8 months ago
Last edited at 8:01AM on 4/24/2013
If it is a job where you are exposed to the public all the time , that might be the reasoning. Any other job shouldn't matter and that is a form of discrimination. If they told you that , it's discrimination. But, like I said , if the tatoo's were exposed while you were dealing with the public, that is probably the reason. Some people don't like a lot of tatoo's on someone serving them. It's not right, but I would look for work elsewhere.
No. If you tattoo is visible then customers can see it, and that may be an issue for them. The employer is running a business and he has to please as many customers as possible. I am in no way saying that people judging people with tattoos should be judged in anyway, but it does happen. You would have to meet a dress code standard and tattoos will not always meet it.
I doubt it. I think it falls in line with the neat appearance and dress code philosophy. I suppose it all depends on point of view of the one doing the hiring. I don't think it has ever been challenged in law and a legal precedent set. That's what you should research.
Many customers are simply put off by heavily tatooed employees, and rightly so in the food service business, as hepatitis is easily contracted and passed to the public this way. One only needs to see the recorded cases at the CDC to see the sharp rise in all forms of hepatitis across all groups in the marketplace.