'I was refused new job because of my tattoo'
SECURITY guard Tom Bibby has missed out on a job – because his facial tattoos would upset customers.
The 38-year-old has spent almost a decade in the security industry and worked at city centre shops including Primark, Netto and B&M Bargains.
-
Tom Bibby was refused a new job because of his facial tattoo.
But out-of-work Tom was shocked to find out he cannot work at Stoke station because of the tribal markings above his right eye.
Tom had the tattoo as a reminder of his uncle's Maori heritage.
Now he has complained to Virgin Trains about discrimination and approached his MP Mark Fisher.
Tom, who last worked at Primark, in Hanley, had called National Car Parks (NCP) after seeing the Stoke station job advertised.
Tom, who lives with wife, Deborah, and their two children, Conair, aged eight, and three-year-old Raeven, said: "I couldn't believe it, no-one has even mentioned my tattoos before.
"I've been a security guard since leaving the Army in 1996, and have since moved up to gain supervisor experience.
"I was chatting on the phone asking about the Stoke station job when I mentioned my tattoos.
"I was asked if they were visible and when I said some were on my face I was immediately told I could not be employed because it could upset some customers.
"People should not be discriminated against because of their looks. Tattoos are just a decoration, I can't see why anyone would be scared of them.
"You don't qualify as a security guard if you are a troublemaker. I'm the opposite, more of a peacemaker.
"I want Virgin to change its policy. It's disgusting I can't have a job I am qualified for just because of how I look."
Deborah, aged 43, said: "The tattoo has never been a problem before and is not offensive.
"Tom is very approachable and will do anything for anyone.
"He deserves a chance for this job, is more than qualified and they should have at least met him."
Tom, from Birches Head, had his facial tattoo when he worked at Hanley's B&M Bargains about three years ago.
John Baldwin, who manages B&M Bargains, in Longton, said: "Tom was a good worker. His tattoos were never a problem and no customers ever complained about them."
An NCP worker confirmed to The Sentinel that the company was following Virgin Trains's policy in not employing people with visible tattoos for front-line customer service roles.
A Virgin Trains spokesman said: "None of our staff are allowed to have visible tattoos on display."
61 Comments
View all
by professional tattooist, burslem
Thursday, November 06 2008, 5:22PM
“first of all i would like to say as long as I've been tattooing that is not Maori of any form its a black with flames the black pattern is called tribal but this does not associated with a Maori tribe .a traditional Maori tattoo is built with patterns each representing a meaning which Mr Bibby should no as his uncles heritage . I as a professional tattooist do not or will not tattoo any ones face i always explain to the customer that the reason why is because this is making you unemployable i also explain that a tattoo is permanent Mark which will only be removed by laser treatment.some tattooist will do this mainly tattooists from home what we call scratchers a lot of these people do not give a monkeys about you they just want your money .there is also tattooists from shops who will do faces i personally don't agree with this as i don't think this is not professional .however i have no disrespect for any one with a tattoo on the face as lot of my good friends have tattoos on there face but if the tables were turned I'm Shaw Mr Bibby would do the same as virgin . best of luck with your job search Mr Bibby but remember this is permanent and the choice you made was yours of you home free will”
by anon, cheshire
Thursday, November 06 2008, 11:22AM
“As Andy from Sandbach says 'It's about professionalism not discrimination.
As a customer facing role employers can expect tidiness and no body adornments including tattoos that are highly visible such as on the face, neck or hands, any where else can be expected to be covered up.
A survey was performed a while back that concluded that US, yes that is US the customer, are intimidated and put of by the sight of tattoos so it's not the employers fault for complying with the customers wants, after all it's the customer that puts money in the till. NO CUSTOMER NO WAGES simple.
If he wants to look the way he does why not get a job on a night club door or take a different job with no customer facing role. The guy made his choice now his has to live with it.
If he is that upset why not have it lasered off”
by Mike Porosa, London
Thursday, November 06 2008, 10:08AM
“Are you serious? It was your stupid decision to get a tattoo ON YOUR FACE.
I'd love to get a tattoo but I'm fully aware that it wouldn't be acceptable in my work environment. So I don't. Why should he get special treatment?
Get a telesales job mate.”
by jon, stoke on trent
Thursday, November 06 2008, 6:01AM
“I was wundring wear warren ad got too ............”
by anon, cheshire
Wednesday, November 05 2008, 11:49PM
“sorry I am not surprised he got turned down, facial or hand tattoos are a no go especially when employed in customer facing roles.
If he wants a security that may accept his tattoos get a job on the door of a night club. Many surveys performed have concluded that the general public do not like them and feel intimidated especially when on the face and hands or those that cannot be hidden. Its the customer that makes the wages so employers have to respect their opinions”
by Warren, Stoke on Trent
Wednesday, November 05 2008, 8:18PM
“Matthew,Discrimination in employment can by defined in 5 main ways. They ore Age , Gender, Disability, Race or Religion, I dont think that haveing a massive big tattoo all over half your face fits into any of them. Virgen Trains demmed him unsuteabule for employment, he sould walk away, and if Mark Fisher as any sease, he will try and explain this to him.”
by Rog, Longton
Wednesday, November 05 2008, 8:05PM
“ST, thats what I was thinking to fella, it looks more Japenish to me, its not Maori thats for sure. If it was it would be a littel more pronosed and solid, there would be no red in it to.”
by ST, Stoke.
Wednesday, November 05 2008, 4:50PM
“Thats not a Maori tattoo.”
by matthew, stoke on trent
Wednesday, November 05 2008, 3:20PM
“Warren what are you on about, were talking about the freedom to be what you want in a way which harms nobody, and you are worried about what a few high level snobs think, to many places in the world trying to entertain these types of people, dont welcome them here, and certainly dont say this man is a bad representative of stoke, how about the filthy councillors who have normal hair, and no piercings and wear suits, how about these slimy people and the business men and women who wouldnt give you a second look, these are the bad reps, fact is is you are working within the rules of the current system a system that is proven to not work and as history shows us the wold is ever changing and evolving, and your talking about the fact that this man shouldnt be allowed a job because he is moving with the world, i dont know the guy he could be horrid for all i know, but i am defending the concept of freedom the same as freedom of speech the freedom to exist how you wish and not be told your face dont fit mate sling it, so repressed”
by Warren, Stoke on Trent
Wednesday, November 05 2008, 3:09PM
“Sorry, I'am sure hes a very nice block, but working at what is, or sould be, the major gateway to a city is not like working in the bargen shops. He would interacting with folks from all levels, meny would find his tattoo thetening to say the least. By the way, why as he changed his place of work so offten.”