Air NZ to permit staff to show visible tattoos

[dajop]

I don't have tattoo, never contemplated them, and will never get them. But they do seem to be a badge of honour for younger generations than my own (gen X). And they range from tattoos usually hidden beneath clothes, to subtle tattoos that may be visible on small part of body to full facial, arm or leg tattoos that are difficult to hide.

And to be honest, I suspect most with much more visible coverage by tattoo (what others call scum) may not get through the recruitment process anyway - perhaps with the exception of those Polynesians who have tattoos for cultural reasons.

 

[Hux]

The maori have been using ta moko since Capt Cook first visited, and probably for a long time before that. No matter what your view on tattoos are, surely this is like arguing whether middle eastern staff on their airlines should be allowed to wear a hijab? Its a cultural decision.

And just because they are allowing it it sounds like it will be based on HR decisions, and there is many reasons to deny someone a job during an interview phase, so full face tats probably aren't about to start appearing on staff.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I do feel sorry for you that you believe all people with tattoos are scum, but as with any discussions on this forum, totally entitled to your view.

I am confident the OP didn’t mean to include Maori with ta moko in this description.

 

[burmans]

I am confident the OP didn’t mean to include Maori with ta moko in this description.

Nice of you to be so generous when the OP clearly isn't being.

 

[burmans]

A ta moko is no different from a rugby player expressing religious beliefs.

Rugby players having religous beliefs and tattos is a good example of what was once severely frowned upon becoming more popular and of religous beliefs changing over time. The first missionaries banned cultural tattooing in Fiji and Tonga, and although Samoans were allowed to continue the practice, it was deeply frowned upon. Tattooing was regarded as heathen and symbolic of satanic rituals not compatible with Chrstianity.

How times have changed, at least for some of those religous beliefs.

 

[juddles]

Well, each to their own. .... but as with any discussions on this forum, totally entitled to your view.

Totally true, but I feel the need to clarify (or expand) my first post in case it could be taken as something it is not.

I have no personal issue with tattoos. On the contrary, I admire and respect each individuals expression of themselves. I actually died my hair bleach-blonde once. It was fun to be different, and seeing the shock in others. But when it comes to a business, I tend to feel much more conservative. I am not sure why, but I do.

The word "prejudice" was raised. This is not really a fair term as each generation has a certain comfort zone, due solely to their environment and norms. I personally do not associate tattoos with a criminal bent. I think that era has gone a long time ago. But likewise I feel a tad that public display of tattoos maybe part of a new-generational thing where everyone is about personal rights and freedoms at the expense of general harmony.

Still suffering from a foot in the old door, but also striving to be real in the new times, I must admit that I still think that personal freedoms should be moderated in the public/work arena. Most of my personal expressions I would never dare to highlight at work

Regarding Air New Zealand specifically, they have always been a little bit "out there". Call it innovation or whatever. If they truly put a stamp on their brand of being Kiwi and showcase those amazing traditional tatts, good on them. Biut if it is just a win by staff that want to foister their self-expression on evryone, then bugger that

 

[burmans]

The word "prejudice" was raised. This is not really a fair term as each generation has a certain comfort zone, due solely to their environment and norms. I personally do not associate tattoos with a criminal bent. I think that era has gone a long time ago. But likewise I feel a tad that public display of tattoos maybe part of a new-generational thing where everyone is about personal rights and freedoms at the expense of general harmony.

Not sure why you regard the word prejudice as "unfair". While certainly true that most of us are shaped by our environment and cultural norms, there is nothing that in my view should lead us to the opinion that our background/experience is "right". We should always be open to the view that our experience is our experience but that another's may actually be better in some aspects. Particularly relevant to a forum such as thus, one of the main reasons I travel is to widen my cultural experience.

I've always held the view that some level of prejudice is inevitable, we dont want to "put down" our own experience and cultural heritage (that's a sure path to depression) but we also need to be open to our prejudices being challenged, i.e. there frequently is a better way.

I should note I don't only apply this in a cultural context, how many have been frustrated at work when the argument against doing something different is "we don't do it that way here".

 

[Melburnian1]

..I do feel sorry for you that you believe all people with tattoos are scum, but as with any discussions on this forum, totally entitled to your view.

You'd be good on a soapbox. Selective quoting.

I was specifically referring to outlaw bikie gangs and other criminal elements who are well known to control businesses such as tattoo parlours. Some of these premises have been fire-bombed by rivals or hitmen. That's not my assertion: it's been reported and confirmed by various police and other agencies like crime commissions.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I was specifically referring to outlaw bikie gangs and other criminal elements who are well known to control businesses such as tattoo parlours.

But you made the link that air new zealand allowing ta moko is associating itself with the criminal elelments such as bikie gangs?

 

[juddles]

...... While certainly true that most of us are shaped by our environment and cultural norms, there is nothing that in my view should lead us to the opinion that our background/experience is "right". We should always be open to the view that our experience is our experience but that another's may actually be better in some aspects. Particularly relevant to a forum such as thus, one of the main reasons I travel is to widen my cultural experience.
.....

I agree with the notion that one should always be prepared to change, to advance, and to embrace new things. But as for "another's way may actually be better", well there is just as much chance that it is worse. So equally we should probably be prepared to defend and uphold things that we feel are correct even if others think differently.

I have also traveled extensively to widen my cultural experience, and I must say that there are so many things that exist in other cultures that would be absolutely abhorrent to the "average" Australian.

To say that someone is "prejudiced" implies that said person is wrong. The label brings with it a very negative connotation. And in direct contrast to your expressed belief that we should be open to change, the use of it is essentially taking a high pedestal. Hence my dislike of it in this topic.

I thoroughly agree with your specific sentiment that some work places suffer from the "we have always done it this way" syndrome. But I also have learnt that one can think one knows better until one finally understands why some things are done a certain way.

 

[dajop]

The word "prejudice" was raised. This is not really a fair term as each generation has a certain comfort zone, due solely to their environment and norms. I

To say that someone is "prejudiced" implies that said person is wrong. The label brings with it a very negative connotation.

I will put up my hands, I am the only person who used the word, the record shows that.

But look at the context - I just meant it as "it is what is", not to imply a person is wrong. I did not accuse a specific person or people of being prejudiced, just observed we all have our prejudices. Of course some of the prejudices are trivial, some of them more serious, but I simply don't believe that there is anyone that is completely free of prejudice. And if indeed someone either is prejudiced against, has had bad experience with, or simply doesn't agree with or like visible tattoos, then they can simply choose to avoid flying NZ. Simple as that (although granted it may mean taking longer connecting flights, driving, catching a ferry or flying Jetstar for certain routes).

 

[theblank]

there is a massive difference between a butterfly tattoo on the ankle to skulls tattooed on a face.
I reckon that Air NZ has made this sensible decision so the girl with the butterfly doesnt need to wear socks.

Though , there is a fuzzy line in the middle. I dare say that anyone with tattoos on their face is very unlikely to end up working as an air hostess or something like that,so its probably never going to come to a head.

 

[burmans]

I agree with the notion that one should always be prepared to change, to advance, and to embrace new things. But as for "another's way may actually be better", well there is just as much chance that it is worse. So equally we should probably be prepared to defend and uphold things that we feel are correct even if others think differently.

Sure, but we need to allow them to do the same without pre-judging and accept that just because it's our experience doesnt make it right. Indeed I'm not a fan of the idea that in all circumstances we need someone to be right, it should be possible for societys and cultures to hold different view and still co-exist.

I have also traveled extensively to widen my cultural experience, and I must say that there are so many things that exist in other cultures that would be absolutely abhorrent to the "average" Australian.

Sure but you equally need to accept that there are things in our culture that may be abhorrent to them!

To say that someone is "prejudiced" implies that said person is wrong. The label brings with it a very negative connotation. And in direct contrast to your expressed belief that we should be open to change, the use of it is essentially taking a high pedestal. Hence my dislike of it in this topic.

The word itself of course does not mean that, it just means you have pre-judged someone based on some of their attributes. In a context like this where some are trying to link tattoos with criminality when this is clearly context dependant (possibly/probably true in Australia/Japan, less so in other cultures), I'm not sure how you align this with being open to change?

I thoroughly agree with your specific sentiment that some work places suffer from the "we have always done it this way" syndrome. But I also have learnt that one can think one knows better until one finally understands why some things are done a certain way.

Sure but to do that you at least need to be open to doing it differently and opening the box as to actually why we do it this way. Far too often people are not even prepared to do this.

 

[p--and--t]

 

[UP4014]

I have to say it is very worrying reading many of the responses here. I don't have tattoos, nor will I ever get them. However, for those that have them for cultural reasons, I respect that and don't feel intimidated by it, nor do I look down on them from my "ivory tower" which it appears others are doing.

Air NZ have said the tattoos have to be non-offensive, so I honestly can't see the problem.

If your favourite restaurant has staff with cultural tattoos showing, would you stop eating there?
If your local supermarket has staff with cultural tattoos showing, would you stop shopping there?
If your nearest petrol station has staff with cultural tattoos showing, would you stop filling up the car there?

Might be best for many to just stay at home locked away from all the horrible people with tattoos in the world!!

The best thing for me is to fly an airline where the staff don't have them. If they want them on display that's fine as it is fine for me to fly elsewhere.

We all have choices, I'm not offended by them but I don't want them in my face in the confined space of an aisle and my face 2 inches from someones arm covered in them. Is a skull offensive, or a snake with a fangs,......

 

[Robert K]

come on people. tone it down with the fake outrage and pretend ignorance.
I'd like to think we, of this forum, are well traveled and cultured enough.

Traditional Maori tattoos are not in the same category as gang tattoos or the variety that's common with the drunk caucasian set.

 

[trooper]

For those who don't want to interact with well..ANYone with tattoos... How can you tell? A person could be tattooed to near totality...with just the hands neck and face untouched...and in normal clothes you would never know...

Can you "sense" when someone has their torso tattooed UNDER a shirt? Wow...that's quite a skill! Ahhh… you are about to say its only "visible" tattoos that matter? (Which some of you did not specifically state) Why? They are all tattoos surely? Visible...in summer or winter? At the beach or in a meeting in the city?

Pu Koh I truly hope you are correct...but that is NOT what some here have actually said. they made ZERO distinction. One even questioned what cultural tattoos even WERE...

Drunk Caucasian set? Bikies? Gangs? An old friend of mine owns a very successful tattoo studio in a major city... I think you folks would be surprised, shocked even, at what demographics make up his main customer base.... Hint: it isn't sailors and bikies anymore!!!

 

[get me outta here]

It is not fake outrage, it is real. There's no shortage of outrage, it's going around.

come on people. tone it down with the fake outrage and pretend ignorance.
I'd like to think we, of this forum, are well traveled and cultured enough.

Traditional Maori tattoos are not in the same category as gang tattoos or the variety that's common with the drunk caucasian set.

 

[prabhsimran9971]

Air New Zealand to allow staff to show tattoos ... tattoo) and non-offensive tattoos visible when wearing their uniform or normal business attire.

 

[juddles]

.......

Sure but you equally need to accept that there are things in our culture that may be abhorrent to them!
....

This is where debates within a forum can get messy.

IMHO you could also be accused of being prejudiced in a very strong sense in your response. You are here actually "pre-judging me" based on "some of my attributes" (your words), in that you appear to be expousing things based just on a few scant lines I put in a single post. To suggest that I "need to accept that there are things in our culture that may be abhorrent" implies that I do not actually do that. Such a statement was not seeking to understand my view, it was responding in a way that judged me without seeking first such clarification. even worse, it could make others form an opinion of me (dare not say pre-judge me) based just on your words...... It ignores the fact that I did not refer to this aspect. I actually hate and am embarrassed by some aussie culture.

And in a similar vein, there have been posters in this thread that have expressed opinions against tattoos in the workplace. These range from some who hate all tatts, to others like myself that feel that tatts are complex and perhaps not a smart idea for a particular service industry company to embrace. I think we all need to actually understand that there are various positions here.

I am against prejudice, in the sense that I want people to think and embrace change. I sense that you have strong feelings in these matters, and good on you for fighting for what you think is right. But be careful you don't fall into doing exactly what you dislike in others At the end of the day I think we essentially share much of the same page