What’s your policy on tattoos in the workplace?
If you’re like a lot of places, it probably depends on what industry you’re in and if you serve customers directly or not. Most people who have tied their shoes and jogged over to Corporate America have done so with the understanding that if they have tattoos, they should be hidden in easily concealable places. The stigma of getting a tattoo and being a CEO just doesn’t play in many corporate board rooms still.
For some reason though, people keep getting inked. And pierced. And some of them wear flip flops, scummy jeans, and t-shirts with maybe some slightly off-color phrases. Quite possibly it’s a HR nightmare (or maybe just a HR headache), but it could impact other employees or customers. Or maybe you might think that simply getting these things done (or wearing whatever “that” is) gives a company reason enough not to hire a person.
But what if you live in Miami, FL, Portland, OR, or Richmond, VA? These cities made it into the top ten most tattooed cities in the country and those folks with ink on them might have some of the talent you are looking for.
A matter of appearance
I started my post college career at a place that had very conservative standards for dress and grooming. We’re talking about no piercings, no tattoos, no long hair for guys and make sure you got your shirt and tie too.
And being that we were located in one of these most inked cities in the country (and the job wasn’t terribly attractive anyway), it made it very difficult to recruit. I remember bringing in a person with a tattoo on his hand and neck, and I had to tell him we wouldn’t even waste our time with an interview.
I get the argument: some companies want to express their culture through appearance. They want to put forward the least offensive, most consistent image possible.
Sometimes though, there can be conflict.
Costco and The Church of Body Modification
When Costco was attempting to tighten up their dress and grooming policies, they required that cashiers may not wear facial jewelry other than earrings. A cashier refused to do so based on her membership in the Church of Body Modification and she was subsequently fired. After a long legal battle, Costco won out and while it was mainly a case surrounding religious expression in the workplace, it also touched upon dress codes in general:
Recognizing that, “Costco is far from unique in adopting personal appearance standards to promote and protect its image,” the Court observed that “[c]ourts have long recognized the importance of personal appearance regulations, even in the face of Title VII challenges.” Such codes, it added, “which are designed to appeal to customer preference or promote a professional public image,” have been upheld. The Court affirmed the dismissal of the state claim as well, in the absence of state decisions departing from the Title VII analysis.
So while they were correct, it was also an expensive legal battle.
And while I can find no other mention of her work performance, I have to assume that a four-year employee of the company was probably doing something right and that this regulation impacted more than just an individual (and possibly hundreds or even thousands of prospective employees). The impact of a simple dress or appearance code can cause ripples down the line.
What counts?
Ultimately, you have one question to ask yourself if you’re the policy-maker in an organization: if the most qualified, perfect employee walked into your interview with a nose ring and visible tattoos, would you reject them out of hand?
It has to be very culturally important to your organization if you’re willing to lose on talent based on appearance (and not ability alone).
And certainly if you’re hiring in Las Vegas or Austin, you might be waiting a little longer for the perfect (but un-inked) person to join your organization.
Your turn: Do you allow tattoos, piercings, flip flops, etc… at your place of business? Why have you chosen the policy you implemented? Feel free to leave a comment below or join the discussion on our LinkedIn group.