Rx_
Nothing In Moderation
- Local time
- Today, 14:25
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,803
* Wow - I never imagined this would be such a hot topic! This is an interesting and valuable insight that was not expected. - Best of luck to everyone *
In my spare time, I attend various investment meeting and such things.
For example, at the IGDA meetings, I will be the one wearing a suit and tie. Usually because a good tailored suit is comfortable.
So, we had three fairly large game developers owner or manager speaking. The subject was interview tips on how to get hired. This meeting was over crowded because of the college students attending due to the topic. So, after a short summary of good tips (nothing new for seasoned programmers) he mentioned "no tattoos". We are talking that if you sport a tattoo, the interview is over before it starts.
Many of the college types, and a few in the 30's really took offense to this. So after the disruption quited down, I asked the speaker if there was a financial reason. He explained that he is always trying to get several million funded for what ever game is out there. That the over 60 banker types who fund these kind of ventures are typically hands-on. To the point that they want to go onto the floor and see operations.
These guys (typically guys) are fairly conservative. They don't necessarily trust some coder with a tattoo of a pot leaf on the fore-head and a dragon head on the hand. OK, I greatly embellished the last sentence, just to make the point. These guys want to put money into a sound operation.
The crowd got a Little out of sorts again so he dropped the subject.
Later, I talked to the other two alone. They both totally agreed, this is the case for them too. They just didn't bring it up to this crowd with the opinion that it was wrong for managers to think about tattoos this way.
This is not a case where the interview has someone strip down and "spread them" to check for tattoos. It is about visible tattoos for acceptable work clothing.
To me, it seems perfectly reasonable.
Thought I would share this for some of the younger generation. Often, what is acceptable at college isn't going to work in the tight marketplace.
I personally have nothing against tattoos, don't have a tattoo myself. But, if I go to a bank to deposit my money, appearances do count for me.
I can fully understand the idea that an employer can and will base hiring on this type of criteria.
In my spare time, I attend various investment meeting and such things.
For example, at the IGDA meetings, I will be the one wearing a suit and tie. Usually because a good tailored suit is comfortable.
So, we had three fairly large game developers owner or manager speaking. The subject was interview tips on how to get hired. This meeting was over crowded because of the college students attending due to the topic. So, after a short summary of good tips (nothing new for seasoned programmers) he mentioned "no tattoos". We are talking that if you sport a tattoo, the interview is over before it starts.
Many of the college types, and a few in the 30's really took offense to this. So after the disruption quited down, I asked the speaker if there was a financial reason. He explained that he is always trying to get several million funded for what ever game is out there. That the over 60 banker types who fund these kind of ventures are typically hands-on. To the point that they want to go onto the floor and see operations.
These guys (typically guys) are fairly conservative. They don't necessarily trust some coder with a tattoo of a pot leaf on the fore-head and a dragon head on the hand. OK, I greatly embellished the last sentence, just to make the point. These guys want to put money into a sound operation.
The crowd got a Little out of sorts again so he dropped the subject.
Later, I talked to the other two alone. They both totally agreed, this is the case for them too. They just didn't bring it up to this crowd with the opinion that it was wrong for managers to think about tattoos this way.
This is not a case where the interview has someone strip down and "spread them" to check for tattoos. It is about visible tattoos for acceptable work clothing.
To me, it seems perfectly reasonable.
Thought I would share this for some of the younger generation. Often, what is acceptable at college isn't going to work in the tight marketplace.
I personally have nothing against tattoos, don't have a tattoo myself. But, if I go to a bank to deposit my money, appearances do count for me.
I can fully understand the idea that an employer can and will base hiring on this type of criteria.
Last edited: