Piercings and tats in the workplace

[KillerMuffin]

By Mary Jo Feldstein

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Ron Carter's Starbucks' Coffee uniform includes pants, a shirt, an apron -- and wristbands to hide his coffee connoisseur customers from the tattoos on his arm.

The drawings are "nothing serious, no gang emblems or anything," said Carter, a coffee taster for several Starbucks restaurants in Chicago. One of the tattoos is the word "Janet" -- Carter is a fan of pop star Janet Jackson -- the other is Sanfok, a form of African tribal art.

His case is not unusual in the U.S. workplace, where the popularity of body piercing and tattoos is posing a challenge to the dress codes of many employers.

While Carter would like Starbucks' appearance guidelines to be more relaxed, he understands the company's reasoning.

"I just take it as a protocol," he said. "It's a business."

Chris Gimbl, a spokesperson for Starbucks Corp., said employees generally see the chain is trying to present a clean, neat environment and are willing to adhere to its policies.

A few employees have been terminated for refusing to remove piercings or cover tattoos, Gimbl said.

Starbucks requires employees to cover all tattoos and remove certain piercings. Carter has obliged for seven years, since he began work for the Seattle-based coffee seller.

DRESS CODES LEGAL

Under the law, if Carter wants to work at Starbucks, he does not have a choice. Employers are allowed to impose dress codes and appearance policies as long as they do not discriminate on race, color, religion, age, national origin or gender said Diane Amos, a public affairs specialist at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Still, as the number of pierced and tattooed employees has grown, so have the numbers of employees challenging the legality of appearance policies, said Ethan Winning, a human resources consultant who has been retained by companies in more than a such dozen lawsuits.

"I've never known an employee to win a case and I've never known a company to lose a case," Winning said. "The employer can set a reasonable standard for dress as long as it doesn't discriminate."

Specific and consistent appearance codes are less vulnerable to discrimination lawsuits, said human resources consultant Lynne McClure. She has acted as a mediator between companies and employees in several appearance policy disputes.

"Our whole society has become very lawsuit happy," McClure said. "I think companies are very vulnerable as people get more aware of the whole diversity issue. Companies need to be consistent with the dress codes they impose and consistent about enforcing them." Wal-Mart Stores Inc. has developed specific policies regarding piercing and tattoos "as the culture has evolved and issues have come up," said Tom Williams, a spokesperson for the company -- the largest U.S. non-governmental employer.

Wal-Mart does not allow facial jewelry, specifically eyebrow, nose and lip piercing. It also requires earrings and hair color, on both men and women, to be "conservative." Employees with "offensive" tattoos must agree to keep them covered.

Appearance has an impact on both employee performance and customer perceptions, according to Williams.

COMFORT FACTOR

He said the policies exist because they help customers feel comfortable. "So when they come shopping it is a pleasant experience for them," he said.

But employers need to consider whether a piercing or a tattoo is worth the expense of a lawsuit or training a new employee, McClure said.

"In today's marketplace there are more jobs than there are people," McClure said. "I usually think it is best for companies to keep the ones (workers) they got."

But some employers, including Sears, Roebuck and Co., the No. 2 U.S. retailer, and Ameritech Corp., a telephone service provider that is a unit of SBC Communications Inc., said safety concerns obligate them to strictly enforce the company dress code. Loose jewelry can become entangled with equipment, they said.

Ameritech recently suspended three employees without pay for refusing to remove facial piercings.

"Its wearing suitable clothing for the type of work that is going to be done," said Denise Koenig, a spokesperson for Ameritech. "We make evaluations based on safety all the time."

****

What do you think? Should employers be allowed to require employees to remove visible piercings that aren't society acceptable and cover tattoos?

Think of it this way. Would you like your Wallyhell cashier to have more face jewelery than the jewelery counter? Would you return to McDonalds if the person behind the counter had a nose hoop, tongue ring, and piercings in his eyebrows, or would it weird you out?

What's more important here? The company's right to maintain a dress code or the individual's right to free expression?

 

[Mustang Sally]

What's more important here? The company's right to maintain a dress code or the individual's right to free expression?

Especially in the service industry, employees are representatives of the employer, thus the whole concept of uniforms. I think it's well within reason for an employer to expect a tidy, professional appearance from its employees during work hours. The individual can freely express themselves on their own time.

 

[cymbidia]

In the education game, below the college level, and like it or not, teachers are supposed to model good choices/behavior with our every breath regardless of what we teach. While there's quite a bit of leeway with regard to personal dress allowed teachers, the profession may be the last one in which a de facto morals clause exists to guide our activities both in school and outside of school.

Too many obvious piercings and/or tats, or (even off-time) behavior that's too wildly out-of-the-mainstream, and a classroom teacher may well lose his/her job.

In any case, i think it entirely appropriate for employers in all realms to insist workers adhere to a dress code while at work. One can always chose to go work somewhere else if their nose ring is so important that it cannot be removed even while at work.

 

[Mustang Sally]

One can always chose to go work somewhere else if their nose ring is so important that it cannot be removed even while at work.

Exactly! The idea of a lawsuit over it seems slightly ridiculous to me.

I was a student employee in a factory for a few years, and some of the other students deeply resented the requirement to remove all piercings. That, obviously, was for safety reasons. I didn't understand what the big deal was about.

 

[Blackbich]

What do you think? Should employers be allowed to require employees to remove visible piercings that aren't society acceptable and cover tattoos?

Yes. When you accept a position with that company, you are agreeing to their rules.

Think of it this way. Would you like your Wallyhell cashier to have more face jewelery than the jewelery counter?

Hell, no. I don't believe it looks professional when you can't see someone's face for all their facial piercings. In the street is one thing, while your working is another.

Would you return to McDonalds if the person behind the counter had a nose hoop, tongue ring, and piercings in his eyebrows, or would it weird you out?

It wouldn't bother me but I still think it looks unprofessional.

What's more important here? The company's right to maintain a dress code or the individual's right to free expression?

Both are equally important. I still say if you accept a job, you need to abide by their rules. If it's not discriminatory then deal with it. In the real world, people have to deal with things they may not like. These people are called (pause for effect) 'grown ups.' Someone who has reached maturity understands the principle behind dress codes and won't have a problem with it.

 

[Bigdog]

Along the lines of KM's scenario, I was in Target last weekend and the cashier had piercings-o-plenty. I didn't give a damn about the eyebrow rings or the dozen or so in one ear, but that tongue stud sure pissed me off. I couldn't understand a word she said!

The inportance of dress code varies by industry, whether it is motivated by image concerns or safety. Every business, however, has to contend with one simple fact: you don't get a second chance to make a first impression. Since it takes 7 times more ad dollars to gain a new customer than it does to keep an old one, the first face they see shouldn't project the wrong image.

 

[lavender]

 

[ChaoticLil]

I had a nose ring that I removed a few months ago for that very reason (unprofessional). Well, that and I have major allergies.

I believe that a company has the right to have a dress code within reason. All of my tattoos are readily covered without me having to wear a nun's habit and I want to keep it that way. If you want to get anywhere in the business, unfortunantly you have to abide by some rules.

Now I do not believe that a company has the right to dictate what you do on your off time. That time should be yours and separate from the business world. I remember a few years ago someone was fired in Houston just because they caught her taking a puff from a cigarette in a bar. Seems they have a no smoking policy and they figured it should apply to the employee's off time also.

 

[Barb Dwyer]

I don't believe that it is haphazard or subjective at all. In today's world, I would venture a guess that the majority of companies have an employee handbook which is distributed to all and which sets forth a dress code. Because of all the frivolous litigation these days, I imagine that they do review it frequently to address the latest 'styles' that show up unexpectedly!

It is not unreasonable for the employer to have rules and to enforce them when necessary. What's to stop someone from showing up in a bathing suit or bra and panties or boxer shorts? That may be their form of self-expression. But society (and in this case I mean the company) has established a standard of what constitutes 'proper' dress. They have every right to require adherence to those rules.

It would certainly make things easier on everyone if the company would come across as more flexible and less rigid in their attitudes. They can easily empower their employees by offering appropriate business reasons for the dress code (e.g., good image for the public; professionalism; safety considerations, etc.)

They can also call them "guidelines" instead of rules. Perhaps they should also not get too specific about prohibited items of clothing or jewelry, because inevitably someone will find a loophole. (It's better to keep language general to cover the spirit of what they intend.)

They can also make a blanket statement that warns that, ultimately, it is at management's discretion. This will give leeway to both sides actually and provide an opportunity to discuss the problem with the employee.

 

[Angel]

I really could care less about an individuals tats or piercings. I don't have any myself, but I respect their right to wear whatever they want wherever they want. In an ideal world, it wouldn't matter whatsoever. But it's not an ideal world, and not everyone can adhere to lavy's philosophy of life. Therefore, realistically I agree with everyone on this thread that employer's do have that right. It's just unfortunate that it is imposed in a subjective manner on many occasions.

I never understand why people cannot talk with a tongue stud in. When you get your tongue pierced, you generally are pierced with a rather long (Seven eights of an inch) barbell to have room for swelling. Once the swelling goes down, they usually replace the barbell with one that hugs the tongue. I happened to like the longer one and never changed it. It is 7/8ths of an inch long and it doesn't affect my speech at all. In fact people never know I have the damn thing unless I show them.

Back on topic - I love my tattoos and my piercings. I wouldn't give them up for the world, but if I work somewhere that doesn't allow them then I have to follow the rules. My tattoos aren't generally visable anyway, but when I get my armbands they might be. Right now I don't have to worry about it, but when I do a job is more important to me than showing off my body art.

Which is why once I was out of school and in the real world, the facial piercings came out.
*shrug*