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

Jamaal510

(10,893 posts)

23. It depends on the type of tat,

Reply to Gravitycollapse (Original post)

Mon Oct 7, 2013, 11:40 PM

Oct 2013

but as far as 420 is concerned, if I were doing the hiring, my employees can't be smoking on the job or showing up to work high or else I'd fire them. To me, it is important to always be aware of the here-and-now when working and taking care of business.

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:

This needs to be said: Not hiring someone because they have tattoos is anti-progressive. [View all] Gravitycollapse Oct 2013 OP

It would depend on the tattoo. alarimer Oct 2013 #1

Depends on the tat Kelvin Mace Oct 2013 #2

Some businesses in Austin REQUIRE tattoos. Eleanors38 Oct 2013 #3

I would agree that most tattoos are fine but... Bjorn Against Oct 2013 #4

Progressive schmogressive tularetom Oct 2013 #5

Well-said. My feelings exactly. Common Sense Party Oct 2013 #9

Depends on the job and depends on the tattoos groundloop Oct 2013 #6

Hardly. earthside Oct 2013 #7

A lot of body modification scares people off Warpy Oct 2013 #8

No, not hiring someone because they have tattoos is stupid. flvegan Oct 2013 #10

OK, but not hiring someone with tattoos is not classist. Tikki Oct 2013 #11

I'm sure this guy appreciates your endorsement of his "progressive" life choices. Decoy of Fenris Oct 2013 #12

Generally lame as well but there are probably some lines I'd understand. TheKentuckian Oct 2013 #13

Heck, in Portland, this might need to be reversed. HuckleB Oct 2013 #14

Depends on the job, and where the tats are. Lil Missy Oct 2013 #15

Were these the responses you expected? Llewlladdwr Oct 2013 #16

Judge much? Vashta Nerada Oct 2013 #17

It seems to me Abq_Sarah Oct 2013 #20

No, they're criticizing the *reasons* that person didn't want to hire someone. cui bono Oct 2013 #33

Who died and made you God? LisaL Oct 2013 #18

I'd hire this guy to sell drinks at a convenience store. TransitJohn Oct 2013 #19

Simplistic thinking is anti-progressive. nt greyl Oct 2013 #21

A little bit of over-generalization here, methinks. cherokeeprogressive Oct 2013 #22

It depends on the type of tat, Jamaal510 Oct 2013 #23

I would fire anyone who showed up to work impaired ripcord Oct 2013 #24

If I know the employee smokes pot, it's because it got in the way of the job. lumberjack_jeff Oct 2013 #25

It depends gopiscrap Oct 2013 #26

When I was practicing law, ... Deep13 Oct 2013 #27

I agree. laundry_queen Oct 2013 #28

where are the folks who would not hire a person wearing makeup? uncle ray Oct 2013 #29

If someone's body mods are geared to say "I am a dirtbag," XemaSab Oct 2013 #30

My being tattooed suggests I'm a dirtbag? a la izquierda Oct 2013 #36

My point was that it depends on the context and content of the tats XemaSab Oct 2013 #38

Oh, I see your point. a la izquierda Oct 2013 #40

I was asleep and I woke up with indigestion and now I am on the internet XemaSab Oct 2013 #41

This is why I hate undefined labels LittleBlue Oct 2013 #31

Judgment is also a criteria Le Taz Hot Oct 2013 #32

It depends on your business......... 4bucksagallon Oct 2013 #34

Thanks. a la izquierda Oct 2013 #35

Sigh leftynyc Oct 2013 #37

I had a co worker with an Assault Rifle tattooed on each arm. Some B Calm Oct 2013 #39

My daughter is a nurse. No visible tattoos Freddie Oct 2013 #42

That depends Spider Jerusalem Oct 2013 #43

Police Officer? GeorgeGist Oct 2013 #44