Tattoos In College Students

Tattooed College Students and Employment

The prevalence of tattoos acceptance in the community is possibly due to the fact that tattoos had been seen in everyday life. Taibi (2013) cites a statistic from the Pew Research Center that nearly a third of Americans 30-45 has at least one tattoo (p.103). Today more people, especially college students are getting tattooed. University students view tattoos as common and as a new lifestyle. The fundamental reason for this tattoos evolution is the fact that youth during their school years uses them as a way of self-expression and self-identification. On the other hand, those people who are owner or managers of companies and businesses have not significantly embraced tattooing. Icon (n.d) say that

tattooed people may perceive tattoos as an expression of their individuality and a way to communicate their freedom, but employers perceive it as an uncontainable manifestation of their selfishness, not as a teammate (p.105) This perception of tattoos by potential employers can reduce tattooed college students’ opportunity to get decent employments. Thereby, college student should avoid getting tattoos for future employability because of the stigma and stereotype connected to tattoos, which engender not only employer’s negative perception and belief, but also company concerns about the risky behaviors show by tattooed college students.
The most important reason college students should avoid tattoos is because of the fact that tattoos are negatively stereotyped and stigmatized.

As Kristen Foltz (2014), who is an attorney and a professor of business communication and speech at the University of Tampa, explains that it is evident that tattoos were used in China to distinguish an individual as a convict, a captive or even a prostitute (p.593). In deed, this stigma of tattoos is still current for employers. Managers criticized and stigmatized persons who have tattoos as deviant, and frequently stereotyped them as having rebellious behavior. King and Vidourek (2013) point out that college student who has several tattoos express advanced level of deviant behavior (p.545). The stigma linked to tattoos students may define them as a bad person, who inspires negative feelings. The negative perception of tattoos of the probable employers should help college students avoid getting tattoos, otherwise the stigma associated with body art by employers can prevent University student of getting a suitable

career.
Furthermore, Due to stigmatization and stereotype connected to tattoos, employers have the negative perception of body art, which can prevent university students of getting hired. Taibi (2013) quotes a study done by St. Andrew’s University School of Management professor Andrew Timming in which he found that noticeable body art give a bad impression and can reduce the opportunity for someone to be accepted for a job position (p.103). In the domain of employment, the appearance is one of the key aspect employers look, at the first glance when someone is looking for a job. It is not a good idea to have tattoos when projecting to work in an industry where the appearance is valued. Foltz (2014) reports that people view caregiver with tattoos to be “unsanitary” or “dirty”(p.592). Certain profession like the medical field, tattooed employees do not have a leading position and they are severely asked to cover them up. The majority of companies does not want visible tattoos and have the right to fire employees with visible tattoos. The fact is that employers have the historical view of tattoos, which is related to a negative connotation of tattoos. Foltz (2014) argues that concerning trustworthiness, people without tattoos have the tendency to view tattooed person to be less trustworthy (p.593). The presence of tattoos on people raises the issue of trust. It is important for today college students to not have body art to increase their possibilities of being hired in a good company. The competition in the job market should be a determinant factor in student’s decision not to get some extravagant and visible tattoos.
In addition to the negative perception of tattoos, the employers also have some concerns about the risky behaviors evince by tattooed college students.

According to King &Vidourek (2013) current study reveals that as compared to their non-tattooed peers, 85% tattooed students are involve in unsafe behaviors including drug abuse, drinking alcohol, smoking cigarette and risky sexual behaviors (p.545). These kinds the behavior enforces the concerns of the employers about tattooed students.. Foltz (2014) point out that yet while students are aware that having a visible tattoo may negatively impact their future employability, nearly half of those students plan to get a tattoo anyway (p.598). This determined attitude shows the apparent irresponsibility of college students with visible tattoos. Most employers want to hire people who can be responsible and healthy. Thus the negative behaviors and attitudes of tattooed college students can be a veritable concern for employers and jeopardize college students future career

opportunities.
However, critics of this proposal debate that college student by getting tattoos express their freedom and can be still hired by company. Rachel Hennessey (2014) point out that “no–tattoos policy would mean losing excellent candidates” (p.114). Tattooed individual are accepted in companies for their skills besides their extravagant appearances. Some company uses their employees to sell their businesses According to Micah Solomon (2014), Starbucks decision to allow tattoos and piercings is a good one because twenty-five century customers want an authentic experience when they shop or dine, and employees with tattoos are more authentic, so they get along better with customers (p.111) The main reason for this change is that not only the tattooed college students are the dominant customers for this company, but also the employers want to create a symbiosis between employees and customers and show how genuine their employees are.
Nevertheless, tattooed University students have the freedom of expression, but this freedom has to be conformed to the rules and laws in each company they will want to work with. Burleson (2008/2014) informs that corporations have a legal right to interdict workers with tattoos; also company can limit employees’ personal expression on the job as long as they do not intrude on their civil rights (p.109). Employers have the right to fire an individual with tattoos anytime. Foltz (2014) believes that nearly all of those students plan to get inked in a spot not typically visible in a work environment (p.598), because they are aware that their body marks can be an obstacle for their employment. Burleson (2008/2014) rejects that “Occasionally hiding a tattoo is not enough. There have been cases where an employee reveals a tattoo at a company gathering or event like a softball game or a barbeque in a view of their manager, who in turn, finds another reason to terminate the employee” (p.109). Students should simply avoid tattoos be sheltered from work discrimination.
Overall, in order to have a suitable employment, college students should avoid tattoos because of the stigma associated with it, also because of the negative perception employers have about tattoos. The majority of employers view tattoos as an expression of deviance behaviors and dirty. This view is also enhanced by the negative attitude and behaviors that tattooed student’s express. Hiring a person with visible tattoos can make the credibility of a company at risk. College student should think about their future career before making the decision to have their tattoos, because at the end, these tattoos can be an obstacle in their future employability.