Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: This needs to be said: Not hiring someone because they have tattoos is anti-progressive. [View all]Abq_Sarah
(2,883 posts)20. It seems to me
You're judging people who, for whatever reason, don't want to hire people with a lot of visible ink. Maybe you ought to work on your judgmental attitude and accept that in the real world, actions do have consequences and if you prefer the ink over a job, that's your problem, not ours.
For the record, I will not hire anyone with neck or facial tattoos. Period.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
44 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
This needs to be said: Not hiring someone because they have tattoos is anti-progressive. [View all]
Gravitycollapse
Oct 2013
OP
I'm sure this guy appreciates your endorsement of his "progressive" life choices.
Decoy of Fenris
Oct 2013
#12
No, they're criticizing the *reasons* that person didn't want to hire someone.
cui bono
Oct 2013
#33
If I know the employee smokes pot, it's because it got in the way of the job.
lumberjack_jeff
Oct 2013
#25