I am a journalism student writing a story on visible body modifications in the workplace. I was just curious if there were any discrimination laws for or against tattoos anywhere in the United States, or specifically in Michigan. I hope you can help me out! Thank you.

I was just curious if there were any discrimination laws for or against tattoos anywhere in the United States, or specifically in Michigan. Tatoos are not protected by any laws.

It's possible that there may be some religious accommodation considerations depending upon the specific situation and the employee's sincerely held religious beliefs but those situations would be few and far between. Most tatoos and other body art are simply a matter of decoration and personal perference and the employer has every right to require an employee to cover those up or reject a candidate who refuses to do that or if it's not possible - one's face tatooed like a big spider web, for example. Most employers would have a major problem with that, especially if the employee was in a customer contact position.

okay, but if someone is required to cover up their tattoos or not hired because of them, could then, an employer not hire a "fat" person or a person with bad teeth because their appearance interferes with their customer contact position?

Think about it. Why are some things allowed to slip through, and others are not, just because an employer doesn't like the looks of some thing, regardless of qualifications?

okay, but if someone is required to cover up their tattoos or not hired because of them, could then, an employer not hire a "fat" person or a person with bad teeth because their appearance interferes with their customer contact position?

Think about it. Why are some things allowed to slip through, and others are not, just because an employer doesn't like the looks of some thing, regardless of qualifications?
An employer doesn't have to hire anyone, as long as the reason for not hiring are not because of an illegal reason.

Do a google search under Title VII and read up on what is protected, that'll shorten your research on discrimination laws. There is some state laws that come into play as well, I believe Michigan is the only State where obesity is a protected class.

okay, but if someone is required to cover up their tattoos or not hired because of them, could then, an employer not hire a "fat" person or a person with bad teeth because their appearance interferes with their customer contact position?

Think about it. Why are some things allowed to slip through, and others are not, just because an employer doesn't like the looks of some thing, regardless of qualifications?

Let's look at this another way. You own a business and have a certain image you wish to project to your customers, your industry, and the community in which you are located. Your industry is also very mainstream and your customers are a pretty traditional group of individuals - they wear suits and ties to work and when they really go wild, they dress in business casual. You're looking to hire a Sales Manager who is going to be the "face" of your company with your customers, will be responsible for establishing and building customer relationships, and so on.

You put an ad in the newspaper and the following week an applicant walks in the door to apply. He's wearing grubby blue jeans, a ratty T-shirt, has multiple piercings all over his face, and tatoos everywhere. Is that guy projecting an image consistent with the professional stature you want your customers and the public to perceive your company has? Can you imagine someone with that appearance calling on your customers in their places of business?

I'm not passing any judgment on the applicant's personal attributes or moral character. I'm simply saying that you have the right to require your employees to present an appearance consistent with the image appropriate to your organization and business objectives. And that will vary depending on the position the person holds. If you're running a distribution facility, it probably doesn't matter a bit if the guy or gal driving a forklift has tatoos and piercings but it matters considerably if we're talking about your Sales Manager.

Let's look at this another way. You own a business and have a certain image you wish to project to your customers, your industry, and the community in which you are located. Your industry is also very mainstream and your customers are a pretty traditional group of individuals - they wear suits and ties to work and when they really go wild, they dress in business casual. You're looking to hire a Sales Manager who is going to be the "face" of your company with your customers, will be responsible for establishing and building customer relationships, and so on.

You put an ad in the newspaper and the following week an applicant walks in the door to apply. He's wearing grubby blue jeans, a ratty T-shirt, has multiple piercings all over his face, and tatoos everywhere. Is that guy projecting an image consistent with the professional stature you want your customers and the public to perceive your company has? Can you imagine someone with that appearance calling on your customers in their places of business?

I'm not passing any judgment on the applicant's personal attributes or moral character. I'm simply saying that you have the right to require your employees to present an appearance consistent with the image appropriate to your organization and business objectives. And that will vary depending on the position the person holds. If you're running a distribution facility, it probably doesn't matter a bit if the guy or gal driving a forklift has tatoos and piercings but it matters considerably if we're talking about your Sales Manager.


it's frustrating to see that you would assume a person with tattoos and piercings would walk into a job interview in a ratty tee and jeans. we're not ignorant, we just happen to use our bodies as canvases. yes, if any person walked into an interview looking that way, i would hope that the employer would see they are not serious about the job and not hire them. but if a perfectly well groomed individual in a suit and tie (or skirt and blazer) walked into an interview for a sales manager job with all the right qualifications i would hope that the employer would see past a visual modification in order to secure the right man for the job.

in essence, you are saying that no matter how educated and qualified a person is, if they have modifications, the only job they should be having is one in which they are not dealing with people on a professional level. it's sad that people with your views are the so called "norm."

and tattoos is spelled with two t's, not one.

it's frustrating to see that you would assume a person with tattoos and piercings would walk into a job interview in a ratty tee and jeans. I'm not suggesting everyone with tattoos and piercings would walk into a job dressed like that but I have seen plenty of individuals do so, both with and without tattoos and piercings. You'd be amazed at how some individuals present themselves for employment.

but if a perfectly well groomed individual in a suit and tie (or skirt and blazer) walked into an interview for a sales manager job with all the right qualifications i would hope that the employer would see past a visual modification in order to secure the right man for the job. The reality is that someone with a pierced eyebrow, nose, tongue and/or visible tattoos is just not going to receive the same consideration for many types of positions as candidates without those same personal decorations and the more they have, the more difficult finding a "mainstream" job is going to be.

"and tattoos is spelled with two t's, not one."

Hmmmmmmmmmm--I count three

On a semi-serious note (I can't believe you're too serious about defending the position you're trying to take)--

People who are different in one respect or another have been treated disparately for centuries, or eons. Laws have been passed to equalize treatment of different types of people. In nearly all cases, however, the laws are to guard against people who are different because of reasons over which they have no control. (I suppose religion is a choice.) The process of body art, at least in U.S. society, is a matter of someone sitting down and having one or more holes punched in one or more body parts, and possibly having ink injected. All of these actions are done knowingly, except for the drunk/high people who wake up wondering how they got that panther on their shoulder.

I'm not disparaging your choice in body art. Some of the work is magnificent. You should be aware, however, that there is a large segment of society (the hiring segment, for the most part) that does not feel that tattoos, piercings, and the like have a place in their businesses. As you have a right to your own decoration, they have a right to hire whomever will represent for them.

In my mis-spent youth, I was roundly criticized for being a "long haired hippie freak". I know it's not the same, but there were jobs that I had no hope of getting until I cut my hair, and shaved. Well, cut my hair, anyway. I never could get used to shaving. Maybe time will work in favor of tattoos, but they have been around for a long time, and seldom accepted in Western culture.

Get used to it. There will be, all your life, choices and compromises. It may be good to suffer for your art, but it's not a lot of fun.

I completely understand that employers have the choice to hire whomever they choose. I just think that it's horrible that people will get passed over because of their appearance.

I honestly came on this forum just to find out if there were any laws pertaining to this subject, not to start an argument, but I can't help but defend something that is a valid point.

And yes, I am extremely serious about my views and my argument. I wish that people would take the time to understand things before they pass judgement on them, but I guess that's just my liberal mind grasping for hope. Every day someone passes judgement on myself or one of my friends because of the modifications we have. We are all attractive individuals by mainstream standards, but my simple lip ring and my boyfriend's sleeves cause people to stare rudely and make unneccessary comments, oftentimes lewd and disgusting. I have been sexually harassed because of my modifications, and many of my friends have been fired from or not hired for jobs because of the way they look.

Imagine someone not hiring you because of the way you do your makeup or the color you choose to dye your hair. These are both body modifications in their own way. You choose to add these things to your body, but no one can tell you to change your hair from blonde to brown or have you take off your makeup.

Everyone is trying to make me look at it from the opposite perspective, and I already understand. Did you ever think to look at it from this one? We are not the ones with closed minds.

Imagine someone not hiring you because of the way you do your makeup or the color you choose to dye your hair. These are both body modifications in their own way. You choose to add these things to your body, but no one can tell you to change your hair from blonde to brown or have you take off your makeup. Sure they can. I recall interviewing a receptionist candidate years ago who looked like she'd dipped her face in a paint can. Um, sorry, that's not quite the look we were going for in our lobby. :eek:

I'm am not defending people who are rude to you because of your piercings or tattoos. Rudeness is never defensible. The truth of the matter though is that grooming and appearance do count and the way in which they count is going to vary depending on the industry and the job. Someone showing up for an interview as a producer for a hip-hop recording studio who looks like a soccer mom probably isn't going to get very far either.

In many situations, looking the part just goes with the territory. You don't wear an evening gown to go bowling and you don't wear a bowling shirt to go to the opera.

Visible tattoo's and non-traditional piercings are done by people who choose to assert their individuality, non-conformity, and rejection of the "norm".

To expect to be accepted by the norm cheapens the reason to participate in body art.

It's the bed you made, now you get to sleep in the dirty sheets.

if your over weight, no hire, if your over wrinkled, same ole again. There is only one place I know of that has such laws and that's the armed forces. And they have every right in that area. If the tattoo is tastefully done, there is no law against it. If your a sales person for a company, I'd like to know how it would be visible in a suit. I cannot believe the arguements on this. ps there may be misspells in this ;)

There is no law, but there is legal precidence. Cloutier vs. Costco, Massachusetts district court.



I honestly came on this forum just to find out if there were any laws pertaining to this subject, not to start an argument, but I can't help but defend something that is a valid point.


Actually, Tattooed Journalist, it's a very interesting discussion. You are an extremely literate person, you voice your thoughts well, and I have been enjoying the way you say you voice your opinions.

if your over weight, no hire, if your over wrinkled, same ole again. There is only one place I know of that has such laws and that's the armed forces. And they have every right in that area. If the tattoo is tastefully done, there is no law against it. If your a sales person for a company, I'd like to know how it would be visible in a suit. I cannot believe the arguements on this. ps there may be misspells in this ;)
Non-visable tatoo's are not an issue since they aren't part of the public persona.

I recently had a young woman that was going to work in one of our Alaska salmon shore plants, she had tat's and piercings, no big deal to me with hiring her, I did mention that she may have to remove the piercings before she goes to work to assure nothing falls into the product (It's a state and federal DEC thing)

She nodded and assured me that wouldn't be a problem and began to explain that she had other piercings that weren't visible and....

:o Before she went any further I held my hand up and said "Stop, if we don't see 'em, it's not an issue" :D

An employer doesn't have to hire anyone, as long as the reason for not hiring are not because of an illegal reason.

Do a google search under Title VII and read up on what is protected, that'll shorten your research on discrimination laws. There is some state laws that come into play as well, I believe Michigan is the only State where obesity is a protected class.
tattooed is right in what she said it doesnt matter what the law says about it

that tats and etc. are a sign of non-conformity and that then to argue that the RL must accept you, to normalize you, is an insult. I agree. The freaks with no tats and no piercings have created a citadel of conformity, one where you have to go along to get along. Instead of trying to insert yourself into that mix, rally outside of the citadel with battering rams and catapults and torches and flaming arrows. Siege the tower of power, and tear it asunder until all people can be what they want, how they want, when they want.

Of course, you'll likely die of starvation before the siege even gets momentum, but at least you'll have the good fight. and the revolution needs more people.

curt j.

Let's turn the tables.

If you are running a skate shop, would you hire an overweight crew-cut 40 year old man to be your frontman to the kids?

How about a beehive hairdoo'd June Cleaver look alike?

No. You know your audience and hire someone who fits in.

It is called buisiness. You can sell more widgets with honey than you can with vinegar.

I've worked for a dot com company, fairly well known, for the last year now. At the time of hire, I only had one tattoo that was overly visible and it COULD be covered by a watch, but was rarely covered. Over the last year, I've added ink to each forearm area. I have a spider webbed-maltese cross around my left elbow (no, it has nothing to do with racism or skin head crap) and flames up my forearm. Sure people look, but I've never gotten any bad remarks from my bosses, not even the lead counsil or the president of the company, whom I have frequent contact with. Yesterday I started my right forearm with a large skull. Suddenly people are telling me that I might have to wear long sleeves now. I understand that there may be positions in life where I'm prohibited from showing my ink, or it's 'preferred' that I wear long sleeves.

If for some reason someone says that it's now suddenly manditory that I cover up, do I have to? Would I have a case if I sued? If they told me in the beginning that I can't show any ink, that's one thing. But to suddenly have to cover them up wouldn't be fair. What I have on one arm isn't more offensive than the other. I don't have naked girls or anything like that. I know MY idea of art, what is appealing, or the way I choose to portray myself isn't the same as everyone else, but I'm hoping that it doesn't become an issue. What the heck do I do if it DOES become an issue???

If for some reason someone says that it's now suddenly manditory that I cover up, do I have to? Yes. It is your employer's right to change their policies.

Would I have a case if I sued? No. Being tattooed, and particularly having your tattoos visible, is not a protected right.

What the heck do I do if it DOES become an issue??? Cover up, remove the visible body art or find another job where your art is not an issue?

The federal anti-discrimination laws are designed to prevent discrimination based on certain characteristics, with the exception of religion, which are immutable, i.e., things over which the individual has no control. You control whether you get a tattoo. Whether you agree with the prevailing sentiment in this country, most employers don't consider a visible tattoo an employment asset.

Human beings make judgments based on appearance and make those judgments long before they have an opportunity to assess your qualifications for the job. Maybe it should be different; but it isn't and it isn't likely to change.

i just have one question: isn't it illegal to discriminate because of the color of somebody's skin? Tattoos are just modifications of your skin by adding different colors. Therefore, tattoos are protected by law.

i just have one question: isn't it illegal to discriminate because of the color of somebody's skin? Tattoos are just modifications of your skin by adding different colors. Therefore, tattoos are protected by law.
Not really, as they are not NATURAL occurences of the variations of skin color, and the color of your SKIN isn't what is protected, it is the RACE and the characterisitics generally indicative of that race (color, hair, features)that is protected.

www.eeoc.gov (http://www.eeoc.gov)

Now, this thread is REALLY old.

Tattoos are NOT protected by law. The color of the skin you were born with is protected; the colors you add to your skin are not. That is total and absolute nonsense.

And rather than have that non-information be added to, I am closing this thread permanently.