By crap - 07/03/2013 08:17 - United States
By mish - 22/09/2013 20:41 - United Kingdom - Leominster
By lily - 18/08/2019 12:00
By Fred - 20/03/2015 01:06 - United States - Kingston
By prettylady? - 28/10/2012 04:22 - United States
By nen_00 - 14/09/2009 21:11 - United States
By wookieewhosshe - 26/06/2019 14:03
By Anonymous - 30/01/2021 13:01 - United Kingdom - Oxford
By Anonymous - 13/02/2016 05:14 - Canada - North Battleford
By fat_thighs - 29/04/2009 04:13 - United States
By Anonymous - 26/09/2009 20:28 - United States
By Anonymous - 10/08/2012 05:29 - Europe
By Anonymous - 25/10/2013 04:35 - United States - Grand Prairie
By bitches. - 15/06/2009 00:39 - United States
By Anonymous - 15/07/2021 06:54
By Anonymous - 29/06/2014 04:16 - United States
By GiveMeCake - 02/12/2018 22:00
By Curly - 09/01/2013 00:26 - United States - Ashburn
By looke27 - 13/11/2010 07:21 - United States
By Anonymous - 22/05/2019 00:01
By dizzy - 07/03/2011 07:28 - Malaysia
By matiasbarbero - 16/02/2010 17:56 - United States
By why - 02/05/2016 20:08 - United States - Beachwood
By ugh - 24/11/2014 12:40 - United States - Port Chester
By superfreak6 - 20/05/2016 13:25 - United States - New Orleans
By fireenginemad - 10/02/2013 06:08 - United States - Vancouver
By Anonymous - 28/09/2013 04:02 - United States - Escalon
By j - 04/06/2009 03:36 - Australia
By Anonymous - 17/08/2010 07:10 - United States
By maddie94 - 27/04/2009 09:14 - Australia
By merse - 18/02/2010 13:20 - United States
By Anonymous - 26/06/2016 12:22 - Australia - West End
By fmyhabit - 15/04/2011 05:34 - United States
By IlikeGreenPlants - 26/11/2009 02:41 - United States
By K - 16/02/2011 02:40 - United States
By tigerbyrn - 30/05/2016 15:35 - Canada - Scarborough
By Emily - 03/03/2011 15:23
By poseidon5213 - 17/05/2012 22:02 - United States - Inglewood
By FullOfNick - 10/09/2011 07:11 - United States
By roofer - 31/07/2009 15:14 - United States
By Anonymous - 25/10/2013 17:20 - United States - Tacoma
Add a comment - Reply to : #
I think I would be filing a complaint with the corporate office.
1, and filing a lawsuit (unless OP works in a At-Will state, in which there doesn't have to be a reason for firing). OP said she was fired over her supposedly tattoo but if it doesn't state that in the termination paperwork, then it will be hard to prove any wrong doing on the company's side.
If they don't give a reason in the termination paper work then again, wrongful dismissal, dismissal for no good reason. If it is a big company they may well give you a few weeks wages just to avoid the legal battle. Even if it is not that easy, at a minimum your old boss will get a negative review for the year. See a lawyer or legal advisor first, because your letter has to be worded in a way where it does not sound like blackmail. Otherwise go to the department of labour.
This must be a case of unfair dismissal. I can't see your location but in the UK you could probably get the police involved.
Some states in the US are "Right To Work" states. You can be fired for any reason at any time. Regardless of how long you've been with the company, or whether there is a legitimate reason or not. The cops don't care, nor is it a valid reason for them to get involved.
That's rough, but if your boss want you gone, he/she will find a reason.
People successfully get settlements from companies who hire stupid managers all the time. Possibly this manager could have found a legitimate reason, but he didn't. And half the office knows what happened. If it is a big company she has a good chance of getting a few weeks wages for complaining, to buy her silence. If this manager has been a problem in the past they might even sack him -- he is costing the firm money and goodwill.
I know this sounds weird, but can they legally fire you for something like that?! Obviously you had it there when you started, am I wrong? I'd look into this and maybe try to get something out of it.
Whilst I personally don't like tattoos, I don't think that such policies should be put into place - it is the choice of the individual. Perhaps if the company wanted to upkeep a certain image, then covering up/no facial tattoo is reasonable, but OPs work shouldn't dictate what OP does with themself.
While I agree, I do undderstand why my employer has the same rule. We are an establishment that caters to families and some tattoos are offensive. Instead of opening the door to defining which tattoos are acceptable and which aren't, it's just straightforward, absolutely none that are visible at all. All applicants know this when submitting their applications. Too bad OPs boss doesn't know the difference between a scar and a tattoo.
Comment moderated for rule-breaking.Show it anyway
A high end company doesn't want association with the type of riff raff commonly associated with tattoos. That being said, it is also the individual right of the owner of the company to choose who to hire based on their guidelines, even if the appearance doesn't reflect the personality of the individual.
This shouldn't be voted down, it's a fair question. People in other countries hear us screaming about freedoms and they think we actually have them. In the US, the employers have a lot of stupid criteria they can force on employees to maintain "image" or any other excuse they want. So long as the requirement doesn't mess with someone's religion, they can demand pretty much anything (and even that's sketchy depending on how popular your religion is). Visible tattoos are often cause for dismissal. At McDonalds, if you're a guy with a pierced ear they technically can require you cover the piecing with a band-aid (though most stores don't enforce that idiocy). Tattoos, strange hair colors, piercings, etc are all seen as unnecessary and thus not protected.
81- We have freedom from oppressive government. (Although, we are getting more and more rights taken away, we are still very free from government.) The reason these employers can make such policies is because they are "free" to do so. Government doesn't run that. They are their own business. FREE ENTERPRISE! HELLO! The government of the US has nothing to do with said policies.
Sorry if it seems like a stupid question to you, I just never heard of anything like this. The few times I can recall when an employer has tried to fire someone because of how they look is rare, and the papers allways write about the company/workplace doing it and how wrong it is. You live and learn ^.^, it must suck to have those rules :/.
I have one on my elbow that looks exactly like the 'Nike' logo. Almost faded now, but still visible. I don't see the problem with tattoos, I personally wouldn't get any, but I am not against them at all. I know people that have face/neck tattoos and they have jobs dealing in customer service. And another guy with a scar going from his should, up his neck, cheek, and then goes towards the ear, and he works for my father dealing face to face with customers and nobody minds it at all. People care too much about image, my dad believes in second chances so he don't care what you look like, he'll give you a shot. My dad is one of those guys whose reference means a lot to other people.