[Strel]

I think a lot of the pro-tattoo people here are naively overconfident at the level of acceptance of tattoos.

And piercings...no you will not be getting a second interview from me, period. I respect your right to express yourself.

Respect my right not to have circus freaks and pirates working in my office.

[JBMallory]

Originally Posted by Strel

Tatooees are not a protected class, so it is not discrimination.

nothing is a protected class until somebody files a lawsuit

[ChrisA70]

Moderator cut: FlamingI no longer wear earrings, have not since 1994, no longer care to have tattoos, have not been denied a job for the one small one I have.Moderator cut: Flaming

[stars99]

My, this thread has grown...

I've seen people working at Target and other places with unusual piercings (in the chin, etc.). I don't really like that appearance--anything other than the ears or nose is just too out there for me. But I don't think there should be a problem working at a gas station or walmart with tattoos, piercings.

[Strel]

Originally Posted by JBMallory

nothing is a protected class until somebody files a lawsuit

Actually the protected classes, including race, religion, national origin, sex, etc., are pretty well defined in Constitutional law.

Filing a suit on behalf of aggreived tattooees might be amusing, but it would have no chance of success on those grounds.

Now if you REALLY want to get legal, someone fired for a tattoo by a state or Federal agency could - theoretically - argue that their First Amendment rights were being violated. Were it a religious tattoo you may have a good argument, but then again, even protected expression is subject to reasonable time and place restrictions.

Moreover, the First Amendment doesn't apply to private employers.

So good luck with that.