[///MPhatic]

I mean, it really has to depend on so many factors. There is no right answer here.

I would say that in 1960, regardless of the person's skill it just wouldn't happen.
In the 80's it was really frowned upon.
In the 90's it got a looser.
And these days it's almost commonplace.

So it's getting easier and easier for the public to accept, and therefore easier for the employer to accept, as he is catering to his customers.

It just depends on the tat/skill/position.

I also think that underlying this all is the sense that this person is, or has been broken, which can work against you or for you, depending.

It all comes back to "it depends."

[CTinline-six]

It isn't that cut and dry. Tattoos are much more common now, but how offensive they are depends on the job, the tattoo location, and the tattoo itself.

I work in a professional environment, and if someone shows up in an interview with a tattoo that is offensive and difficult to hide, that is already a strike against them. If they have a small subtle one of a butterfly on the back of their neck and it can be hidden with the right shirt, no big deal. If they have curse words tattooed in a visible area that they clearly insist on showing off during an interview, that tells me all I need to know. Same goes for dating. I had a woman show up for an interview with a low cut shirt, clearly showing the provocative cleavage tattoo she had. She interviewed poorly, but even if she knocked it out of the park that would've been a strike against her.

[spazzyfry123]

I'd typically say no. Our industry is customer facing with all day, every day in front of surgeons, physicians, C-suite folks for hospitals, etc.

But it's so damn hard to find an employee that will work nowadays, I'd say I'll take just about anything...

[dreamingat30fps]

Originally Posted by ///MPhatic

I mean, it really has to depend on so many factors. There is no right answer here.

I would say that in 1960, regardless of the person's skill it just wouldn't happen.
In the 80's it was really frowned upon.
In the 90's it got a looser.
And these days it's almost commonplace.

So it's getting easier and easier for the public to accept, and therefore easier for the employer to accept, as he is catering to his customers.

It just depends on the tat/skill/position.

I also think that underlying this all is the sense that this person is, or has been broken, which can work against you or for you, depending.

It all comes back to "it depends."

I'd be curious what kind of people were getting tattoos in the 60s vs 80s vs 90s etc.

I would be willing to bet the further back you go the more unsavory characters were getting tattoos which is what gave tattooed people a bad rap. Were they all unsavory, doubt it, but enough were to create that stigma or stereotype or whatever you want to call it.

As more people started getting tattoos over the years the stigma lessened. I think the same applies now with neck and face tattoos. I think most people wouldn't bat an eye at a regular tattoo, but once you go neck or face it get's more sketchy because that's still more fringe. According to Google like 32% of Americans have tattoos, but how many of those have face or neck tattoos, my guess is a lot smaller percentage. If 32% of Americans had face and neck tattoos then I think it would become more accepted just like regular tattoos.

[baron95]

The OP's question/premise was a neck tattoo that was non-offensive, on a candidate that had passed a background check, and had good qualifications for the job - presumably if the job was customer facing he/she would be good at that even with the tattoo.

Given those were the facts in the scenario, I really don't see a reason not to consider the candidate as viable for hiring.

I don't have any tattoos (I know, boring), but I can't think of a single negative inference I'd make against someone for having a non-offensive neck tattoo.

Now, if they showed up driving a slammed BMW with gold wheels.....well....

[Clark_Kent]

It depends on the tattoo and it depends on the job.

[vreihen16]

Originally Posted by CTinline-six

She interviewed poorly, but even if she knocked it out of the park that would've been a strike against her.

I haven't been paying attention to HR and discrimination law stuff lately, but the first thing to cross my mind is if discriminating because of a tattoo is prohibited under some anti-discrimination law? Discrimination based on hair style is already prohibited, if I recall my last mandatory DEI training seminar correctly.....

[///MPhatic]

Originally Posted by dreamingat30fps

I'd be curious what kind of people were getting tattoos in the 60s vs 80s vs 90s etc.

I would be willing to bet the further back you go the more unsavory characters were getting tattoos which is what gave tattooed people a bad rap. Were they all unsavory, doubt it, but enough were to create that stigma or stereotype or whatever you want to call it.

As more people started getting tattoos over the years the stigma lessened. I think the same applies now with neck and face tattoos. I think most people wouldn't bat an eye at a regular tattoo, but once you go neck or face it get's more sketchy because that's still more fringe. According to Google like 32% of Americans have tattoos, but how many of those have face or neck tattoos, my guess is a lot smaller percentage. If 32% of Americans had face and neck tattoos then I think it would become more accepted just like regular tattoos.

100%

[CTinline-six]

Originally Posted by vreihen16

I haven't been paying attention to HR and discrimination law stuff lately, but the first thing to cross my mind is if discriminating because of a tattoo is prohibited under some anti-discrimination law? Discrimination based on hair style is already prohibited, if I recall my last mandatory DEI training seminar correctly.....

Well violation of the company dress code was the main reason as well as her actual interview performance...

[unluky]

I will say at my last job we had a lady who worked there that had a huge spider tattoo on her neck along with others on her body. This place was owned by 3 older gentlemen - 2 of which were Harvard MBA's. i.e. - pretty conservative. I was taken aback with her body art when I first met her too, but after working with her a bit - I saw she was one of the biggest assets the company had. And still has. If I needed something done and done right - I went to Heather. She was on 2nd shift then and sometimes I'd hold stuff till she got there to have her do it.

She now runs that department and I still try and get her to come to where I work now. LOL I tell her - whenever she is tired there - we got a spot for her!

When I feel myself slipping back into judging people like that I try and remember Heather. She might be the exception, not the rule - but we could have easily missed out on her had we not looked deeper.

[baron95]

Originally Posted by unluky

I will say at my last job we had a lady who worked there that had a huge spider tattoo on her neck along with others on her body. This place was owned by 3 older gentlemen - 2 of which were Harvard MBA's. i.e. - pretty conservative. I was taken aback with her body art when I first met her too, but after working with her a bit - I saw she was one of the biggest assets the company had. And still has. If I needed something done and done right - I went to Heather. She was on 2nd shift then and sometimes I'd hold stuff till she got there to have her do it.

She now runs that department and I still try and get her to come to where I work now. LOL I tell her - whenever she is tired there - we got a spot for her!

When I feel myself slipping back into judging people like that I try and remember Heather. She might be the exception, not the rule - but we could have easily missed out on her had we not looked deeper.

ˆˆˆ This right here. Focus on the person's abilities, performance and contributions they can make to the company.

On attire/appearance/piercings/tattoos, etc, unless something is offensive/polarizing to the point of interfering with performing the job effectively, it is irrelevant.

[DocL]

I've hired staff with tattoos on their neck. Usually women put a heart or a flower on the side of their neck and it isn't offensive to my patients. However a scripture or something like a prison tattoo, that's a no hire for me.

[hubbahubba]

We have several customer facing employees with neck tattoos. Also full sleeves, with a short sleeve uniform. As long as they are tasteful, not profane or vulgar, I’d do it again in a minute if the person was qualified and fit in well with the team. It’s the heart and mind that matter, not the shell.

[dreamingat30fps]

Originally Posted by DocL

I've hired staff with tattoos on their neck. Usually women put a heart or a flower on the side of their neck and it isn't offensive to my patients. However a scripture or something like a prison tattoo, that's a no hire for me.

I guess we have to define neck tattoo also. A small heart on the neck... that's not what comes to mind when someone says neck tattoo. This is a neck tattoo.

[RickFLM4]

How about a face tattoo?

[dreamingat30fps]

Originally Posted by RickFLM4

How about a face tattoo?

I have a hard time imagining someone with a neck tattoo that doesn't also have a face tattoo. I'm sure many people do, but they go hand in hand in my mind.

Ironically I have no issues picturing someone with face tattoos but no neck tattoo.

[DocL]

Originally Posted by dreamingat30fps

I guess we have to define neck tattoo also. A small heart on the neck... that's not what comes to mind when someone says neck tattoo. This is a neck tattoo.

Yeah, that type of neck tattoo is not gonna be acceptable in my office on a male or female employee.

[clutchdj]

Originally Posted by Tyga11

I'm curious to all of the business owners / managers on here...let's say you have a prospective candidate that walks in with a non offensive neck tattoo.

His / hers qualifications are fine and passes a background check.

Are you hiring or tossing out immediately due to the neck tattoo?

Depends on customer base and job description.

[p0p]

Id give them a chance. It's sink or swim; dog eat dog world.
You never know he could be the best employee you've ever had.

I tried to implement a hot/tall girls age 22-32 weight 125lbs or less, but my partner and wife did not like it. Now I'm stuck with bald headed, Asians or Spanish...dudes

[UncleWede]

You never get a second chance to make a first impression

I have ink, but you won't see it until we are partying together on the weekend and I take off my . . .

[tturedraider]

Originally Posted by CTinline-six

I work in a professional environment...

Originally Posted by UncleWede

You never get a second chance to make a first impression...

I have a very high prejudice against lack of professionalism and in my “tail end of the baby boomers” mind tattoos pretty much scream unprofessional. It may not be a popular view to hold these days, but that’s how it is for me.

[CTinline-six]

Originally Posted by tturedraider

I have a very high prejudice against lack of professionalism and in my “tail end of the baby boomers” mind tattoos pretty much scream unprofessional. It may not be a popular view to hold these days, but that’s how it is for me.

I don't think tattoos themselves are unprofessional, but if it is something vulgar that is in a place it can't be hidden, that is not a good start to an interview. I'm not saying I wouldn't consider anyone with a neck tattoo that had great skills, it's just on a level playing field with other candidates it would be a disadvantage for them given our workplace environment.

I do have some colleagues with tattoos, but they are either hidden during important professional meetings, or not in obvious places. Usually the candidates who need to show their tramp stamp, neck tattoo, or cleavage tattoo during an interview have other reasons why they are disqualified.