Take out your piercings, damn it!

[uniqueone]

How about "cultural" being defined as the predominant norms and morays of the country/society in which you have taken up residence?

 

In other words, "When in Rome, do as the Romans do!"

 

Even more simply, if you're in America, be American, not a hyphenate or any other abberation!

 

 

But TBF is saying that she thinks it's ok if CERTAIN people wear cultural adornments. That's the reason for my inquiry.

[uniqueone]

Let's say Gloria, an African American (born and raised in Atlanta) goes to work in full tribal getup......ears full of gold hoops, long colorful orange and gold gown and matching head covering.

 

Then let's say in another office, Karen, a Caucasian Irish American (born and raised in Atlanta) goes to work in the same type of outfit with the same type of jewelry.

 

What do you think will happen to Gloria?

 

What do you think will happen to Karen?

[Ocean-Blue]

I don't think you're really getting what i'm saying. I'm not talking about things like daggers. I'm talking adornments. You didn't specifically answer my questions.

 

Who can judge what is cultural? Well that all depends on context, doesn't it? Cultural identity is so nuanced that it is almost impossible to identify and legitimate it in a neat, packaged form.

 

I understand that there are those that adopt a particular cultural expression without prescribing to the culture as a whole. There are many people that walk around with tattoos for aesthetic reasons without having it having any "cultural" significance to them (i.e. a regular Joe with a tat vs. a Maori). But how would you go about identifying what is culturally relevant and what is not? Human thought and action is so complex that I don't think it's possible. This is precisely why I think it's better to err on the side of caution and leave certain expressions at home for the sake of workplace etiquette.

[uniqueone]

Let's say Gloria, an African American (born and raised in Atlanta) goes to work in full tribal getup......ears full of gold hoops, long colorful orange and gold gown and matching head covering.

 

Then let's say in another office, Karen, a Caucasian Irish American (born and raised in Atlanta) goes to work in the same type of outfit with the same type of jewelry.

 

What do you think will happen to Gloria?

 

What do you think will happen to Karen?

 

Oh....btw....I can TELL you what's going to happen.....

 

Ain't nobody going to say squat to Gloria......managers aren't going to touch that one with a ten foot pole.

 

But meanwhile Karen....she's going to be told to dress more "professionally".

 

So someone tell me why Gloria can express her culture when both were raised in Atlanta?

[Ocean-Blue]

Oh....btw....I can TELL you what's going to happen.....

 

Ain't nobody going to say squat to Gloria......managers aren't going to touch that one with a ten foot pole.

 

But meanwhile Karen....she's going to be told to dress more "professionally".

 

So someone tell me why Gloria can express her culture when both were raised in Atlanta?

 

Depends on your constitution, case law and Atlanta human rights legislation. Usually there are precedents for these things... Each region handles such matters differently.

[Trialbyfire]

But TBF is saying that she thinks it's ok if CERTAIN people wear cultural adornments. That's the reason for my inquiry.

It depends on whether you're accustomed to certain cultures. To use OBs culture, she's Eastern Indian. Of Eastern Indians it is commonly known that a nose piercings and henna are typical for her culture. It's not significant where she was born. What's significant is that she has sufficient racial features to give the impression it's cultural, therefore acceptable.

 

If she were caucasian, this type of attire would be solely a fashion statement, particularly if she has no accent. Even if she was born in Pakistan or India, she would not give the correct impression of it being a cultural issue.

 

Perception is everything, within a conservative business world.

[Curmudgeon]

Who can judge what is cultural? Well that all depends on context, doesn't it? Cultural identity is so nuanced that it is almost impossible to identify and legitimate it in a neat, packaged form.

 

...an employer has every right to make the determination as to what is acceptable to them. And that's as it should be! Someone else's "freedon of expression" stops short of my ability to make a living.

[Trialbyfire]

Let's say Gloria, an African American (born and raised in Atlanta) goes to work in full tribal getup......ears full of gold hoops, long colorful orange and gold gown and matching head covering.

 

Then let's say in another office, Karen, a Caucasian Irish American (born and raised in Atlanta) goes to work in the same type of outfit with the same type of jewelry.

 

What do you think will happen to Gloria?

 

What do you think will happen to Karen?

Gloria and Karen would not be hired. It is not discreet attire. You don't go to a job interview in festival gear...

[Ocean-Blue]

...an employer has every right to make the determination as to what is acceptable to them. And that's as it should be! Someone else's "freedon of expression" stops short of my ability to make a living.

 

My statement regarding the complex nature of cultural expression was a general observation. I agree that an employer can and should decide what is appropriate as far as attire, etc is concerned. But the law does offer a framework with which to deal with certain "issues" that have been discussed in this thread.

[uniqueone]

Gloria and Karen would not be hired. It is not discreet attire. You don't go to a job interview in festival gear...

 

I didn't mention interview.

[uniqueone]

It depends on whether you're accustomed to certain cultures. To use OBs culture, she's Eastern Indian. Of Eastern Indians it is commonly known that a nose piercings and henna are typical for her culture. It's not significant where she was born. What's significant is that she has sufficient racial features to give the impression it's cultural, therefore acceptable.

 

If she were caucasian, this type of attire would be solely a fashion statement, particularly if she has no accent. Even if she was born in Pakistan or India, she would not give the correct impression of it being a cultural issue.

 

Perception is everything, within a conservative business world.

 

 

It's not significant where she was born. Wow.

 

So then my brother can wear a kilt to work, right?

[Trialbyfire]

It's not significant where she was born. Wow.

 

So then my brother can wear a kilt to work, right?

Does he look hawt in one?

[Ocean-Blue]

It's not significant where she was born. Wow.

 

So then my brother can wear a kilt to work, right?

 

Your questions and posts illustrate the very SPECIFIC, detailed nature of such things. This is why you can't generalize... Each situation is different. There are no set definitions that we can apply.

 

People need to use common sense and balance that against their beliefs before going out into the working world.

 

The "tribal" get up example would likely be met with negativity for both women. However, one may have more of a "case" in terms of a freedom of expression complaint than that other. Again, each jurisdiction handles such matters differently.

[Pyro]

I'm temporarily working as a receptionist at my office because we don't have one right now. We're interviewing for them. We had one potential candidate and I was ecstatic because I hate working as a receptionist on top of the other duties I have like bookkeeping and proofreading (it's hard to proofread when you have to answer the phone all the damn time).

 

So one girl had her second interview today - I was really hoping that she would get the damn job. But NOOoooOOooo, she had to be an idiot and wear her tongue ring into the interview.

 

Ok, I'm done venting. Thanks for listening.

 

I agree.

 

Seriously, take out the damn piercings for an hour. First impressions are everything, especially when it comes to getting a job. Its not the end of the world to take piercings off/out.

[glamgurl36]

thanks kitten

[Art_Critic]

Earlier this year, Costco Wholesaler was sued for religious discrimination when it sought compliance with its policy prohibiting facial jewelry and discharged a cashier who refused to remove her facial piercings after being asked to do so by management.

 

The policy provided: “appearance and perception play a key role in member service. Our goal is to be dressed professionally at all times…No visible facial or tongue jewelry (earrings permitted).”

 

When Costco asked the employee to remove her facial jewelry, she cited her religion as the basis for her refusal.

 

The employee, who was a member of the Church of Body Modification (CBM), maintained that wearing facial jewelry was a practice required by her religion.

 

In an effort to comply with its obligations to provide religious accommodation, Costco agreed to permit the employee to leave her piercings in if she covered them with a band aid while at work or replaced the jewelry with clear plastic spacers.

 

These proposed accommodations were rejected by the employee, who insisted that she be exempted from the dress code because she claimed her religion required her to display her facial jewelry at all times.

 

The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts in Cloutier v. Costco found the employee’s religious discrimination claim invalid.

 

For the purposes of its decision, the court found that CBM was a bona fide religion, and accepted the sincerity of the plaintiff's religious beliefs, however, it found that CBM did not require the display of facial piercings at all times.

 

The court further found that “the temporary covering of plaintiff’s facial piercings during work hours impinges on plaintiff’s religious scruples no more than the wearing of a blouse which covers plaintiff’s tattoos” and that Costco had a legitimate interest in presenting a workforce to its customers that is in its eyes reasonably professional in appearance.

 

Thus, the court concluded that Costco had fully satisfied its legal obligations to provide a religious accommodation and that Ms. Cloutier’s claims were not actionable.

[sedgwick]

I am very heavily tattooed and pierced. I have one inch holes in my earlobes. I could not possibly care less about someone's piercings when I walk into a building, and I would hope they would grant me the same respect. I'm a person, I'm clean, I don't have any diseases, I have an education, I'm a writer writing a book about becoming a tattooed lady, I taught college for five years (had pink hair when I got hired for one of my teaching jobs.) I've had quite a few office temp jobs looking exactly like I look. I wouldn't want to work for anyone who would care about something so insignificant when there's actual work to be done!

[Trimmer]

I am very heavily tattooed and pierced. I have one inch holes in my earlobes. I could not possibly care less about someone's piercings when I walk into a building, and I would hope they would grant me the same respect. I'm a person, I'm clean, I don't have any diseases, I have an education, I'm a writer writing a book about becoming a tattooed lady, I taught college for five years (had pink hair when I got hired for one of my teaching jobs.) I've had quite a few office temp jobs looking exactly like I look. I wouldn't want to work for anyone who would care about something so insignificant when there's actual work to be done!

I fully support your right to reject employment from any employer whose policies do not match your opinions. And, barring discrimination as legally defined, it works the other way, too. I support the right of an employer to choose not to offer employment to someone whose personal policies do not match the employer's opinions. And these are not statements supporting or condemning the actual opinions on either side; it's strictly about a meeting of the minds.

 

Employment is an agreement between two parties. Both have to agree to move forward with the relationship. Like a marriage, it only takes one to disagree - why would you want to work for someone who doesn't want you?

 

They can't force you to work for them, you can't force them to hire you. I would think everyone would end up happy here!

[Art_Critic]

It is generally recognized that employers are free to set reasonable dress codes and grooming standards that are business-justified and applied in a nondiscriminatory manner.

 

In the case of individuals with tattoos and piercings, there is no federal or state law that affords them explicit protection from employment discrimination on the basis of their appearance.

 

Which is why someone going into an interview should remove their tongue piercing if they are serious about securing a job at a place of employment that might consider piercings a deal breaker

[Racquel Colette]

Well, there are a lot of 80-year olds that are still taken aback by seeing a black person in anything other than a subservient occupation.

 

Professionalism is one thing, but it seems like we're SOOOOOO paranoid about the smallest offenses that the line of "acceptable" takes forever to inch forward. And it enforces the idea that there's something off about people who choose to look ever the slightest bit different.

 

There are days I look very conservative, and days I look punk, and no matter how I'm dressed, as long as I act maturely and address people respectfully, I've never gotten so much as a dirty look.

 

No offense, the whole multiple piercings and tattooed bodies just looks dirty and gross.

[lovesparis]

i have a tongue piercing. i've taken it out for every job interview i've gone to since getting it. if the place i worked didn't allow visible piercings, i wouldn't wear it; if that meant it closed up, so be it. i am a receptionist, i deal with people on the phone as well as face-to-face.

 

after being hired i didn't wear the ring until i was sure that i could. it took 6 months before the other receptionists that i worked with noticed. it took closer to 1.5 years before the higher ups noticed, and that was only b/c i was laughing uncontrollably at one point during a staff meeting.

 

when i got my tongue pierced i asked them to place it as far back as they could, so it would be less visible.

 

i work in a very conservative christian environment, our office manager has visible tat's. one on her inner wrist, one on her neck, one on her ankle. i have 2 tats, both were placed in locations that are covered up unless i want them to be uncovered. i debated long and hard over the placement of them, so i wouldn't have to worry about them showing to someone i didn't want to see them.

 

at the same time, since the aforementioned job candidate meet every other criteria, i don't see why telling her the policy on piercings and allowing her to make a decision if she wanted to take it out or not wasn't extended.

[sedgwick]

Oh my goodness! To quote Curmudgeon, "...tats and piercings are just another fad. They're no different than [incidentally, the correct phrase in American English is "different FROM" --sedg] beehive hairdos, poddle skirts, polyester leisure suits, powdered wigs, ponytails on men, goatees or afros. In time they'll be left behind for something newer and more in vogue. Unfortunately, the tats can't be packed away in the attic to only be brought out for halloween a generation later and laughed at like the rest."

 

As a woman who has been tattooing her body for almost 20 years now and has never regretted one single mark or viewed it as a fad for one moment, I am going to assume that you're not making such a statement without having read bmezine.com, Armando F. Favazza's "Bodies Under Siege," and the Re/Search volume "Modern Primitives" -- yes? Because otherwise this post would be highly offensive and uninformed. I have a book about coping with mental illness via body modification coming out with W.W. Norton in 2009; I would assume that since you know so much about the subject matter, you'll want to read mine as well.

[sedgwick]

And to quote Racquel Collette, "No offense, the whole multiple piercings and tattooed bodies just looks dirty and gross."

 

I would ask in this case that if people really want to enter into this discussion, you consider that there are people reading this and willing to talk to you if you do not insult them. Can you define "dirty" and "gross" outside of your own personal standards, or are you simply making sweeping generalizations? How does my having ink on my skin make me dirty? I shower twice a day. How does it make me gross? I'm not blowing my nose on you or touching you and spreading pathogens or anything. Let's come up with useful definitions. Where I originally come from (the rural South), there are people who will tell you that being Mexican makes you look dirty and gross. Let's think before we type, yeah?

[OceanBlue]

You lost me. OB has a piercing which has a cultural aspect to it. We have a multi-cultural acceptance policy in Canada where if it's discreet, it's not an issue. This is not pure aesthetics. Having said that, a member of the Sikh community will not be hired, if he chooses to wear a ceremonial dagger. It endangers everyone, cultural aspect or not.

 

I don't recall seeing where they are not allowed to wear them in a work environment. The big lawsuit had to do with the school. And the Supreme Court ruled that the Sikh kid was allowed to wear his ceremonial dagger to school. I totally disagreed with this ruling. So they can't wear them on a plane, but it's okay for a 20 cm blade to be worn to school.

 

I wouldn't touch that with a ten foot pole. It would leave the door wide open for a civil suit.

 

20 years ago I argued that "you hired me with 5 earrings, I will work wearing 5 earrings." And, for the record, I still wear all 5 as a business professional today.

 

No offense, the whole multiple piercings and tattooed bodies just looks dirty and gross.

 

Not sure what your point was? KittenMoon already says she doesn't have tats or multiple piercings... And I don't believe that I look either dirty or gross.

 

i have a tongue piercing. i've taken it out for every job interview i've gone to since getting it. if the place i worked didn't allow visible piercings, i wouldn't wear it; if that meant it closed up, so be it. i am a receptionist, i deal with people on the phone as well as face-to-face.

 

I wondered about that....I was led to believe that tongue piercings begin to heal almost immediately as it is a muscle and not a normal piercing.

 

With this culture of piercing and tats, I have tried to ensure that my kids keep their futures in perspective. I remind them of the professionalism, or lack of it when it comes to visible tattoos, and facial piercings. That being said, I have no problem with some piercings, though I have never been a fan of the eyebrow one.

 

I attempt to consider qualifications ahead of appearance. I hired a long haired guy with an earring once and that almost sent my boss through the roof...he turned out to be one of our best employees. And he liked him once he put aside his preconceived notions about guys with long hair and got to know him.

 

I don't know...just doesn't seem like we've made much progress in terms of tolerance and accepting people on merit rather than appearances. Don't get me wrong, I conform to the image my employer wants portrayed (most of the time) and I understand the corporate culture. I just think it is limiting in certain aspects.

[Trialbyfire]

I don't recall seeing where they are not allowed to wear them in a work environment. The big lawsuit had to do with the school. And the Supreme Court ruled that the Sikh kid was allowed to wear his ceremonial dagger to school. I totally disagreed with this ruling. So they can't wear them on a plane, but it's okay for a 20 cm blade to be worn to school.

My responses were based on hiring practices. You don't need to explain why you don't hire someone. You simply don't hire them.

 

20 years ago I argued that "you hired me with 5 earrings, I will work wearing 5 earrings." And, for the record, I still wear all 5 as a business professional today.

Same issue as above. The employer hires as they see fit. If there's something they don't like, you won't get hired. It's up to you to decide how far you want to mess with your chances of getting hired, based on ideals.