true blue in wake county: blog true blue in wake county's blog
tattoos and body art in the workplace
Published Feb. 7, 2009Views: 2285
Its topic that sits on a fence. Do tattoos and body art make the person? to some - yes, to others its a form of expression and one that should be a "free" form.
As police officers and public safety officials and state/city/county Government employee's we are expected to live up to a certain image. But who decides what that image should be? What may be considered unprofessional to one, may be admired by another.
Most of our agencies and work environments have a standing policy - no visible body art or piercings while in-uniform and engage in duties with the public. Same goes for smoking, profanity, drinking soda pops, and being seen with your hands in your pockets.
Kinda extreme huh? well not really. There is a reason for it. There are some pretty prestigious agencies within the state that do not have a tattoo or body art policy and officers are free to display that beautiful art all they wish.
Others, not so misgiving. But, it's a necessary requirement.
I know many LEO's and EMT's from numerous agencies that are HEAVILY decorated and it shows everyday and yes, in court. Some people scowl but a whole lot more seem to admire. I've been to several mass public events (4th of july, etc) whereas members of the public actually walked up to the officer and stated "man, those are some awesome tattoos, hey officer, check these out." So it does have its benefits in certain aspects. In certain circumstances some members of the public seem to trust a little more and open up a little easier during the course of investigations. I will not get into the covert benefits that it has for obvious safety reasons.
Some have not been so admirable - "I can't believe they let you have those and a badge too, I mean you dont LOOK like a police officer" hmmmm I'm confused, just what is a police officer "supposed" to look like??? Same goes for the response we get when we stop people on the street at 2.am wearing long dark coats in a business district and its July..."Well, do I LOOK like a criminal" hmmm not sure son, whats a criminal supposed to look like??
Now, does that mean that we should be out wearing ear rings (as males), goatee's and van dykes, and walk up to your car meeting all of the requirements except the red laces in our boots? not at all. Although I do know of one very large department and a very prestigious department in Cumberland county that I have observed uniformed officers with goatee's though.
Does this mean that they are any less of professional officers because they have some pretty colorful and intricate tribal style art? Not sure, again, tattoos dont make the person. However, I draw that line at a police officer with tattoos that either directly or subliminally depict an allegiance to drugs, sexism, racism, and what could be considered extremeism.
Case in point, I once watched a defense attorney in Wake get publicly admonished to almost tears when she used "the officer got out of his car with tattoos and black gloves and resembled that of a storm trooper." The judge rolled up his robe and stated "I have this and several others, does that make me a storm trooper too" among some pretty colorful other facts that he proceeded to point out. Defendant was found guilty.
Tattoos in the work place? well, it not only applys to public safety officials but I seem to be seeing alot of business establishments starting to institute the "no visible body art" policy...
How are things on your job????
The pic attached to the BLOG is Corporal Paul Orinthal, San Francisco PD, CA.
TRU
Filed under: Government
75 Comments
(27 votes) palin dines with rev. billy graham
(15 votes) funeral held for slain fayetteville girl
(14 votes) 4 us service members die in afghan attacks





































Welcome to GOLO, where WRAL.com visitors can comment on stories and create profile pages, blogs and photo galleries.
You must be a registered WRAL.com user to use these tools. Click here to register or log in.
GOLO member since August 22, 2008
February 7, 2009 12:23 p.m.
If they're a distraction to others, maybe they aren't being kept busy enough.
God bless.
Rev. RB
GOLO member since July 2, 2007
February 7, 2009 12:23 p.m.
GOLO member since September 30, 2008
February 7, 2009 12:25 p.m.
GOLO member since August 22, 2008
February 7, 2009 12:25 p.m.
GOLO member since September 30, 2008
February 7, 2009 12:28 p.m.
GOLO member since August 22, 2008
February 7, 2009 12:29 p.m.
A job can legally be denied you for having one, or having a beard (Dr. Pepper) etc. Only where a deeply held, sincere religious reason demands the tattoo or beard would be an exception.
GOLO member since January 20, 2008
February 7, 2009 12:33 p.m.
GOLO member since September 30, 2008
February 7, 2009 12:40 p.m.
South Carolina has such a law.
"A job can legally be denied you for having one"
The Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission would disagree with you
GOLO member since November 28, 2008
February 7, 2009 12:43 p.m.
Discrimination is common and legal, except where Constitutionally protected, such as race, religion, etc.
When Hooters hires a shapely WOMAN as a waitress, they are discriminating. When the NBA hires a 7 foot man, they are discriminating, yes on the basis of performance, which is legit. The good looking buxom young woman performs better at getting customers than grandma. Got the wrong dialect, sorry. It is everywhere. We don't live in boxes or berkas.
GOLO member since January 20, 2008
February 7, 2009 12:43 p.m.
I don't think tatts keep one from looking professional at all if accompanied by the right demeanor.
God bless.
Rev. RB
GOLO member since July 2, 2007
February 7, 2009 12:53 p.m.
In the end, would you want to work for that kind of person anyway? I wouldn't!!!
God bless.
Rev. RB
GOLO member since July 2, 2007
February 7, 2009 12:56 p.m.
So, as far as legality goes, yes you can be denied or fired. It would then be up to the former employee to challenge the fact under 1st amendment protections and prove it.
GOLO member since November 28, 2008
February 7, 2009 12:57 p.m.
GOLO member since November 28, 2008
February 7, 2009 1:02 p.m.
GOLO member since October 18, 2007
February 7, 2009 1:40 p.m.
GOLO member since August 2, 2007
February 7, 2009 2:09 p.m.
However, I'm glad I didn't see it before I hired her because it probably would have made me see her as less professional. If I'd seen it, I may have offered the job to someone else based on this fact alone. Tattoos are a risk to the wearer.
February 7, 2009 2:36 p.m.
February 7, 2009 2:39 p.m.
GOLO member since May 2, 2008
February 7, 2009 3:05 p.m.
GOLO member since May 7, 2008
February 7, 2009 3:14 p.m.
GOLO member since November 28, 2008
February 7, 2009 3:29 p.m.
February 7, 2009 3:33 p.m.
GOLO member since June 13, 2008
February 7, 2009 3:35 p.m.
GOLO member since June 13, 2008
February 7, 2009 3:35 p.m.
GOLO member since November 28, 2008
February 7, 2009 3:39 p.m.
GOLO member since June 13, 2008
February 7, 2009 3:41 p.m.
GOLO member since November 28, 2008
February 7, 2009 3:43 p.m.
Your employer.
GOLO member since July 12, 2007
February 7, 2009 3:45 p.m.
GOLO member since June 13, 2008
February 7, 2009 3:46 p.m.
The Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission would disagree with you"
Absolutely wrong.
There are provisions for Gender, Age, Religion, but no protection statues referencing tatts, pink hair or bad attitudes .
GOLO member since July 12, 2007
February 7, 2009 3:48 p.m.
(Well, at least until Hussein, Pelosi and their ilk trample the rest of private property rights.)
GOLO member since July 12, 2007
February 7, 2009 3:50 p.m.
GOLO member since November 28, 2008
February 7, 2009 4:06 p.m.
GOLO member since July 12, 2007
February 7, 2009 4:08 p.m.
GOLO member since March 22, 2008
February 7, 2009 4:09 p.m.
February 7, 2009 4:17 p.m.
February 7, 2009 4:19 p.m.
Golo terms clearly state that women with tramp stamps must have them posted in their image gallery. Please comply with the terms. "the management"
February 7, 2009 4:22 p.m.
I had always wanted the tramp stamp. To be perfectly honest, my ex husband told me I wasn't allowed to get one there. It involved pulling my shirt up to get it. Therefore, it wasn't permitted. So, now that he is gone, I got one as a 30th present to myself.
GOLO member since June 13, 2008
February 7, 2009 4:23 p.m.
GOLO member since November 28, 2008
February 7, 2009 4:24 p.m.
GOLO member since June 13, 2008
February 7, 2009 4:24 p.m.
February 7, 2009 4:24 p.m.
GOLO member since June 13, 2008
February 7, 2009 4:25 p.m.
GOLO member since November 28, 2008
February 7, 2009 4:25 p.m.
GOLO member since June 13, 2008
February 7, 2009 4:30 p.m.
It's your thoughtful, well reasoned arguments that make you represent your party so well.
GOLO member since July 12, 2007
February 7, 2009 4:32 p.m.
GOLO member since November 28, 2008
February 7, 2009 4:33 p.m.
GOLO member since June 13, 2008
February 7, 2009 4:34 p.m.
GOLO member since November 28, 2008
February 7, 2009 4:37 p.m.
GOLO member since June 13, 2008
February 7, 2009 4:38 p.m.
Good deal. Sounds like he wants a pet, not a thinking breathing, challenging partner. He doesn't know what he's missing (but perhaps he soon will!)
GOLO member since July 12, 2007
February 7, 2009 4:38 p.m.
Please log in to add comment.