Running head: INK

Ink
Tyler Denos
Salt Lake Community College
12/3/14

INK

Ink
Personal expression is a fundamental right of every human being. A person
should be able to express personality, beliefs, thoughts, and things enjoyed without
discrimination or judgment, provided it is legal. With this right taken away, a one is
stripped of identity and feels unfulfilled with ones life. Expression is a way to
differentiate oneself from the drudge and normalcy of everyday life, and become an
individual with much to offer to society. Without this key ability, the structure of society
will not operate correctly, and eventually fail. It was the differing opinion of women in the
early 20th century that led to voting rights for women. It was the different view of the
Founding Fathers of America that led to the creation of the United States. It was the
opinion of Christopher Columbus that the world was round that led to the discovery of
the American continent. From these examples, it is proven that expression of opinions
and creative differences lead to fantastic results.
The Polynesian culture has been using tattoos for over 2,000 years. Tattoos in
the Polynesian culture can mean many things, including status, pride in culture, and
importance within society. A Polynesian tattoo artists song says Your necklace may
break, the fau tree may burst, but my tattooing is indestructible. It is an everlasting gem
that you will take into your grave (PBS, 2003). In the 21st century, tattoos are
commonplace. Many people across many demographics are getting tattoos, whether it
be a business professional, a teacher, college student, doctor, or stay at home mom.

INK

The new generation of teenagers is increasing this margin more than any other
generation. Because of the ever-increasing popularity and use of tattoos in modern
society, the prejudices of tattoos in the workplace will disappear.
Not everyone agrees with this conclusion. Tattoos, whether of a religious symbol
or image of a scantily clad female, often signal rebellious behavior. Studies have, for a
long time, linked the existence of tattoos with illegal behavior. People who have tattoos
are more likely to use illegal drugs, carry illegal weapons, or be arrested. In a study
done by Andrew Timming of the University of St. Andrews, Timming and colleagues
asked participants to assess job candidates based on pictures, where some images
were photo-shopped to add a neck tattoo. Candidates with a neck tattoo present were
consistently ranked lower than those without tattoos, regardless of equal qualifications.
This study showed the rate of lower assessments of candidates with tattoos was much
higher when the job required direct interaction with customers (The Economist, 2014).
The prejudices of tattoos sometimes dont end with the hiring of employees.
Often-times tattoos are seen as a distraction in the workplace, causing unnecessary
attention and warranting some employees to hide body art. The Pew Research Center
noted that 70% of those between 18 and 29 years old who have tattoos, decided to
conceal body ink under clothing (Stevens, 2014). Some employers have decided to take
this matter into the business own hands. Company-wide bans on tattoos or dress codes
are ways some businesses have chosen to deal with the tattoo problem. Bans on
tattoos may be across the board, or specific to large or offensive tattoos, allowing small,
concealed ones.
In the Constitution, it states that Congress cannot make laws that abridge the

INK

freedom of speech. Certain Supreme Court cases have interpreted this even further, in
that this also covers free expression. Therefore, it is unconstitutional to pass a law
banning tattoos anywhere. This does not, however, apply to private workplaces. Most
states have at at-will employment policy, and employees can be fired for any reason
the company chooses, including no reason, as long as it is not discrimination.
Theoretically, this could mean an employer could fire an employee for getting a face
tattoo. Most companies leave this decision up to the managers in charge, and it is the
managers call when it comes to this rule (Vallas, 2013).
Tattoos are personal expression. Tattoos can have one or multiple meanings to
the person whose skin contains the message, symbol, or image, and quite literally
become a permanent part of the persons body. In corporate environments this form of
expression has, in the past, been looked down on. This trend is changing. Bank of
America Spokeswoman Ferris Morrison said We have no formal policy about tattoos
because we value our differences and recognize that diversity and inclusion are good
for our business and make our company stronger (Hennessey, 2013). This point of
view is not limited to that of Bank of America. Jill Abramson, former executive editor of
The New York Times and listed as number five on the Forbes list of the most powerful
women, has multiple tattoos (Monty, 2014). The trend of condescension and distrust for
those with tattoos is that of the old guard. With the 21st century bringing in many
changes to societys norms, tattoos in the workplace are becoming common and quite
ordinary.
When it comes to a professional appearance, many people think of the same
stereotypical look. Suit, tie, slacks, dress shoes, and hair done nicely. A forearm tattoo

INK

is usually not included in this visual. But, in modern society, this is normal. Two
businessmen may shake hands, and both have tattoos visible on the arm. Not a single
mention of this is heard in discussions, or dealings. This is directly due to the fact that
this example is not out of the ordinary. Companies often allow tattoos, with a few
guidelines to follow. The Phoenix, Arizona Fire Department Operations Manual states:
While on duty, tattoos will only be displayed on the arms and legs while in
uniform. No other visible tattoos are authorized. The display of ANY
unprofessional or offensive tattoo or brand (nudity or violence, sexually explicit or
vulgar art, words, phrases; profane language, symbols to incite negative
reactions, initials or acronyms that represent criminal or oppressive
organizations) regardless of its location, while members are in uniform, is
prohibited. (Murphy, 2014)
Firefighters are often seen as people who save lives. It is with this in mind, that the fire
department chooses candidates carefully. In this workplace, if a qualified candidate has
a tattoo, the employer does not discriminate and will hire the candidate.
With the new generation changing the norms of society, it is only natural that the
ideals and prejudices must be changed as well. If society stuck to the old customs and
norms that existed even just a few years ago, no problems would be solved and society
would be stuck without advancement. Tattoos are no different. If a candidate for a job
has the qualifications necessary for the applied position, there should be no reason to
discriminate against them solely based on the existence of ink. A workforce should
encourage individuality, and expression, so that employees will feel more comfortable
with the place in which the employee works. This will lead to positive results not only in

INK

employee morale, but also production (McFarlin, 2014). If an employee is uncomfortable

or disgruntled, that employee is less likely to perform to the maximum of potential. High
morale is an extremely important quality for an employee to have. Having confidence
and willingness to perform are qualities in which an employee with high morale exhibits.
Employees who are happy with the workplace usually have job security, better business
conditions, and ability to move upward with respective careers (Ali, 2014).
This starts with the executives. A top-down approach, when dealing with policies,
is always the most efficient and effective method of changing the environment within the
respective businesses. If an executive has personal hesitations about a person with
tattoos, a tolerance policy is much less likely to be implemented, and the hiring of a
candidate who has ink is less likely as well. Executives must realize that tolerance
within the business will lead to results. Change cannot be implemented from the
employee level, as the influence of an executive is much stronger than that of the
ordinary office worker that reports to said executive. An example of tolerance in the
workforce is ADP. ADP, one of the worlds leading cloud software vendors, is known as
an extremely tolerant employer. The company consistently celebrates diversity, for
things such as race, sexual orientation, and background. The company provides an
absolute equal employer environment, and has won many awards from various
sources in recognition of this. ADP employees reflect the positive attitude of the
workplace, and attend events funded and planned by ADP that recognize these
differences, and praise them. ADP is partnered with over a dozen organizations, whose
purpose is to provide advancement for individuals with different backgrounds. ADP
leads the way for other companies to follow suit, and is an excellent example of why

INK

diversity and tolerance is the new standard of business environments (ADP, 2014).
The solution to the issue is simple. Tattoo discrimination should be nonexistent.
With corporate environments implementing this idea, morale, productivity, profits, and
turnover ratios will all improve. Qualified candidates, who may outperform candidates
without ink, will be hired into positions that will benefit the company as a whole. Petty
discriminations like this one are easily fixed and simply a hindrance to society overall.
Society must learn to overlook such unimportant prejudices, and choose to judge a
candidate, person, or individual by actions, rather than personal expressions or styles.
Companies who fall behind this ordeal will also cease to attract new prospective
employees, who prefer tolerant workplaces to those with tight regulations.
Discrimination has no place in the corporate workforce, including tattoo discrimination.
With this ideal, advancement in the workplace and society will increase exponentially.

INK

8
References

ADP. (2014). ADP's Diversity and Inclusion. Retrieved from ADP:

http://www.adp.com/careers/uscareers/why-adp/inclusion-diversity.aspx
Ali, V. (2014). The High Cost of Low Morale-and What To Do About It. Retrieved from
Barreett Rose & Lee Inc.: http://www.barrettrose.com/the-high-cost-of-lowmorale-and-what-to-do-about-it/
Hennessey, R. (2013, February 27). Tattoos No Longer A Kiss Of Death In The
Workplace. Forbes. Retrieved from
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rachelhennessey/2013/02/27/having-a-tattoo-and-ajob/
McFarlin, K. (2014). Correlation Between Productivity & Morale. Houston Chronicle.
Monty, L. (2014, September 11). Workplace Tattoo Taboos Fading. USA Today.
Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/11/tattootaboo-workplace/15449719/
Murphy, J. K. (2014, April 25). Firefighter Tattoos and First Amendment Protection.
Retrieved from Fire Engineering:
http://www.fireengineering.com/articles/print/volume-167/issue4/departments/fire-service-court/firefighter-tattoos-and-first-amendmentprotection.html
PBS. (2003). Skin Stories: The Art and Culture of Polynesian Tattoo. Retrieved from
PBS: http://www.pbs.org/skinstories/history/
Spruill, C. (2014, August 8). Tattoos Accepted in the Workplace. Liberty Voice.
Retrieved from http://guardianlv.com/2014/08/tattoos-accepted-in-the-workplace/

INK

Stevens, M. (2014). Discrimination Against Tattoos in the Workplace. Retrieved from

Global Post: http://everydaylife.globalpost.com/discrimination-against-tattoosworkplace-1792.html
The Economist. (2014, August 2). Ink Blots. The Economist. Retrieved from
http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21610334-body-art-growing-morepopular-though-few-employers-are-keen-ink-blots
Vallas, G. (2013, November 16). Tattoos at Work: How Far Can Employers Go In
Regulating the Appearance of their Employees? Retrieved from Ottinger:
http://ottingerlaw.com/tattoos-at-work/