Iceland refuses to employ cleaner due to tattoo

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20

Tommyjw

Original post by alabelle

What is the reason then?

Company image and things that revolve around that, clearly.

Reply 21

GeordieEdgeDXB

I first thought you meant the country, I was wondering what she was going to be hired for!!
Don't blame the company for not hiring her, it's within their rights to decide who they hire, if they view the tattoo as a reason not to, it's their decision.

Reply 22

Mm_Minty

It's a shame people think this about tattoos. I can understand why some people find them unsightly but the one this woman was sporting was actually pretty tasteful.

Guess we're not as free as we all think these days.

Reply 23

alabelle

Original post by Tommyjw

Company image and things that revolve around that, clearly.

I doubt that Iceland would develop a bad reputation because they hired a lady with a hand tattoo. :tongue:

Reply 24

SpiritedAway

Original post by alabelle

My job asks me to look decent too, because I work in retail. I'm also not allowed to wear piercings, but that's because of food safety. At least the piercings rule makes sense; they could get in the food, so it's unhygienic. Judging someone because they have a tattoo, however, doesn't make sense.

I asked my mum (who is an employer) what she thinks, and she said if you are meant to have tattoos, then you'd be born with them, and they do not look nice or professional and she doesn't want customers to have a bad imagine of the business and sadly there are too many negative stereotypes about people with tattoos, and at the end of the day, if you start letting having one employee bend the rules, then where do you stop? Company policy is there and to followed by all from the managers to the cleaners.

Reply 25

SHIRT_LIFTER

. . . . Am I the only person who thinks that having to have a two hour interview and assessment is a bit over the top for a cleaning job?

Reply 26

Lamptastic

Not viewed as professional I'm afraid. Now I like some tattoos but I wouldn't have one anywhere public for this very reason.

I need to pay my bills, so need to be careful.

(Damn because I wanted one behind my ear or back of the neck)

Reply 27

Liblover

I hate Iceland. First their banks go bust and they won't pay back any UK pension funds, then their stupid volcanos cause havoc and now they are down on tatoos!

Reply 28

Lamptastic

Original post by SHIRT_LIFTER

. . . . Am I the only person who thinks that having to have a two hour interview and assessment is a bit over the top for a cleaning job?

I also agree. But much! I can understand them doing a health & safety course after getting the job but an assessment before too?

Actually depends what the assessment actually was tbh.

Reply 29

the bear

i suppose the nature of the tattoo would make a difference... if it was the Iceland Logo, or the Icelandic national flag she might be accepted.

bear

:badger:

Reply 30

Pindar

It's the 21st century, tattoos are pretty standard. It's not as shocking as in the punk era in the 70s.

Reply 31

SHIRT_LIFTER

Furthermore, Iceland customers are all chavs anyway, So I would have though that having a tacky tatoo would just help her to fit in more.

"And that's why Chavs go to Iceland".

Reply 32

Mr_Mad_

Original post by u_sername

OK so I first saw this in the Daily Fail, so not exactly the most balanced and reliable source but I just wanted to know what everyone else thought about this (assuming it actually happened, we all know what the Daily Mail is like!)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2010229/Unemployed-mother-refused-cleaning-job-Iceland--tattoo-hand.html

Personally I think fair play to Iceland, I think tattoos are personal preference and if you want them then I'm not going to stop anyone. However most companies have a no visible tattoos policy and this is common knowledge, therefore if you choose to have a tattoo in a place where it can't be concealed then you have to accept that getting a job might be slightly harder. I'm not necessarily saying no visible tattoos policies are good, I, and no other normal person, should be that bothered if a cleaner or supermarket worker has a tattoo on their hand, but it's just one of those things in life that have to be accepted :smile:

tattoo are trashy!
It is disgusting when girls have tattoos, they think they are so cool and fashionable but in reality they lack class!

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 33

Left Hand Drive

I would never buy out a store with someone with a visible tattoo. Thank god companies use this.

Reply 34

whyumadtho

Original post by alabelle

Yes, they're not viewed as professional. But is that view correct? How can someone without a tattoo on their hand say that they can do their job better than someone who does have one? It doesn't make sense. And it's still discrimination on the part of the employer. It doesn't matter if she chose to have a tattoo or not.

It's equivalent to working with scruffy hair, dirty and broken shoes, stained clothes, etc. There must be some sort of standard enforced in the workplace, or people may be deterred and the general atmosphere of the workplace would lower.

Reply 35

Tommyjw

Original post by alabelle

I doubt that Iceland would develop a bad reputation because they hired a lady with a hand tattoo. :tongue:

Learn how business works and then we can talk about this, no point doing it now.

Reply 36

tvdx

If she was a cleaner, she wouldn't be employed during opening hours would she?

Reply 37

SpiritedAway

Original post by RJ555

But with all due respect, a supermarket cleaning job isn't exactly what I'd consider a "professional" career. And by your argument, anyone with the slightest sign of a tattoo should and could be banned from ANY employment. So surely by this hypothetical problem, they should ban any tattooist doing visible tattoos out of fear the person will spend a life on benefits, no?

Besides, with the state of the economy and unemployment we really want as many people back in work and off benefits as possible, tattooed or not.

WORD TWISTING ALERT!
I never said it was an argument, it is common sense, as shown by other users posting the same. I also never said they should nor are banned from having jobs, I said it will affect the chance of them getting the job, which is does....obviously.