Do not hold tattoos against job seekers By Andrea Martino Tattoos are often seen as a negative in the professional world, but it shouldn't be a reason to judge an individual's background, to believe it will make them incapable of executing a job efficiently or to assume they will be less qualified than anyone else. Jobs are meant for the individual to practice their skills, prove their dedication, and mainly do well for whomever they work for or with. Since when do tattoos tell you anything about those qualities and whether someone can do something or not? They don't. With the increase in tattoo popularity in America, many companies are starting to have more flexibility in their tattoo policies. Thomas Hynes, 25, from San Diego, is a forklift driver for Coca-Cola and has a script tattooed on his left forearm. He's planning on getting full sleeves, which are large tattoos or a collection of small ones that cover the arm from shoulder to wrist. Hynes says he has never encountered any issues regarding his job and having a visible tattoo. Unfortunately, not everyone is as lucky as Hynes. Some corporations continue to keep conservative views and stricter policies against visible tattoos. Within the last two years, both military and police tattoo policies have been modified, taking more aggressive stands against tattoos and body art. In general, police officers are prohibited from displaying any kind of body art. Any existing tattoos will have to be covered or removed. This means either spending the summer days wearing pants or long sleeves or having to pay for the painful process of removing the tattoos. U.S. Army policy states that soldiers are allowed to keep tattoos on their necks or hands as long as they are not "extremist, indecent, sexist or racist." If they are, any refusal to cover or remove the tattoo will result in discharge. These are both prestigious and demanding jobs in which long allegiance is customary. How is anyone supposed to handle losing such a position because of a decision they took many years ago? Lewis Hassell, director of anatomic pathology at the University of Oklahoma, who doesn't have any tattoos, said he wouldn't necessarily hire someone who does. "Physical tattoos are a distraction in the workplace," he said. But being unaccustomed to having someone with tattoos around is not a good-enough reason to discriminate, especially when you're talking about a profession. According to a January 2007 report by The Pew Research Center, 36 percent of 18- to 25-year-olds have or have had at least one tattoo, and the numbers increase through the years. People often correlate tattoos with low incomes, low self-esteem and crime. Hassell suggested that choosing to have body art can mean that the individuals don't have a high opinion of themselves. He said the roots of that particular thought came from working as a volunteer counselor where he had encountered people - many with tattoos - with various social and economic problems. In Hynes's case, even though he had no issues with acquiring his job although he has a visible tattoo, when asked about attitudes coming from his co-workers, he said, "I can tell some people are intimidated by them." Stereotypes are known to be one of the strongest negative aspects of societies and yet it is exactly what businesses are promoting when they make these anti-tattoo policies and assumptions. People need to learn and understand that tattoos are becoming a common way of self-expression, and that they have been around for many years. It's not fair to make a tattoo a factor in acquiring a job. • • • Vox is the newspaper of the 2009 CCNMA-San Diego Multicultural Journalism Workshop. Return to index | See also: Vox on Blogspot