• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Do you have a tattoo?

Do you have a tattoo?

  • Total voters
    160
21
Percent of Americans who have a tattoo

23
Percent of women who have a tattoo

19
Percent of men who have a tattoo

36
Percent of 18-to-25-year-olds who have a tattoo

38
Percent of 30-to-39-year-olds who have a tattoo

11
Percent of 50-to-64-year-olds who have a tattoo
 
No, thank God. Thinking back on what I would have gotten. SMH. So dumb.
 
ZhQLAi857kMt.jpg
 
My money's on her being either student at the University of Florida, or a recent grad. They're the king of jorts.
 
Have one on my right forearm that takes up about 50 percent of that area. I prefer long sleeved shirts as professional dress anyway and I interact with clients daily... none of them have any idea. As far as coworkers, I don't think most people care these days but only those I spend time with outside of work know I even have it.
 
Thought of this thread when my wife returned home from a business trip last week and was discussing the new practice of discriminating against the hiring of potential clients because of tattoos. I had no doubt that it existed but I thought it would be by more conservative groups because of appearances, but my wife ( sells wellness programs to large Insurance agencies or businesses) said that it is common now for companies to not hire applicants with ink due to the potential health costs and complications if an employee was likely to get additional tattoos. A company that she just met with told her “off the record” that they recently had medical costs of over $150,000 to treat an employee who had become infected due to a recent tattoo. They did not provide details on the disease or treatment. My wife said this is the third time this has been brought to her attention in the last 6 months.

So recent grads of the Pit with ink, you may want to cover what you can during the interview.
 
TARDAWG said:
Thought of this thread when my wife returned home from a business trip last week and was discussing the new practice of discriminating against the hiring of potential clients because of tattoos. I had no doubt that it existed but I thought it would be by more conservative groups because of appearances, but my wife ( sells wellness programs to large Insurance agencies or businesses) said that it is common now for companies to not hire applicants with ink due to the potential health costs and complications if an employee was likely to get additional tattoos. A company that she just met with told her “off the record” that they recently had medical costs of over $150,000 to treat an employee who had become infected due to a recent tattoo. They did not provide details on the disease or treatment. My wife said this is the third time this has been brought to her attention in the last 6 months.

So recent grads of the Pit with ink, you may want to cover what you can during the interview.
Click to expand...

LOL at the idea that "tattoo infections" are a huge concern considering the costs of cancer and obesity related disease.
 
RacerDeac said:
LOL at the idea that "tattoo infections" are a huge concern considering the costs of cancer and obesity related disease.
Click to expand...

seriously, what a load of poop. might as well screen folks who like to travel, too, since they stand a pretty good chance of contracting an illness while abroad. that's just someone's weak excuse for discriminating against people with tattoos.
 
Don’t shoot the messenger. Not to break the news to you but if you do not think obesity plays a factor in two equal candidates for a job position (one skinny, one fat) you are living in a perfect world dream.
RacerDeac said:
LOL at the idea that "tattoo infections" are a huge concern considering the costs of cancer and obesity related disease.
Click to expand...
 
TARDAWG said:
Thought of this thread when my wife returned home from a business trip last week and was discussing the new practice of discriminating against the hiring of potential clients because of tattoos. I had no doubt that it existed but I thought it would be by more conservative groups because of appearances, but my wife ( sells wellness programs to large Insurance agencies or businesses) said that it is common now for companies to not hire applicants with ink due to the potential health costs and complications if an employee was likely to get additional tattoos. A company that she just met with told her “off the record” that they recently had medical costs of over $150,000 to treat an employee who had become infected due to a recent tattoo. They did not provide details on the disease or treatment. My wife said this is the third time this has been brought to her attention in the last 6 months.

So recent grads of the Pit with ink, you may want to cover what you can during the interview.
Click to expand...

at this point in my career if a company didn't give me a job because they were worried about ink, i'd be grateful. red flag for a shitty working environment or overly cautious, cheap management.
 
TARDAWG said:
Don’t shoot the messenger. Not to break the news to you but if you do not think obesity plays a factor in two equal candidates for a job position (one skinny, one fat) you are living in a perfect world dream.
Click to expand...

i'm guessing this happened in a red state.
 
deacphan said:
at this point in my career if a company didn't give me a job because they were worried about ink, i'd be grateful. red flag for a shitty working environment or overly cautious, cheap management.
Click to expand...

Understand why companies would use ink as a tiebreaker, but I agree with your point. I have a CPA friend who put Fantasy Football commissioner on his resume because he didn't want to work with a bunch of uptight accountants. Things have worked out well for him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top