The “Water Cooler” is a feature on Claycord.com where we ask you a question or provide a topic, and you talk about it.
The “Water Cooler” will be up Monday-Friday in the noon hour.
QUESTION: Should tattoos impact hiring decisions?
Talk about it….
The Water Cooler – Should Tattoos Impact Hiring Decisions?
Hi,
You are free to express yourself and companies are free to choose who they hire.
For the private sector, it should be up to them. For govt., I would say any visible tattoo is a bad look and they should be avoided.
Would you hire someone for a customer facing position that has a swastika tattoo on their neck?
Yes. I would pick them last and once they are hired, they need to cover the tattoos during business hours.
My friend got a tattoo of a barcode on his arm. Now he gets scanned everywhere he goes!
Monochromatic tats can be an indication of past incarceration.
Body art is a personal choice, but facial, neck or hand tats often give people pause and could off put customers in retail situations.
.
Son has some really amazing tats, 20+ years ago he interviewed in Texas with a multi nation company and was really concerned about his chances, interviewer did ask what church he attended. He did land the job and large salary that went with it. Unfortunately eight years later French company bought company. Next worked in Kuwait for a couple years, long sleeves. Now tats don’t matter, he now owns three companies.
.
Tattoos that can be covered by clothing should be considered, tats that can’t be covered by clothing can be CLM (career limiting move). Thought needs to be given, there are segments of society that thing poorly of tats. Never get a tat when drunk.
Depends on the position/role. In the food industry, when I see arms, necks, faces covered in ink, I really do not want them handling my food; it just looks unclean (I know it not necessarily is). That would be something that a tat should impact hiring. Also, if someone is supposed to represent the company, tats could be undesired, therefore impacting hiring. I work with many scientists, very smart, with tats, and the work they do (commodities they invent/produce, etc.) are innovative/high quality. When I interview, a visible tat could tilt the decision to the un-tatted (non-tatted?) in the case of even skills/experience, etc. Should it? In my mind, yes. My view is drawing cartoons (permanently) on your body is not an activity I view as reasonable.
It depends on the type of job. If you’re changing oil and doing tune-ups, I don’t think it matters. If you’re working in a bank, law firm or CPA firm, etc. I wouldn’t hire them.
It would depend on the type of business, and where the tattoos are placed on the body.
Arms are usually OK, but face and neck could be an indication that the person is lacking
in common sense.
A person with good common sense should realize and understand that certain decisions
made today can and will affect their future. Sometimes we must conform to societies rules, even when we don’t agree or like it.
Personally I don’t care, most tattoos don’t bother me, but I’m not an employer. An
employer may look at too many tattoos as an indication of low self-esteem, and the
person is screaming out, “hey, look at me,” which can affect their self-confidence, and motivation.
If it’s offensive, yes.