face to the public & all that.
 
2014-07-23 01:27:33 PM  

Chris Ween: Di Atribe: While it is certainly within the company's rights to terminate the lady, my opinion is that their reason for doing so is stupid. If she was doing a good job & not even in contact physically with clients or the public, how would a foot tattoo matter? It doesn't prevent her from doing her job. If it was really that big of a deal, why didn't they ask her about it in the interview?

I can't wait until the old guard dies out & these antiquated "values" go away. So much stupid shiat is criticized as being "unprofessional" when it really has nothing to do with getting the job done. Tattoos, facial hair, & open-toed shoes (in an office environment, I mean come on) are all things I've heard thrown around as unprofessional.

I remember an interview with a nice young lady.  It went well until she asked about our policy on face piercings.  Turns out, there are lots of other applicants out there that do a great job and don't try to be all edgy with nose rings and the like.  She had taken it out for the interview, so she knew it was kind of a bad idea to try to be a law firm receptionist with it.


So you passed on her because she wanted to confirm something?

And the HR types say its bad to NOT ask questions at an interview
 
2014-07-23 01:30:18 PM  
grumpycatgood.jpg

no person who respects himself would soil his body with that atrocious 'art'
 
2014-07-23 01:32:33 PM  
She could have worn boots everyday.  Boots are sexy.
 
2014-07-23 01:35:40 PM  

serial_crusher: She said: "The only way to cover it would be to wear a sock. I'm a businesswoman and I wear smart dresses to work, so that would look stupid.

1) your tattoo already looks stupid
2) did anybody say you have to wear a "smart dress" instead of pants like a normal person?

/ for the record I think dress codes are stupid, but this woman's obstinate refusal to follow them offends me.


Read: Grr, uppity slut thinks she can just do whatever the hell she wants.
 
2014-07-23 01:36:44 PM  
img4.4inews.co.uk

should have explained it was the crazy eyes that got her fired.
 
2014-07-23 01:42:14 PM  

tricycleracer: She could have worn boots everyday.  Boots are sexy.


Judging by the shot of her foot only, I've venture to guess that on her, they would not be.
 
2014-07-23 01:46:07 PM  

Di Atribe: While it is certainly within the company's rights to terminate the lady, my opinion is that their reason for doing so is stupid. If she was doing a good job & not even in contact physically with clients or the public, how would a foot tattoo matter? It doesn't prevent her from doing her job. If it was really that big of a deal, why didn't they ask her about it in the interview?

I can't wait until the old guard dies out & these antiquated "values" go away. So much stupid shiat is criticized as being "unprofessional" when it really has nothing to do with getting the job done. Tattoos, facial hair, & open-toed shoes (in an office environment, I mean come on) are all things I've heard thrown around as unprofessional.


Oh that's only cause you want to rock a backless dress and show off your Cowboys tat like this guy..

i149.photobucket.com


I do agree with you. I work at arts center here in Vegas, and we definitely do not have a problem with people expressing themselves.
 
2014-07-23 01:49:21 PM  

Polartank13: Oh that's only cause you want to rock a backless dress and show off your Cowboys tat like this guy..


*blink*

i.imgur.com
 
2014-07-23 01:49:22 PM  

Di Atribe: While it is certainly within the company's rights to terminate the lady, my opinion is that their reason for doing so is stupid. If she was doing a good job & not even in contact physically with clients or the public, how would a foot tattoo matter? It doesn't prevent her from doing her job. If it was really that big of a deal, why didn't they ask her about it in the interview?

I can't wait until the old guard dies out & these antiquated "values" go away. So much stupid shiat is criticized as being "unprofessional" when it really has nothing to do with getting the job done. Tattoos, facial hair, & open-toed shoes (in an office environment, I mean come on) are all things I've heard thrown around as unprofessional.


Me too.  The whole "you're inherently unprofessional/bad/stupid because you've made some personal aesthetic choices" attitude is so, so, so painfully stupid.  "Oh, I'd never give my business to a place that hired tattooed people!"  Why?  What difference does it really make to you?  Why do you care so much about other people's choices?
The whole thing reeks of the same, old-fashioned, "if you're different from me something is wrong with you" mentality that continues to cause all kinds of problems for gays, browns, and the non-religious.  There's a lot of people that need to get over themselves and realize that their choices do not need to be other people's choices.  We're moving in that direction, at least, but I'd love it to be faster, and for the arbitrarily judgmental to just shut the fark up already.

I've been fortunate to work in fields where my ability to do my job is valued over someone's arbitrary notions of what "looks right."  I'm IT support/sysadmin for my company, and somehow I'm able to do my job well, be nice to everyone, and get the place much cleaner than it has ever been before, in spite of the heavy burden of my piercings and tattoos.  In fact, I'm way better at the job than the guy before me, who matched the traditional notion of "professional appearance."  Go figure.
 
2014-07-23 01:56:41 PM  

ckccfa: Di Atribe: While it is certainly within the company's rights to terminate the lady, my opinion is that their reason for doing so is stupid.


how's that mcjob working out for you??
 
2014-07-23 01:57:51 PM  

Di Atribe: Polartank13: Oh that's only cause you want to rock a backless dress and show off your Cowboys tat like this guy..

*blink*

[i.imgur.com image 245x210]


Yeah, I've had to explain a few time to my IT dept why I downloaded a weird pic...thankfully I'm above them. I really just wanted to find a Tony Romo tat in anticipation of football season, but I couldn't find one. Was kinda surprised. And to stay on topic they certainly do their job well, and have full sleeve tats. I always wondered why they wore long sleeve shirts, then I ran into one of them at a bar.
 
2014-07-23 01:59:47 PM  
I don't have any tattoos, harder to be picked out of a line up that way with fewer distinguishing features. If they need to ID my body, my dental records are unique enough...
 
2014-07-23 02:00:25 PM  
That is a pretty fugly tattoo.
 
2014-07-23 02:00:53 PM  

xtech: how's that mcjob working out for you??


I've been employed full-time at the same job for 13 years & I have no tattoos.  I also don't care if my coworkers have tattoos because that's a stupid thing to care about.


ckccfa: Why do you care so much about other people's choices?


Here's the crux of the situation right here. I can never get an answer to this.
 
2014-07-23 02:03:06 PM  

serial_crusher: She said: "The only way to cover it would be to wear a sock. I'm a businesswoman and I wear smart dresses to work, so that would look stupid.

1) your tattoo already looks stupid
2) did anybody say you have to wear a "smart dress" instead of pants like a normal person?

/ for the record I think dress codes are stupid, but this woman's obstinate refusal to follow them offends me.



Wear pants.
Wear boots.
Cover it with makeup.
Wear socks.


I am not anti-tattoo, but her argument is pretty lame.
 
2014-07-23 02:06:41 PM  

Polartank13: Yeah, I've had to explain a few time to my IT dept why I downloaded a weird pic...thankfully I'm above them. I really just wanted to find a Tony Romo tat in anticipation of football season, but I couldn't find one. Was kinda surprised. And to stay on topic they certainly do their job well, and have full sleeve tats. I always wondered why they wore long sleeve shirts, then I ran into one of them at a bar.


HA! As much as I love him, even I can't commit to a tattoo of a single person (except my daughter, MAYBE). I can't even commit to a personalized license plate & I had a good one all cooked up in my head and everything!

I have a friend who works in a "professional IT environment" who has been working on his sleeves for years. He wears long sleeves to work, even in the summer in Texas and he knew exactly what he was doing when he started the process. That doesn't make him a thug or a criminal (this is what old people really think).
 
2014-07-23 02:11:24 PM  

TheGrayCat: I could forgive it if it wasn't so pedantic. What an awful tattoo!
/and those SHOES!!


www.powerpivotpro.com
 
2014-07-23 02:12:29 PM  
About 15 years ago I worked for a major retailer. One of the policies was that men were not allowed to have visible piercings, hence I was forced to cover it up with a band-aid which actually drew more attention to it than if it was exposed.It was amusing when one of the female staff would get a new tongue piercing and have to use the PA.
 
2014-07-23 02:16:44 PM  

Ctrl-Alt-Del: I'm so glad the article included a stock picture of a woman's feet without any tattoos. Because that's really helpful for those of us who may have difficulty imagining what they may look like.

For those who might actually want to see the tattoo in question, here's a pic from a much more useful article
[i.dailymail.co.uk image 418x299]

It's also interesting to note that the "no visible tattoos" rule was put in place just last month, shortly after this woman was hired. I'm sure it was completely honest and professional, and not in any way a pretext created just so they could fire her.


If she was only hired a couple of months ago they could have fired her without any problem. Except for reasons of race, gender etc rights against unfair dismissal don't kick in until twelve months.
 
2014-07-23 02:23:14 PM  

SpectroBoy: Wear pants.
Wear boots.
Cover it with makeup.
Wear socks.


All of this
 
2014-07-23 02:36:41 PM  

Di Atribe: While it is certainly within the company's rights to terminate the lady, my opinion is that their reason for doing so is stupid. If she was doing a good job & not even in contact physically with clients or the public, how would a foot tattoo matter? It doesn't prevent her from doing her job. If it was really that big of a deal, why didn't they ask her about it in the interview?

I can't wait until the old guard dies out & these antiquated "values" go away. So much stupid shiat is criticized as being "unprofessional" when it really has nothing to do with getting the job done. Tattoos, facial hair, & open-toed shoes (in an office environment, I mean come on) are all things I've heard thrown around as unprofessional.


Am I the only one who doesn't want to see bare feet in the office environment?

www.chfi.com
 
2014-07-23 02:39:14 PM  

mcreadyblue: Am I the only one who doesn't want to see bare feet in the office environment?


Probably not. But I'm a lady & I have lady-feet & wearing boots in the middle of the Texas summer is grosser than wearing sandals. If they're under my desk all day, then why should anyone care?
 
Displayed 50 of 110 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report