Workplace tattoos seem to be a hot topic in the news lately.
This is somewhat of a contradiction to the last article I posted, but tattoo policy obviously will vary from company to company.
While tattoos and body piercings have become more mainstream, they still cause some to blanch. And where there’s blanching, there may also be some employment discrimination. A few years ago, Texas A&M business professor Brian Elzweig reported that discrimination in employment decisions based on tattooing and body piercing was actually not illegal.
A study by Mr. Elzweig and Texas A&M University/Corpus Christi colleague Donna Peeples has looked at legal cases and potential workplace conflicts that can arise when tattoos and piercings enter the workplace — and found that employers usually come out on top.
Six years ago, Mount Angel Abbey’s serene hilltop campus shook, as leather-clad Bobby Love rolled in on his motorcycle. Love removed his helmet revealing pierced ears and a mop of dreadlocks. With tattoos on his hands, arms and neck, he looked like an extra on “Sons of Anarchy” not a someone attending a retreat for those who might become Catholic monks.
Yet another case of a tattoo studio not being allowed to open due to some creative interpretation of zoning laws by people who clearly just don’t want tattoo studios in their town.
…since tattoo artists are licensed by the state Department of Health and the state defines the premises from which tattooists work as a “tattoo studio,” DiProjetto’s and Wight’s proposed business could not rightly be considered an “artists’ studio.”
Limbeck also maintained that tattooing was not a “retail business,” despite LoveHate Tattoo having a retail license from the city of Rochester dating to 2001.
It comes down to Pittsford not wanting tattooed people in their town doing business. It’s okay if a tattooed person is pumping your gas, but a tattooed person opening a business in Mayberry won’t fly.