So what do you guys think? Is there as much of a bias in the workplace against body art now as there was twenty years ago? Is it disrespectful to not look 'professional' at a job? Does anyone even still care what color your hair is?
It depends on the workplace, but in the corporate world, you'd be amazed at how many people have piercings, tattoos, etc. However, we keep it covered up, especially if we're gonna have a meeting. This can become rather tiresome in this part of the world... this isn't the time of year to have to wear long sleeves.
I've explained this to my folks and they understand. Look, if it was my world, I'd let them do what they want, but we're working for The Man over here.
If I could, I would love to get legislation passed that prohibeted firing a worker based on piercings, hair color or tatoos. I feel that these are an extension of your personality, and that we should be free to be able to express ourselves. And I greatly appreciate work places that share that sentiment.
Neither clothes nor piercings make the person. Same goes for hair color and tatoos. It is just another form of judgement and predjudice, one that I woudl really like to see done away with.
I work two places right now. A library and a Pizza joint, and they have different dress codes.
Ridiculously enough, I can wear jeans, have multiple piercings (our teen librarian has a double eyebrow, one of our psas has huge gauges, and I used to have an eyebrow till it got infected. Now I just have three in each ear), and tasteful tatoos. We are even able to dye our hair, as long as it isn't "disruptive". (My friend working at another library in the system got permission to dye his hair silver, while another girl had black with bright pink streaks.) We all wear jeans, and many of the pages wear t-shirts and jeans. When I worked at Barnes and Noble I wasn't allowed to wear Jeans, but I could have whatever color of hair I want, tatoos were fine, and piercings were okay.
On the flip side, I can't have facial piercings at dominos, no visible tatoos, and I could be fired for dying my hair the wrong color. I have to wear black slacks or shorts. This is similar to how I had to dress when I worked at Mcdonalds.
The food service industry is a major exception. I have to admit that, while I respect body modification on the whole, some piercings or heavy tattooing just radiate the idea of "not clean" to me. I would probably not eat at a place where one of the food prep folks had a tongue ring. I don't really care whether it's sterile or not, part of dining out is aesthetic.
Freebirds, for one. There are guys who have gauges I could do hula-hoops with, and they're right there in front of me, putting my meat and rice into my tortilla.
That said, in my experience, most workplaces hold people to a standard that is much higher than necessary.
I'll give you an example: two offices, same company, about 20 miles away from each other. At office 1, the receptionist had visible tattoos (along her neck, upper back, and shoulders). It was common for jeans to be worn during the week (as long as they weren't frayed or torn) and if somebody was coming in for a half-day, it wasn't that unusual for them to come in in a T-shirt and sneakers too - as long as the t-shirt didn't have any printed text on it and the sneaker were in good condition.
At office 2, t-shirts were never allowed except underneath button-down shirts. Jeans were acceptable only on Fridays. Sneakers were never acceptable. While there was no specific policy regarding tattoos or piercings, nobody who worked in that office had any visible tattoos or non-ear piercings.
What was the difference? Was one a sales office and the other back-end administration? Did one service a different clientele? No, not really, on any account. They both had occasional client visits.
At office 1, the office manager would make sure the employees there knew when a client visit was scheduled and expected that employees would dress appropriately on those days. If they didn't, they were suitably and swiftly reprimanded.
At office 2, the office manager didn't bother. She didn't want to concern herself with when clients were in the office and when they weren't, so her policy was that employees were always expected to dress as though clients were present.
The office manager's laziness basically meant that dozens of employees were inconvenienced.
The funny thing about this is I'm currently in the middle of this exact situation. I work in office #1 (but replace sneakers with flip-flops) and we are moving across town to office #2. And myself and my co-workers are pissed.
I am a supervisor at my government office, right now my sleeves are rolled up, and I have a red and black design on my forearm. No one has ever had an issue of this, but then again, when I'm in a formal meeting it is covered. I think as long as it's tasteful and the employee recognizes that there are still cultural biases to work around, it's all good.
jeddy lee on
Backlog Challenge: 0%
0/8
PS2
FF X replay
PS3
God of War 1&2 HD
Rachet and Clank Future
MGS 4
Prince of Persia
With appearance in the workplace, you're always having to work with the lowest common denominator. When the employee works for/on behalf of someone else, you have to anticipate everything that might offend the customer and try to remove it. That's why so many jobs have really mundane, similar dress codes.
As everyone has said, it all depends on the work place, and also the type of work. I worked as a stocker for Costco, my shift was from 2 am to 10 am. Those of us with tattoos or piercings didn't really need to conceal them, because we didn't have any direct customer interaction. But everyone else who works in the day time, they have to keep their tattoos covered, and their piercings have to be nothing crazy.
pinenut_canary on
0
Options
firewaterwordSatchitanandaPais Vasco to San FranciscoRegistered Userregular
edited June 2009
I work in an office where those in charge probably wouldn't bat an eye if I turned up in leather shorts and a Hawaiian shirt. I don't dress like that, mind you, because I'm more than happy in jeans and a polo. However, a substantial portion of my job duties require me to spend time in both Federal and District court.
You can be damn sure that when I'm in court, I'm dressed to the nines.
Long story short, as long as it can be covered/concealed, I'd have no problem hiring someone with tats or piercings - as long as it's crystal clear that they're able and willing to look as fastidiously professional as possible on short notice.
The food service industry is a major exception. I have to admit that, while I respect body modification on the whole, some piercings or heavy tattooing just radiate the idea of "not clean" to me. I would probably not eat at a place where one of the food prep folks had a tongue ring. I don't really care whether it's sterile or not, part of dining out is aesthetic.
I can understand why no dangles, only studs are required, but really? Having a piercing does not make you, nor any activity you do less clean. I'm probably more clean and more up tight about my sanitation then the preppy dudes that I worked with at both Mcdonalds and Domino's. And once a tatoo heals it is firmly UNDER the skin, and not going to contaminate in any way shape or form. All you are doing is conforming to the stereotype and letting it effect the way you think.
I'd rather have a spunky girl with a nose stud and pink hair helping me in a friendly manner, than that prep boy doing it just for money and who could care less. The prep boy is more likely to contaminate my food for some bullshit reason.
On the flipside, I've noticed that I tend to tip better if a delivery person/server is heavily tattooed or pierced and does a good job. I almost always throw down an extra few dollars more than I would if someone "normal" looking did a good job. I think of it as my way of throwing a few extra dollars their way that they likely won't see because people are assholes, but I'm fully aware it's a dick move to people who don't choose to modify their bodies.
The food service industry is a major exception. I have to admit that, while I respect body modification on the whole, some piercings or heavy tattooing just radiate the idea of "not clean" to me. I would probably not eat at a place where one of the food prep folks had a tongue ring. I don't really care whether it's sterile or not, part of dining out is aesthetic.
I can understand why no dangles, only studs are required, but really? Having a piercing does not make you, nor any activity you do less clean. I'm probably more clean and more up tight about my sanitation then the preppy dudes that I worked with at both Mcdonalds and Domino's. And once a tatoo heals it is firmly UNDER the skin, and not going to contaminate in any way shape or form. All you are doing is conforming to the stereotype and letting it effect the way you think.
I'd rather have a spunky girl with a nose stud and pink hair helping me in a friendly manner, than that prep boy doing it just for money and who could care less. The prep boy is more likely to contaminate my food for some bullshit reason.
I'm slightly confused by the choice of tongue ring, since mouth piercings are cleaned by your saliva and only need a bit of regular scrubbing. They're probably much cleaner than most peoples' earrings.
METAzraeL on
dream a little dream or you could live a little dream
sleep forever if you wish to be a dreamer
If I could, I would love to get legislation passed that prohibeted firing a worker based on piercings, hair color or tatoos. I feel that these are an extension of your personality, and that we should be free to be able to express ourselves. And I greatly appreciate work places that share that sentiment.
I think this is a pretty bad idea. I agree that such things can be an extension of your personality, but sometimes someones personality is reason to fire them. Being rude and abrasive is part of some peoples personalities and I do not think an employer should be unable to fire them for that. Similarly if someone has a tattoo that might be considered offensive due to the use of violent imagery or profanity I see no reason why an employer should be required to ignore that.
If I could, I would love to get legislation passed that prohibeted firing a worker based on piercings, hair color or tatoos. I feel that these are an extension of your personality, and that we should be free to be able to express ourselves. And I greatly appreciate work places that share that sentiment.
I think this is a pretty bad idea. I agree that such things can be an extension of your personality, but sometimes someones personality is reason to fire them. Being rude and abrasive is part of some peoples personalities and I do not think an employer should be unable to fire them for that. Similarly if someone has a tattoo that might be considered offensive due to the use of violent imagery or profanity I see no reason why an employer should be required to ignore that.
I think, though, that as people have become more amenable to tattoos as expression, they have become less of a symbol for "renegades" or dilettantes.
METAzraeL on
dream a little dream or you could live a little dream
sleep forever if you wish to be a dreamer
I vaguely recall there being laws against the prohibition of facial tattoos in New Zealand, because the practical upshot of such a policy is that it means "No Maoris". That's probably a little outside the scope of the discussion, though.
If I could, I would love to get legislation passed that prohibeted firing a worker based on piercings, hair color or tatoos. I feel that these are an extension of your personality, and that we should be free to be able to express ourselves. And I greatly appreciate work places that share that sentiment.
I think this is a pretty bad idea. I agree that such things can be an extension of your personality, but sometimes someones personality is reason to fire them. Being rude and abrasive is part of some peoples personalities and I do not think an employer should be unable to fire them for that. Similarly if someone has a tattoo that might be considered offensive due to the use of violent imagery or profanity I see no reason why an employer should be required to ignore that.
-snip-
I think, though, that as people have become more amenable to tattoos as expression, they have become less of a symbol for "renegades" or dilettantes.
Not only this, but criminal/prison tattoos do not generally look the same as professional ones. The industry does a lot to keep itself seperate of the criminal image.
I'd still regard any prison tattoo as being a big symbol.
I think, though, that as people have become more amenable to tattoos as expression, they have become less of a symbol for "renegades" or dilettantes.
This a thousand times.
Like I said earlier, I work in media design/art/journalism (it's kind of an all over the place job). While I do have one big tattoo, the woman that works as our secretary has three. And she's about as normal and conservative as you can get (we're talking deep south here).
I think, as long as the tattoo isn't offensive or vulgar, a lot more people now are seeing them as body art, and not gang signs.
The food service industry is a major exception. I have to admit that, while I respect body modification on the whole, some piercings or heavy tattooing just radiate the idea of "not clean" to me. I would probably not eat at a place where one of the food prep folks had a tongue ring. I don't really care whether it's sterile or not, part of dining out is aesthetic.
I can understand why no dangles, only studs are required, but really? Having a piercing does not make you, nor any activity you do less clean. I'm probably more clean and more up tight about my sanitation then the preppy dudes that I worked with at both Mcdonalds and Domino's. And once a tatoo heals it is firmly UNDER the skin, and not going to contaminate in any way shape or form. All you are doing is conforming to the stereotype and letting it effect the way you think.
I'd rather have a spunky girl with a nose stud and pink hair helping me in a friendly manner, than that prep boy doing it just for money and who could care less. The prep boy is more likely to contaminate my food for some bullshit reason.
I'm slightly confused by the choice of tongue ring, since mouth piercings are cleaned by your saliva and only need a bit of regular scrubbing. They're probably much cleaner than most peoples' earrings.
I used to manage a Taco Bell and the honest, simple reason is that the piercing, or a part of it, could fall off into the food. I have a lip ring and no one cared that I kept it in after I demonstrated that I could hold the store's safe bag up with it, and that sucker wasn't going anywhere. But on the opposite side, I did make an employee remove her nose stud because, as she said, "Sometimes it just pops out when I sneeze."
Depends on the tattoo and who is hiring. I've actually received a few pings of interest due to my tattoos, which are a bunch of math formulas and very geeky.
I think with younger people, tattoos in and of themselves are not the issue, but what the tattoos represent. Tattoos are a statement of things that are important to a person and if the person has some tattoos that indicate that the thing that is very important to them is also the same thing they will be doing in their job, it becomes a positive.
So you're saying my full back tattoo of a CMS 1500 HCFA is a plus? Excellent.
I expect that joke to be gotten by very few people, but I'm still proud of it.
I feel kind of dirty that I understood that reference immediately.
If I could, I would love to get legislation passed that prohibeted firing a worker based on piercings, hair color or tatoos. I feel that these are an extension of your personality, and that we should be free to be able to express ourselves. And I greatly appreciate work places that share that sentiment.
I think this is a pretty bad idea. I agree that such things can be an extension of your personality, but sometimes someones personality is reason to fire them. Being rude and abrasive is part of some peoples personalities and I do not think an employer should be unable to fire them for that. Similarly if someone has a tattoo that might be considered offensive due to the use of violent imagery or profanity I see no reason why an employer should be required to ignore that.
Jesus fucking Christ that's a bad idea. It's not like you're born with your tats or piercings. If you look like a freak by choice and can perform your job functions correctly I'll hire you. If you look like a freak by choice and that impedes your ability to do your job somehow then I won't.
It's a lot to ask any HR department to keep itself current on the meanings of all tattoos, and whether they're gang-related. And what would generally be considered gang-related tattoos have been leaking out more and more into regular society.
The teardrop is well-known to be used among gangs to symbolize friends who have been killed and/or people the bearer has killed. Meanwhile this lady:
writes songs for Christina Aguilera. I'm guessing she's probably not a gang member.
Part of the personality? I guess. Of course, couldn't it also be another applicant's personality that he really likes the color blue and wears bright blue shirts, pants, shoes, and hats everyday? Or maybe they really like the number 13, and feature it prominently in their clothes and tattoos.
Or they could be from Rollin 60s or Mara Salvatrucha.
Depends on the tattoo and who is hiring. I've actually received a few pings of interest due to my tattoos, which are a bunch of math formulas and very geeky.
I think with younger people, tattoos in and of themselves are not the issue, but what the tattoos represent. Tattoos are a statement of things that are important to a person and if the person has some tattoos that indicate that the thing that is very important to them is also the same thing they will be doing in their job, it becomes a positive.
So you're saying my full back tattoo of a CMS 1500 HCFA is a plus? Excellent.
I expect that joke to be gotten by very few people, but I'm still proud of it.
Man, some guy came in to an interview with a tattoo that said "DNR" on his arm. I don't know what means, but I don't want no gang shit going on in my workplace!
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
How about the idea that an individual who is willing to get visible art and piercings is demonstrating that their personal expression is more important to them than fitting in with the corporate culture?
Man, some guy came in to an interview with a tattoo that said "DNR" on his arm. I don't know what means, but I don't want no gang shit going on in my workplace!
How about the idea that an individual who is willing to get visible art and piercings is demonstrating that their personal expression is more important to them than fitting in with the corporate culture?
I would kind of go along with this idea. However, I would always hold experience and capability above appearance. Visible body mods, etc. are just one more aspect of your personality a person is openly volunteering. I would rather keep that card up my sleeve personally.
Man, some guy came in to an interview with a tattoo that said "DNR" on his arm. I don't know what means, but I don't want no gang shit going on in my workplace!
"Do Not Resuscitate?"
Thank you Arch, that was the joke.
PeregrineFalcon on
Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
How about the idea that an individual who is willing to get visible art and piercings is demonstrating that their personal expression is more important to them than fitting in with the corporate culture?
That sounds all corporate-brutality-sensible, but I think there's a lot more to whether someone's a useful employee than whether they're conformist.
For example, I work for a company that generally likes yes-men. But we have a problem with our senior management, in that many of them are just wusses with no individual ideas on anything.
Independence can be a virtue in the corporate world just as much as in, say, the artistic one.
Also, can I hate the word 'professional'? It's the most empty, tautologous term ever. You should look or act a certain way in business because that's how business-people act and look? No.
poshniallo on
I figure I could take a bear.
0
Options
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
Depends on the tattoo and who is hiring. I've actually received a few pings of interest due to my tattoos, which are a bunch of math formulas and very geeky.
I think with younger people, tattoos in and of themselves are not the issue, but what the tattoos represent. Tattoos are a statement of things that are important to a person and if the person has some tattoos that indicate that the thing that is very important to them is also the same thing they will be doing in their job, it becomes a positive.
So you're saying my full back tattoo of a CMS 1500 HCFA is a plus? Excellent.
I expect that joke to be gotten by very few people, but I'm still proud of it.
Well, a HCFA 1500 will get you in the door at a professionals office, but if you wanna go for the big money cash facility money, get a UB 92 on your face!
Also, can I hate the word 'professional'? It's the most empty, tautologous term ever.
Yes, you absolutely can. If anyone other than a hitman identifies himself as "a professional," then he's almost certainly someone I'm not going to like.
Bama on
0
Options
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
Each employee set was presented in two, with one being a 'deviant' and the other being 'normal'. For the first run of the test, both applicants had the same qualifications. In the second run, one client had obviously better qualifications. The better applicant varied between the deviant and the normal.
The results we found were basically what we expected. The younger the person participating in the experiment, the more likely they were to ignore the physical appearance and go for qualifications. However, there were enough exceptions to that conclusion that it seems to be more of a personal bias than an age one. Also, we could only complete the experiment at my college, which is located in Georgia, so I'm sure that influenced it as well.
So what do you guys think? Is there as much of a bias in the workplace against body art now as there was twenty years ago? Is it disrespectful to not look 'professional' at a job? Does anyone even still care what color your hair is?
The flaw with this experiment is that the participants were all college students that had no skin in the game. None of the people in this experiment have had any significant experience hiring anyone.
If someone was to sit opposite from me with any sort of visible tattoo or any piercing other than a woman with earings (2 per ear TOPS) I would politely finish the interview, but that 'candidate' just wasted both of our times.
Anything more than that and you might as well tattoo "UNEMPLOYABLE" on your forehead.
Also, can I hate the word 'professional'? It's the most empty, tautologous term ever.
Yes, you absolutely can. If anyone other than a hitman identifies himself as "a professional," then he's almost certainly someone I'm not going to like.
I'm not a crazed gunman, Dad.
PeregrineFalcon on
Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
Each employee set was presented in two, with one being a 'deviant' and the other being 'normal'. For the first run of the test, both applicants had the same qualifications. In the second run, one client had obviously better qualifications. The better applicant varied between the deviant and the normal.
The results we found were basically what we expected. The younger the person participating in the experiment, the more likely they were to ignore the physical appearance and go for qualifications. However, there were enough exceptions to that conclusion that it seems to be more of a personal bias than an age one. Also, we could only complete the experiment at my college, which is located in Georgia, so I'm sure that influenced it as well.
So what do you guys think? Is there as much of a bias in the workplace against body art now as there was twenty years ago? Is it disrespectful to not look 'professional' at a job? Does anyone even still care what color your hair is?
The flaw with this experiment is that the participants were all college students that had no skin in the game. None of the people in this experiment have had any significant experience hiring anyone.
If someone was to sit opposite from me with any sort of visible tattoo or any piercing other than a woman with earings (2 per ear TOPS) I would politely finish the interview, but that 'candidate' just wasted both of our times.
Anything more than that and you might as well tattoo "UNEMPLOYABLE" on your forehead.
So what you're saying is that you're prejudiced?
PeregrineFalcon on
Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
0
Options
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
Possibly. It's a reasonable pre-judgement to make. I expect my team to project awesome and poop excellence. They are a reflection of me. If someone has a dragon on their fucking neck or a spike sticking out of their skull, their attitude towards our corporate environment is questionable.
There's an expression "Dress for the job you want, not the job you have." If you pierced the hell out of your face in college or your early 20s you made a choice that shows you value your personal expression a heckuvalot more than your career options.
You can excel regardless, but you need to deliver a lot more awesome than other people. I have a friend in my field that is a white dude with long dreadlocks. He is a much better coder than I am and about the same age as me, but I am a lot further along in my career because of the differences in our values.
The same argument as above, but worded differently. It doesn't matter whether you think that's an unreasonable prejudice to hold or not. It does matter that you identify whether the people with money to spend on talent in your field hold that prejudice. It's a value decision. Do you value the right to express yourself in that creative way, or do you value the extra boost that meeting the "professional standards" of the stodgy old folks in your industry gives you?
I have a friend in my field that is a white dude with long dreadlocks. He is a much better coder than I am and about the same age as me, but I am a lot further along in my career because people are stupid.
I think some of it might be how well you can clean your self up too. If you can comb out your hair, put on a sport coat and act like all the other suit monkeys your fine for most companies now a days.
I have a friend in my field that is a white dude with long dreadlocks. He is a much better coder than I am and about the same age as me, but I am a lot further along in my career because people are stupid.
fixed
If it's because people are stupid, does that make Deebaser any less successful? You have to play to the crowd, man.
Posts
I've explained this to my folks and they understand. Look, if it was my world, I'd let them do what they want, but we're working for The Man over here.
Neither clothes nor piercings make the person. Same goes for hair color and tatoos. It is just another form of judgement and predjudice, one that I woudl really like to see done away with.
I work two places right now. A library and a Pizza joint, and they have different dress codes.
Ridiculously enough, I can wear jeans, have multiple piercings (our teen librarian has a double eyebrow, one of our psas has huge gauges, and I used to have an eyebrow till it got infected. Now I just have three in each ear), and tasteful tatoos. We are even able to dye our hair, as long as it isn't "disruptive". (My friend working at another library in the system got permission to dye his hair silver, while another girl had black with bright pink streaks.) We all wear jeans, and many of the pages wear t-shirts and jeans. When I worked at Barnes and Noble I wasn't allowed to wear Jeans, but I could have whatever color of hair I want, tatoos were fine, and piercings were okay.
On the flip side, I can't have facial piercings at dominos, no visible tatoos, and I could be fired for dying my hair the wrong color. I have to wear black slacks or shorts. This is similar to how I had to dress when I worked at Mcdonalds.
The funny thing about this is I'm currently in the middle of this exact situation. I work in office #1 (but replace sneakers with flip-flops) and we are moving across town to office #2. And myself and my co-workers are pissed.
PS2
FF X replay
PS3
God of War 1&2 HD
Rachet and Clank Future
MGS 4
Prince of Persia
360
Bayonetta
Fable 3
DS
FF: 4 heroes of light
You can be damn sure that when I'm in court, I'm dressed to the nines.
Long story short, as long as it can be covered/concealed, I'd have no problem hiring someone with tats or piercings - as long as it's crystal clear that they're able and willing to look as fastidiously professional as possible on short notice.
I can understand why no dangles, only studs are required, but really? Having a piercing does not make you, nor any activity you do less clean. I'm probably more clean and more up tight about my sanitation then the preppy dudes that I worked with at both Mcdonalds and Domino's. And once a tatoo heals it is firmly UNDER the skin, and not going to contaminate in any way shape or form. All you are doing is conforming to the stereotype and letting it effect the way you think.
I'd rather have a spunky girl with a nose stud and pink hair helping me in a friendly manner, than that prep boy doing it just for money and who could care less. The prep boy is more likely to contaminate my food for some bullshit reason.
dream a little dream or you could live a little dream
sleep forever if you wish to be a dreamer
I think this is a pretty bad idea. I agree that such things can be an extension of your personality, but sometimes someones personality is reason to fire them. Being rude and abrasive is part of some peoples personalities and I do not think an employer should be unable to fire them for that. Similarly if someone has a tattoo that might be considered offensive due to the use of violent imagery or profanity I see no reason why an employer should be required to ignore that.
I think, though, that as people have become more amenable to tattoos as expression, they have become less of a symbol for "renegades" or dilettantes.
dream a little dream or you could live a little dream
sleep forever if you wish to be a dreamer
Not only this, but criminal/prison tattoos do not generally look the same as professional ones. The industry does a lot to keep itself seperate of the criminal image.
I'd still regard any prison tattoo as being a big symbol.
This a thousand times.
Like I said earlier, I work in media design/art/journalism (it's kind of an all over the place job). While I do have one big tattoo, the woman that works as our secretary has three. And she's about as normal and conservative as you can get (we're talking deep south here).
I think, as long as the tattoo isn't offensive or vulgar, a lot more people now are seeing them as body art, and not gang signs.
I used to manage a Taco Bell and the honest, simple reason is that the piercing, or a part of it, could fall off into the food. I have a lip ring and no one cared that I kept it in after I demonstrated that I could hold the store's safe bag up with it, and that sucker wasn't going anywhere. But on the opposite side, I did make an employee remove her nose stud because, as she said, "Sometimes it just pops out when I sneeze."
I feel kind of dirty that I understood that reference immediately.
Jesus fucking Christ that's a bad idea. It's not like you're born with your tats or piercings. If you look like a freak by choice and can perform your job functions correctly I'll hire you. If you look like a freak by choice and that impedes your ability to do your job somehow then I won't.
The teardrop is well-known to be used among gangs to symbolize friends who have been killed and/or people the bearer has killed. Meanwhile this lady:
writes songs for Christina Aguilera. I'm guessing she's probably not a gang member.
Part of the personality? I guess. Of course, couldn't it also be another applicant's personality that he really likes the color blue and wears bright blue shirts, pants, shoes, and hats everyday? Or maybe they really like the number 13, and feature it prominently in their clothes and tattoos.
Or they could be from Rollin 60s or Mara Salvatrucha.
UNIT 28 SPG83. SSA 4 LIFE.
I love you, Medicare!
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
"Do Not Resuscitate?"
I would kind of go along with this idea. However, I would always hold experience and capability above appearance. Visible body mods, etc. are just one more aspect of your personality a person is openly volunteering. I would rather keep that card up my sleeve personally.
Thank you Arch, that was the joke.
Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
That sounds all corporate-brutality-sensible, but I think there's a lot more to whether someone's a useful employee than whether they're conformist.
For example, I work for a company that generally likes yes-men. But we have a problem with our senior management, in that many of them are just wusses with no individual ideas on anything.
Independence can be a virtue in the corporate world just as much as in, say, the artistic one.
Also, can I hate the word 'professional'? It's the most empty, tautologous term ever. You should look or act a certain way in business because that's how business-people act and look? No.
Well, a HCFA 1500 will get you in the door at a professionals office, but if you wanna go for the big money cash facility money, get a UB 92 on your face!
(I got the joke, and LOLed)
The flaw with this experiment is that the participants were all college students that had no skin in the game. None of the people in this experiment have had any significant experience hiring anyone.
If someone was to sit opposite from me with any sort of visible tattoo or any piercing other than a woman with earings (2 per ear TOPS) I would politely finish the interview, but that 'candidate' just wasted both of our times.
Anything more than that and you might as well tattoo "UNEMPLOYABLE" on your forehead.
I'm not a crazed gunman, Dad.
Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
So what you're saying is that you're prejudiced?
Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
Possibly. It's a reasonable pre-judgement to make. I expect my team to project awesome and poop excellence. They are a reflection of me. If someone has a dragon on their fucking neck or a spike sticking out of their skull, their attitude towards our corporate environment is questionable.
There's an expression "Dress for the job you want, not the job you have." If you pierced the hell out of your face in college or your early 20s you made a choice that shows you value your personal expression a heckuvalot more than your career options.
You can excel regardless, but you need to deliver a lot more awesome than other people. I have a friend in my field that is a white dude with long dreadlocks. He is a much better coder than I am and about the same age as me, but I am a lot further along in my career because of the differences in our values.
If it's because people are stupid, does that make Deebaser any less successful? You have to play to the crowd, man.