Company wont hire programmers with tatoo (policy)

[RainLover]

Galaxiom and Anthony.

I am losing it because I do not understand your position.

I have always said how a person looks does matter.

If you were to go back to post number One the theme was do not get a Tattoo because those in power who make the decisions will not give you a job. This was meant as a warning to younger developers.

To me, it seems perfectly reasonable.
Thought I would share this for some of the younger generation. Often, what is acceptable at college is not going to work in the tight marketplace.

I personally have nothing against tattoos; do not 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.

 

[AnthonyGerrard]

Galaxiom and Anthony.

I am losing it because I do not understand your position.

I have always said how a person looks does matter.

Yes and as far as I am aware I am agreeing with you?!

 

[Vassago]

I don't challenge the "sexist" idea that women should be allowed to have ear piercings so much as the idea that an ear piercing is any different than an eyebrow ring. What's the difference? They are both holes in your body.

 

[RainLover]

I don't challenge the "sexist" idea that women should be allowed to have ear piercings so much as the idea that an ear piercing is any different than an eyebrow ring. What's the difference? They are both holes in your body.

Vassago

It is not so much what you or I like, it is as per post #1 what the people in power like.

Most of my mates have tats and some are truly works of art. The tats that is.

The problem is what others think. Especially employers.

One of these mates has a drop dead gorgeous daughter. She went and got a large tat down her thigh. At the age of 20 this has severely damaged her employability.

You can argue until you are black and blue in the face. You can quote examples, principals ability to do a job or anything you like.

In todays world it is still frowned upon.

The message to the younger people is to think long and hard before doing something to your body that is irreversible.

This thread is not about your beliefs, likes and dislikes. It is a warning from the OP that even your prospective employer has very little say. It is those with the money who can say and do whatever they like and the worker loses out. So think before you act.

 

[Vassago]

Vassago

It is not so much what you or I like, it is as per post #1 what the people in power like.

Most of my mates have tats and some are truly works of art. The tats that is.

The problem is what others think. Especially employers.

One of these mates has a drop dead gorgeous daughter. She went and got a large tat down her thigh. At the age of 20 this has severely damaged her employability.

You can argue until you are black and blue in the face. You can quote examples, principals ability to do a job or anything you like.

In todays world it is still frowned upon.

The message to the younger people is to think long and hard before doing something to your body that is irreversible.

This thread is not about your beliefs, likes and dislikes. It is a warning from the OP that even your prospective employer has very little say. It is those with the money who can say and do whatever they like and the worker loses out. So think before you act.

And my point is to push for that to change. That mindset to change. It has been changing and will continue to do so.

 

[Brianwarnock]

The last two posts summed up why this thread got past post #6

Brian

 

[ChrisO]

People will, of course, Google for an answer but has anyone in this thread tried to answer the question as to why people want to change their appearance in such a permanent way?

Why?
To be part of the group?
To be different from the group?

Sure, we all strive to be part of the group in some way. We cover parts of our bodies in general public, in some countries more and some countries less. And, within those countries, there are places where more is more and less is less…approximately, more or less.

But there is some need to comply with the circumstances of our being in someplace at sometime. It may not be appropriate to cover our bodies on a nude beach, yet the bravest person may not walk a tightrope across Niagara Falls naked.

It would seem to me that it is not so much our appearance, but where and when we want that appearance to show.

All people make mistakes, both young and old. Getting old only means we don’t have to live with those mistakes for so long. But permanent mistakes, when we are young, live for a much longer time in many more situations.

To be part of the group or to be different from the group may only be a short time fad, only time will tell. The thing which lingers is the permanent change.

I think it is fundamentally irresponsible to promote permanent change to the young.
A permanent change, based on a fad, which may be regretted for a very long time to come.

Chris.

 

[Vassago]

The last two posts summed up why this thread got past post #6

Brian

People keep trying to convince me that this is the way it is today. I agree! lol

 

[Dick7Access]

Has it been mention yet that Churchill and Roosevelt had tattoos?

 

[Galaxiom]

Has it been mention yet that Churchill and Roosevelt had tattoos?

Oh well, that proves tattoos indicate that the wearer is an undesirable.

 

[Dick7Access]

Oh well, that proves tattoos indicate that the wearer is an undesirable.

that's good

 

[Dick7Access]

Just found anther tattoo totter. J Stalin

 

[Galaxiom]

HRH Elizabeth II likes tatoos too. She attends one every year in Edinburgh.

 

[AnthonyGerrard]

Just found anther tattoo totter. J Stalin

Hitler was fond of tattooing others by their millions.

Godwins law.

 

[ColinEssex]

If I was still interviewing, I would favour a non tattooed person to a tattooed one.

I would never have appointed a tattooed female.

If people made spelling mistakes on their CV I would not even interview them, nor would I appoint a university graduate to a clerical post as they only used it as a stepping stone - a total waste of training time, and most were thick as planks.

Col

 

[AnthonyGerrard]

If I was still interviewing, I would favour a non tattooed person to a tattooed one.

I would never have appointed a tattooed female.

If people made spelling mistakes on their CV I would not even interview them, nor would I appoint a university graduate to a clerical post as they only used it as a stepping stone - a total waste of training time, and most were thick as planks.

Col

You wont get a bite with such a wide net - you just need a simple line.

PS - In Essex you never employed a tattooed female are you sure?

How about vajazzeled?

 

[RainLover]

You wont get a bite with such a wide net - you just need a simple line.

PS - In Essex you never employed a tattooed female are you sure?

How about vajazzeled?

How about reading the post.

Col never said he did anything.

He clearly said "IF"

 

[AnthonyGerrard]

How about reading the post.

Col never said he did anything.

He clearly said "IF"

You are right , I was clarifying what he had done in the past, as he doesnt directly tell us?


Keep up.

Congratulations on use of the word if! Now try the longer ones.