Should jobs take your personal perferences in count?

[Juujika]

Do you think its fair for an employer to judge you by your personal perferences, Be it tattoo's, piercings, religion, life style, etc.

I know thats a pretty wide thing to cover. As the law states employers cant take race or religion into a count when hiring you, But lets say your religion or beliefs arent of the normal?

Maybe you follow how indians used to be and you have tribal tattoos on your body and piercings. Would you still consider that covered by the law or just extra baggage that isnt protected by the law?

I know a few people that believe in witch craft, no god, or self god, etc and they all sort of live there lives alittle different to adjust to their own beliefs. If an employer refuses to hire not based on your application/resume but because you dress a way that is around your religion or beliefs that are different then just catholic and jewdism, etc, etc. Should you be covered?

I personally find that the laws in alot of ways are far behind the times and the people. When most of the laws were set in stone for employee and employer rights kids were out and being open about their own beliefs that were different then there parents. Atleast i think so, i could be wrong, well i believe that such life styles that reflect a persons views and beliefs should be protected as long as its not in dangering another persons well being.

[Draffut]

Depends on it it effects how you can perform your job.

Lets say you are goign to be presenting major projects for a company to people. I dont think hiring someone with more metal on thier face then teeth would be a good idea. Even if it is from a religion or culture.

But in 99% of cases, I would say, no. They should not be able to judge you for most things.

[deto]

does a tattoo make me a worse employee? a piercing? my religion? - no. so it shouldn't be taken into acount, but people are shallow. I especially hate the central european mentality on those topics, in order to get a job you need to be so far up someones ass that you can see the back of his teeth.

[Juujika]

Depends on it it effects how you can perform your job.
Lets say you are goign to be presenting major projects for a company to people. I dont think hiring someone with more metal on thier face then teeth would be a good idea. Even if it is from a religion or culture.
But in 99% of cases, I would say, no. They should not be able to judge you for most things.
that is true, you have to hold up a type of professionalism when working which is why this type of thing isnt so black and white.

A prime example is a friend of mine, he isnt really into any religion i believe but he is white and likes to live the "gangster ghetto" life and has a RIP tattoo on his neck from his friend getting shot.
Where i can look at the tattoo and say oh it looks cool, another part of me is saying well you pretty much doomed to work at the mall or the quickie mart forever. Anything that really cant be covered up will hold you back from moving on in life.

Or me, i have a tattoo but its at my inner arm near my elbow so i can cover it up and i have four piercings in my left ear which i can take out. I thought of getting the eyebrow piercing but it would really risk my chances to get a better job or keep my current for the period i need to leave it in so i havent done it. Though thats not really a religion belief, just my life style that i like those type of things but i'm not stupid or navie enough to get it done.

[Draffut]

The military has lots of regulations on piercings and tattoos you can have, is that wrong also?

[deto]

The military has lots of regulations on piercings and tattoos you can have, is that wrong also?

i can still shoot someone 1 mile away no matter if i'm tattoo'ed or not. piercings could make sense to a certain extent. since you could hurt yourself in different situations. but tats? it's beyond me really.

[Juujika]

i can still shoot someone 1 mile away no matter if i'm tattoo'ed or not. piercings could make sense to a certain extent. since you could hurt yourself in different situations. but tats? it's beyond me really.
just something to add, i went to a job interview for a security company. I was told they hold the same dress code as PA police officers which is, handle bar mustache only for men all other facial hair must be cut, no long hair and men arent allowed to wear earings. Women are allowed two ears but men who earings would must likely be studs and less dangerous to the person then hoops cant wear them.

Theres alot of old rules that dont really allow for anything new, i'm not sure what the army/navy etc rules are on tattoos, hair, facial hair and piercings i would assume its more strict. But then again thats the army, there standards should be stricter then normal jobs.

You can get away with facial hair and long hair at normal jobs, but when tattoos or piercings that arent on your ear are visible thats when boss complain or co workers do ( if your lucky enough to get hired in the first place )

[Draffut]

I can give you the general rules in the Air Force, I think the other brances are the same:

No tattoo can cover more then 1/4 of an explosed body part. So you can have all the tatoos you want under your shirt, but if you have a large Tattoo on your arm, you can't wear any short sleeves.

No mustache can extend beyond the edges of your mouth.

Hair must be under 1.25 inches, cannt touch your ears, and cannot be a "fad" cut. (just about anything different. and it's such a general rule, that they can pull it on all types of stuff)

Earings must be conservative on females, no hoops or stuff, and can only be on ears. Males cannot have any.

Now, this is only while on duty obivously. When you are off, you can wear whatever earings and the lik you choose. It has to do with the whole "Uniform" and "Conformity" things.

[Vampyrelord]

I'd have thought that military regulations on tattoos and earrings are also to try and make GIs look fairly civilized and not too intimidating (dark glasses and an assault rifle are scary enough, but if the guy has big earrings and threatening tattoos it's probably rather worse).

Of course, it might just be because the conservative prudes in charge of the US amry think that men with earrings are all fags and women with big earrings are all hookers. A typical ignorant, right wing view.

[shaberry]

I believe that as long as you have the professional appearance and are qualified for the job, employers shouldn't judge a person on their personal preferences.

[Shinomori]

So long as it does not affect your ability to perform in the job, I don't believe it necessary to essentially discriminate.

If you're a fundamentalist christian who wants to work at a tattoo parlor, there may be a conflict of interests. After all, someone wants a devil on their back, say. Fundamentalist christian people would probably go ape-shit on them, telling them that the devil does not deserve to be idolized and such.

Something like that, it's entirely plausible to "discriminate" with because it's not discrimination. It's just a matter of the ability to do work.

Anything where it's the owner's personal preference (i.e. an atheist shop owner not hiring christians) is up to them, really. If they can't work with someone of that nature, then it's their prerogative. Otherwise, they might as well.

So yeah, it's more or less up to the person who owns it.

[nx6]

The actual rules are of little consequence. As long as you're not some skilled labor they absolutly need, companies have no trouble trying to bully you around in your appearance and what you do outside of work. I'm sure we've seen the news story about the woman who was a flight attendant and had an S&M fetish. She didn't do anything on the job of course, is was a strictly personal thing. But the company found out and fired her. The reason they always give for stuff like this is that the person's activities reflect negetively on the company as a whole reputationwise (as though the repuation of a company has anything to do with what rank and file employees do in their spare time).

My sister used to work at a fast food mexican place. She's a vegetarian, and can put up with being around meat cooking all day. But she's also Hindu, and her boss is an Evangelical Christian. She can complain about him being preachy, but he can just find some stupid excuse to fire her then. When there's a dozen people willing to do a job, companies can treat people like dirt and replace them if they quit.

[zen]

A lot of people say professional appearance, But in all honesty you can be a complete idiot and look professional, look at George bush. I believe that if you are good for the job and will improve the overall company, then it doesn't matter how you look. UNLESS you have tattoos on your face which shouldn't matter, But I wouldn't hire someone with tattoos on their face to be honest.

[KT Samurai]

It should only depend on your occupation and the intended market. If you're sitting in a computer lab and repairing printers where no one else can see you then just wear a clean (company) shirt and there should be nothing else to discuss if you're actually well-versed in printer repair. Working with people as a sales represntative, though, requires a certain amount of attention paid to personal appearace. Like it or not, people might be offended by your retarded hair, drab clothing, or inant tattoo. If you're scaring off potential customers then you're not doing the business any good, so what good are you?

Sorry, people get offended and frightened by some people's choices about their appearance. A good employer will be able to work out what he can and cannot get away with with the people he needs to represent him, and if the kind of people you will typically be serving/assisting/selling to are progressive enough not to care then the way you look is less likely to be an issue.

Don't like it? Start a business and try it yourself. An employer pays you for a reason. It's not always "fair", but that's how the world is.

[Shinomori]

I'd have thought that military regulations on tattoos and earrings are also to try and make GIs look fairly civilized and not too intimidating (dark glasses and an assault rifle are scary enough, but if the guy has big earrings and threatening tattoos it's probably rather worse).

Of course, it might just be because the conservative prudes in charge of the US amry think that men with earrings are all fags and women with big earrings are all hookers. A typical ignorant, right wing view.

Actually, from what I've heard, they say no piercings or visible tattoos in order to make you all look alike.

It "demeans" the soldiers, forcing them to act more like an individual group and less like a group of individuals.

It's the same reason they all have the same haircut.

[EndlessSky]

Of course, it might just be because the conservative prudes in charge of the US amry think that men with earrings are all fags and women with big earrings are all hookers. A typical ignorant, right wing view.


That is a very sterotypical and ignorant view in my opinion. There are reasons behind why they have those regulations such as for discipline like someone has already mentioned. The uniformity can also help you tell who is friendly or the enemy.

You got to understand they are trainning them for WAR and for killing people.

[Draffut]

The actual rules are of little consequence. As long as you're not some skilled labor they absolutly need, companies have no trouble trying to bully you around in your appearance and what you do outside of work. I'm sure we've seen the news story about the woman who was a flight attendant and had an S&M fetish. She didn't do anything on the job of course, is was a strictly personal thing. But the company found out and fired her. The reason they always give for stuff like this is that the person's activities reflect negetively on the company as a whole reputationwise (as though the repuation of a company has anything to do with what rank and file employees do in their spare time).

This reminds me of the lady who was kicked out of the Air Force a few months back, becuase she posed in Playboy. Basically the same reasoning.

[diamondedge]

Do you think its fair for an employer to judge you by your personal perferences, Be it tattoo's, piercings, religion, life style, etc.


Absolutely NOT. That is extremely unprofessional and stupid, because job and personal life must never mix. That is violation of someone's privacy. On paper, your employee doesn't even have the RIGHT to ask you if you have a boyfriend, yet alone judge any personal info he may get about you and let it influence his decision. Of course, there are some exceptions, such as criminal activities, but other than that, I think it's really dumb to judge on that. Professionals must strictly separate personal life from their work. I do that. Based on what you said, would you not employ me because of my aggressive gothic style of dressing and my tattoos, even though I am perfectly fitting for the job, and rather employ some "normal" incompetent person with apparently "normal" lifestyle?

Personal life, beliefs, tastes, lifestyle are irrelevant as long as you can do the job and as long as you don't let it influence your performance at work.

If I was to give a job to someone, I don't give a damn about what he does in real life, what he believes in as long as he does what he is supposed to. No, it's not fair.

[Draffut]

Absolutely NOT. That is extremely unprofessional and stupid, because job and personal life must never mix. That is violation of someone's privacy. On paper, your employee doesn't even have the RIGHT to ask you if you have a boyfriend, yet alone judge any personal info he may get about you and let it influence his decision. Of course, there are some exceptions, such as criminal activities, but other than that, I think it's really dumb to judge on that. Professionals must strictly separate personal life from their work. I do that. Based on what you said, would you not employ me because of my aggressive gothic style of dressing and my tattoos, even though I am perfectly fitting for the job, and rather employ some "normal" incompetent person with apparently "normal" lifestyle?

Lets roll with the Goth thing for now. First off, how would the employeer know you are a Goth when he/she hires you? Are you going to the interview dressed in all black? Are you going there with massive tattoos exposed or metal face accessories on? If so, I would expect the interviewer to note hire you, if you cant go to a simple interview and present yourself professionally.

Now, if you went there, and presented yourself well. I would see no reason for the employer to not hire you about your personal prefererances, or even question it.

[nx6]

Now, if you went there, and presented yourself well. I would see no reason for the employer to not hire you about your personal prefererances, or even question it.

It's becoming more common for recruiters and HR people to search for someone on Google or MySpace before hiring them. This is especially dangerous as Google will pick up anything on the internet, including false information about you (or someone who happens to have your name). And it's not like you're going to be given a chance to defend yourself on what they find.

[BeMused]

No.

Jobs should not choose employees based solely on their appearance. But, again, it falls back on which kind of job you are talking about.

Instead of lengthy post, I will give you with an example: Would we be expecting or wanting a doctor coming in clinics with piercings and tattoos? How would patients react to that?

[Tyekanik]

An employer can do one of two things. (about markets that generally don't accept such things)

1. Say ok do what you want, people 'should' understand you are a very kind human being with a bunny in your heart.

2. Say hell no, humans are judgmental and I don't want to lose money because of your fashion sense.

It doesn't matter what any person thinks except the one looking to drop money on the business, and the majority of goods sold is not body jewelry/tattoos, whatever/however little clothing you wish to imagine.

[BeMused]

Lets roll with the Goth thing for now. First off, how would the employeer know you are a Goth when he/she hires you? Are you going to the interview dressed in all black?

Well, "going Goth" does not mean that you have to wear black... O.o
That was beside the point. I understand what you mean though.

An employer can do one of two things.

1. Say ok do what you want, people 'should' understand you are a very kind human being with a bunny in your heart.
2. Say hell no, humans are judgmental and I don't want to lose money because of your fashion sense.

Exactly that! It all falls back to the kind of job you are doing.

If the job requires you to stay all day in doors doing, say, scientific research, you would not mind an employee with bizarre fashion sense, though he/she might need some equipments for personal protection.

But, if the job requires you to meet other people, as in meetings and presentations, or even a school teacher, you might think twice of putting more emphasis on 'proper, socially accepted' appearance.

[nx6]

Instead of lengthy post, I will give you with an example: Would we be expecting or wanting a doctor coming in clinics with piercings and tattoos? How would patients react to that?
You mean like this guy?
http://www.mundane.org/ult/travels/details/bm/1999/pics/ult/images/19990905020642.jpg

[BeMused]

You mean like this guy?
http://www.mundane.org/ult/travels/details/bm/1999/pics/ult/images/19990905020642.jpg

Perhaps I should have been more specific in it by saying those who are trained in Western medicine.

[nx6]

Sorry. It was a smart aleck answer anyway.

I wouldn't care if they had piercing or tattoos, as long as they could fix me up. There are limits to that however, I don't think even I would accept a witch doctor.

But I think standards of personal appearance are too strict overall. There are professions where, yes, you appearance does play a vital role in things (like real estate). But there are many low wage jobs with dress codes and standards that frankly, nobody cares about. Think about all the retail stores that forbid employees to have beards. I don't mean ZZ-top, but a well manicured, modern beard.

At my job I'm supposed to be wearing a collared shirt and slacks. My customers don't even see me, I work on the phone. Yeah, there are times corporate people visit and I'm supposed to dress more business like, and that makes sense. But really, when I can be sitting here naked and do my job just as effectively, why do I need a collar?