Is Covering Tattoos A Form of Workplace Discrimination?

In modern Britain tattoos are largely considered just part of everyday fashion and lifestyle which people from all walks of life embrace. The days when body art was confined to particular subcultures, along with any lifestyle assumption attached to them, is long over. In fact, it’s believed that one in five UK citizens now has a tattoo.

Despite these changes, tattoos are still viewed negatively by many UK workplaces, as employers do not approve of their employees having tattoos on display, no matter how concealed they might be. Many employers might prefer not to hire someone with tattoos at all if possible. The result of this is that lots of talented workers, especially of the younger generation, are missing out on the employment opportunities they deserve.

Margaret Mountford, the esteemed businesswoman and lawyer known for her regular appearances on The Apprentice, has called employer attitudes to tattoos “a real problem” for young people. A third of people in Britain under the age of 30 are believed to have at least one tattoo.

The cause of workplace concern over tattoos stems from the belief that they project an undesirable image to a firm’s clientele that may compromise the desired image of the brand. Thus many firms require their employees to wear clothing that conceals their body art.

The employer advice group Acas is urging firms to change their attitude where employee dress code dictates tattoos should be covered, and are encouraging a dialogue about whether body art censorship constitutes a form of workplace discrimination.

Acas Head of Equality, Stephen Williams, acknowledges employer concern but feels a fair balance for employees is required: “Businesses are perfectly within their right to have rules around appearance at work but these rules should be based on the law where appropriate, and the needs of the business, not managers’ personal preferences.”

Williams has also pointed out how employers are also affected by so called ‘ink discrimination’ due to the loss of skilled staff that results from refusing to employ tattooed workers, or from those workers leaving due to their refusal to cover up: “A dress code that restricts people with tattoos might mean companies are missing out on talented workers.”

This attitude towards tattoos has long existed in UK workplaces but is only now being reviewed due to a recent number of high-profile cases, such as the 2015 case of a trainee teacher being sent home from work due to the Catholic School she was teaching at objecting to her tattoos

But while some employers and employees alike will perhaps be sympathetic to concerns about excessive, large body art being on display, censorship has extended to minor instances as well. In 2014, a business consultant was dismissed from her job for having a 4cm tattoo of a butterfly on her foot.

If tattoos are a form of self-expression, any attempt to conceal them in the workplace can be considered a direct form of discrimination. However, this opens up a new debate as to what kind of tattoo is acceptable. Should controversial phrases or symbols be permitted if a person believes in them? And if so, does this run the risk of causing offence to others?

If a tattoo represents an employee’s religious or cultural belief, to prevent them exposing it may be a violation of the rights outlined under the Equality Act 2010. Whether an act of body modification like a tattoo constitutes the equality of a protected characteristic is not yet defined.

It seems a single set of rules for all employers may need to be enforced for all UK businesses to follow. However, establishing an agreement for doing so may prove difficult as the likelihood of tattoo discrimination will differ between industries. Certain jobs, especially those less formal, may require less strenuous rules.