Professional vs. Average.

It is very fair in my opinion for employers to say they do not want to hire someone who has visible tattoos. It is their choice. Depending on the type of job being applied for, a person may not even want to show their tattoos. If I were to hire a lawyer and he had tattoos That I could see, I might question him as a lawyer. It is human nature to judge off of appearance, no one tries to, it just happens. I have nothing against tattoos, depending on what they are, I actually really like them.
There is a major difference in having a professional position and an average position. I think having visible tattoos at a grocery store or an auto store, would be totally acceptable, considering they are not completely professional businesses. I do not think people should not be hired for jobs such as that because of visible tattoos. However, as I stated earlier, if they were at a law firm, corporate company, or any other professional type of company or business, I know I would question them and their ability to help me and give me what I need.
Again, I have absolutely nothing against tattoos. I do believe, however, If certain companies want to look more professional, then I believe it is more then fine to hire the people who are going to help create that look for them.

Did you know as an actor or model you are not allowed to have tatoos? For models they want the focus to be on the clothes or lack there of in some cases. Not only does it take away from the clothes line or product they are trying to sell but it also distracts from the image the director is trying to create from scratch. Yes some big movie stars like Will Smith do have tattoos. But guess what, before he gets to shoot one scene he has to spend about two hours covering up those tattoos on his arms alone.
Now why do tattoos matter so much? They are a way of expressing one's self, true. They are also a way of judging somebody before even meeting them, again true. The issue is not whether tattoos are good or bad. The issue is are they suitable for a work environment, particullarly in Boutaful.
I would say tattos are not appropriate for a work envoronment. When I go and see a play that was placed in the 1800's it sure helps me understand what's going on when they dress, talk, and act a certain way. I expect the same thing in the work feild. When I go to the dentist, he better be wearing gloves when he's cleaning my mouth. My waitress wearing a name tag makes me feel inclined to compliment her on her great service or ask for assistance. I know as well as anyone else that tattoos aren't going to hurt anybody. (Except in the matter of pornagraphyic or crude ones, but that's another story for another day). But as I walk into a work environment I do expect certain things. For one I want to be comfortable, expecailly if I'm doing buisness. Yes when I see a man/woman in a nice attire and very clean cut I am more welcome to open up and get things done. Now I'm not saying that because somebody has a tattoo I'm inclined to run away. I just prefer the buisness clean cut look, because then I know what to expect and what I'm looking for. Piercings definatly distract me when I'm talking to someone, because I will try to make eye contact but the focus is drawn to the the shiny piercing.
The thing is the law in Bountiful isn't that one can't have tattoos; just that they can't be visable. That is not taking away their rights. To me it's like we could all be naked but we choose to cover ourselfs up. It's creating an environment that the employers want. Which in all fairness they don't have to hire anybody they didn't want to. If they want their buisness to reflect on what they belive in such as comfort and trust, then they should have a say as to how they want their buisness run.

I agree to new policy of Bountiful city

I think new policy of Bountiful city positively. Some people may believe that this policy is unfair. Of course, I completely understand employees’ position. They will think that it is prejudice that they are evaluated by employers just their appearances such as having tattoos and piercings.etc. However, when we think employers’ position, they prefer to hire a neat person into their company because people who are neat have a wrapped tight mind. It is not a prejudice. Of course, this sentence doesn’t have application to everyone. Some of neat people don’t think straightly, but most of people who are neat have good consciousness. Similarly, some people who have tattoos and piercings have good consciousness, but most of them have a high possibility to commit crimes. When we imagine a bad person, we think that he or she looks threatening and has a tattoos and piercings. It’s not a prejudice, but it depends on our knowledge and experiences. When we see news and read a newspaper, criminals have such appearances, so we think naturally that people who have tattoos have a high possibility to do bad things such as drugs. Employers want to find person who works faithfully and honestly, not involved in crimes. The things that they can judge via an interview are just from employees’ past work experiences and appearances. There is no standard to judge their characters and faithfulness. That’s why appearances are large part of an interview. Therefore, if employees really want to get the job, they should have qualifications which employers want.

Why Image Is So Important

When a person goes to work he/she will wear a uniform of some kind or another. A doctor will wear scrubs, a businessman will wear a suit, and so on. What we wear and how we appear will represent who we are and what we do. In certain professional positions, there will always be a certain look or "uniform" necessary to maintain a certain image. One might ask, "Why does professionalism take on this particular image?" The major reason is that professionals want to gain the trust of the people they are working with and for. In a fast-paced world that runs on first impressions, it is important to not only maintain long-term trust, but to establish immediate trust by acting, speaking, and even appearing a certain way. The way people perceive tattoos is not something that can be changed overnight, although tattoos are growing in popularity. People often associate tattoos with rebellious teens, drunken rock stars, gang members, and prison inmates. So it is easy for people to make misconceptions of a person at the first sight of his/her tattoos. Imagine hearing a knock on your door, and a man from a sales company wanted to offer you an amazing deal on a new security system for you home and wanted to come inside to discuss further details. Imagine if this man's neck and face were covered with tattoos and he was wearing a sleeveless shirt, making visible the sleeves of tattoos on each arm. From your first impression, would you be hesitant to let him in? If you were new to an area and went to a doctor's office for the first time, and the doctor came into the room in jeans and a t-shirt, would you question his credentials? There is a reason for a uniform in every position, to gain trust. I do not believe that the city of Bountiful is wrong in their attempts to gain a more professional image through their employees. The city of Bountiful is not forcing anyone to refrain from tattoos or piercings, they are simply saying that the tattooed uniform is not coherent with their professional uniform.

Judging a Book by It's Cover

Unfortunately, I do understand the frustrations of many of those who have tattoos or any kind of piercing in their bodies. Since they believe that this is their right to do what they want with their bodies. This is a private matter more than a public matter. The history of tattoos has existed for a very long time which derives from a persons background and is symbolic of the persons beliefs and their life. Today tattoos have become an expressive artistic way to share a personal story through images they tattoo on their bodies. On the other hand, I do share the concern of publicly showing tattoos in the workforce. I do believe that the world judges us by our outward appearance first and by that then bases who we are in the inside. It is unfortunate but nonetheless true, especially in a professional setting. I did an experiment a while ago. I went to a dealership to buy a luxury car. The first time when I went there I was dressed up really casual. First thing I noticed was that these people weren't serious about me and were ignoring me and although they knew I was a serious buyer. I got frustrated and I left. The next day, I dressed up in a fancy suit and tie, put my business glasses on and head over to the same dealership. I was amazed at the tremendous difference of treatment and how important my business was to them. How frustrating and unfair is this for someone like me who was ready to purchase the car the first time, when I was dressed casually, but like I said, people will always judge us by the way we look. This is a fact that we can't erase or ignore or become offended. This issue of tattoos is a similar concept of my own experience that at some point the Bountiful employment council is trying to address to the people with new requirements that will create a professional setting by the employees themselves. If you are working for someone else, you are representing that company (and the company's values) not your own. Therefore, you need to adjust to what the company asks of you professionally because it is only fair to conduct ourselves in a professional matter and represent the company in the best way we can.

Discriminations? I don’t’ think so!

First of all where does it say in the policy that “if you have a tattoo we will discriminate against you”? No one said anything about discrimination. They didn’t state “if you have a tattoo we have a right to fire you” they simply set a policy requiring you to not have any visible while working. I can’t imagine any of us who have not had work policies. I’ve worked at companies that have written policies about appearance and hygiene and I do not think this is any different. I think every company or organization has a right to set policies for their employees. It says in the article that the Air Force has a similar policy and I don’t hear anyone crying discrimination against them.
I was curious to read what others commented about the article, here were some of my findings:
“When I am hiring people for work and two people are in the running my choice will always be for the one who looks clean and professional - tatoos makes people look dirty and nose rings look like boogers are hanging from their nose. I can judge people by their appearance and determine that their look is not what I want in my company. That is my right. The consequence of your "personallity" would be not getting the job. If you want to wear those things on your own time that is your right. Who I choose to represent my business is my right. Sometimes looks are "everthing!!!!!!".”
“I am a college graduate, I dont smoke, drink, I am not over weight, and I have a great job, I am married with two little girls, I attend church and I HAVE 3 TATTOOS. Am I a freak? Get a life! You people who get offended by a simple tattoo need to grow up and get a life.”
It is obvious that some of the opinions are very different but I must agree with the first, you choose who you want to represent you and your company. However, the second commenter does have a good point. Either way I am strongly against discrimination but in my opinion, this is not discrimination.

W.D.C.T.T.S.T-P.T.W.P.O.S.A.V.Y.I.O.W.R.T.R.O.R.T.V.A.I.E.I.A.C-C.M.C.O.A.T.B.E.A.W.H.T.W.B.C.T.W.I.C.A.B.T.F.V.M.A.E.T.S.B.P.T.W.I.A.J.W.W.V.R.T.V.C.

This act by Bountiful City is just another in a long line of shocking civil rights violations and atrocities. It shouldn't come as a surprise, though it certainly still does, that the city which had, up to this point, been discriminating against those potential employees who choose to shout obscenities non-stop in the work place, those who chose to come to work dressed in Nazi and Ku Klux Klan uniforms, and those who chose not to wear clothes at all at work. Now they have pushed their intolerance even farther by banning visible tattoos on city employees.

It is time we as concerned upholders of the blessed first amendment took a stand. Bountiful City went too far a long time ago, but now they've become prideful in their power, and will no doubt be unprepared for the onslaught which we will bring to their door. We will send them a message! We will let them know that our free speech is MUCH more important than theirs! How dare they attempt to oppress us in order to present a "professional" image? We will start a protest the likes of which those Tea Party dirtbags have never even DREAMED! Our motto? "We don't care that the same tax-payers that would pay our salary also voted you into office! We refuse to relinquish our right to voluntarily and intentionally enter into a counter-culture, meanwhile causing our appearances to be, exactly as we hoped they would be, contrary to what is considered acceptable by the fascist "vast majority" and expect to still be paid to work in a job where we visually represent the very city which we are protesting!!!"

OK, so it's kind of a long motto. I'm the riler, not the motto-comer-up-wither. We'll talk to him and get him to come up with something a little more catchy. But you get the point! We're not going to stand for this anymore! Discrimination against things we have extremely voluntarily chosen to do must end!