Stretched earlobes ....horrible

katydid

lanos wrote: »

lets try a different approach

2 people equally qualified
one is clean cut and conventional
the other is pierced and alternative

who gets the job ?

It would depend on the job

katydid

Mozzeltoff wrote: »

Which ever has the most hands on experience and is capable of doing the tasks that are required of them.

The Chef De Partie was above me. He had them in. Obviously he got a job because of his skills as a chef. Not his ear lobes.

I'm just watching Masterchef the Professionals (recorded) and one of the guys has a closed up tunnel in his left ear.

katydid

AmyPL wrote: »

Retail can be snootier about appearance than the IT industry, it turns out.

It's nothing to do with snootiness. Its business. They know their customer profile and they know that many customers would be put off by certain kinds of body modification.

Joe prim

Turtyturd wrote: »

While we're playing make believe. If I owned a restaurant and you had that attitude towards my staff I'd tell you to leave and not bother coming back.

What's the food like?

lanos

Kovu wrote: »

Lol.
You actually went back through the thread to get all the negative comments. What about all the positive ones?

well I was expecting this

the very fact that so many people have such a negative view of them will influence managers, because it can affect the bottom line - i.e Reduced Revenue.

the fact that so many other people are indifferent about them will not sway the manager because an employee with tunnels will not increase revenue - all other things being equal.

to summarise:
employee with tunnels will repulse some customers
employee with tunnels will not attract new customers
net result - lost customers = reduced revenue = sack the hiring manager

people with skills are plentiful
clean cut people are plentiful
so the hiring manager will not take the risk.

q.e.d

katydid

P_1 wrote: »

Sad to see such snobbery is still alive and well

It's not snobbery. In my case, it would put me off my food, and I would worry about the standards of an establishment that would send someone out to interact with the public in that state.

I teach catering students work experience. I have had this discussion with them on several occasions, as it's part of their course to think and write about factors that influence employment. The vast majority of the students accept that they should cover up body modification where possible, and that employers are reasonable in expecting them to be covered up. We've had heated class discussions in which a few students would disagree, but they would be in the minority.

katydid

Turtyturd wrote: »

While we're playing make believe. If I owned a restaurant and you had that attitude towards my staff I'd tell you to leave and not bother coming back.

Your business. Your loss. Especially when I'd tell all my friends about how I was treated.

One eyed Jack

lanos wrote: »

a few viewpoints

I'm already aware of some people's personal distaste for piercings and tattoos.

Is that the extent of your evidence that employers do not hire people with tunnels?

Is that the extent of your evidence that people with tunnels are unemployable?

If that's all you've got, I think we're done here, because effectively - you've got nothing. You just don't like them. That's fine, but your opinion bears no reflection on reality. It's a perception in your own mind, based upon your own personal distaste for tunnels.

lanos

lanos wrote: »

lets try a different approach

2 people equally qualified
one is clean cut and conventional
the other is pierced and alternative

who gets the job ?

katydid wrote: »

It would depend on the job

any of these jobs I mentined earlier

lanos wrote: »

Fields of employment that wouldn't accept you if you had tunnels
All the professions: including Solicitor, Chartered Accountant, Chartered Engineer, Doctor,
Teacher
Nurse
An Garda Síochána
Armed Forces
The Prison Service
Sales Reps
Financial Services
Airlines
Catering
Retail, except maybe places that sell tunnels
Senior IT - high stakes positions dealing with valuable clients

katydid

lanos wrote: »

any of these jobs I mentined earlier

Exactly.

It's a decision a person has to make, knowing they are excluding themselves from certain professions.

Kovu

lanos wrote: »

well I was expecting this

the very fact that so many people have such a negative view of them will influence managers, because it can affect the bottom line - i.e Reduced Revenue.

the fact that so many other people are indifferent about them will not sway the manager because an employee with tunnels will not increase revenue - all other things being equal.

to summarise:
employee with tunnels will repulse some customers
employee with tunnels will notattract new customers
net result - lost customers = reduced revenue = sack the hiring manager


people with skills are plentiful
clean cut people are plentiful
so the hiring manager will not take the risk.

q.e.d

How do you know? Have you gone out there and surveyed some people in different establishments? Had a few vox-pops on the street? Nah, nah, you made a thread on a forum and continuously pushed your pov. Well done you!

Your Q.E.D. is false as it is not proven. It is, as you quoted ''off the top of your head''
So what happens if the hiring manager has tunnels? Do they have to employ people who look 'normal' when they themselves have an alternative look which appeared to work for them when they got the position.
They are becoming more commonplace and 'meh' in many areas and for someone who has established themselves in a *shock, horror, can they ever get there* salaried sector of business, it should be a matter of choice which can be backed up by a good work ethos and experience.

lanos

One eyed Jack wrote: »

If that's all you've got, I think we're done here

at last
I can go to bed now
and go to work tomorrow to a tunnel free zone

Haznat

lanos wrote: »

I provide lists and examples and what do you respond with ?

waffle waffle
spoof spoof
blah blah blah

you're an expert in typing tons of drivel but nothing of any substance
and nobody is fooled I can assure you

you probably want me to provide proof of that though don't you

Your list is nonsense. I've worked in three roles with stretched ears on your list.

lanos

katydid wrote: »

Exactly.

It's a decision a person has to make, knowing they are excluding themselves from certain professions.

you mean most professions

lanos

Haznat wrote: »

Your list is nonsense. I've worked in three roles with stretched ears on your list.

name them please

One eyed Jack

lanos wrote: »

well I was expecting this

the very fact that so many people have such a negative view of them will influence managers, because it can affect the bottom line - i.e Reduced Revenue.

the fact that so many other people are indifferent about them will not sway the manager because an employee with tunnels will not increase revenue - all other things being equal.

to summarise:
employee with tunnels will repulse some customers
employee with tunnels will not attract new customers
net result - lost customers = reduced revenue = sack the hiring manager

This depends entirely upon the nature of the business.

lanos wrote: »

people with skills are plentiful
clean cut people are plentiful
so the hiring manager will not take the risk.

q.e.d

This depends entirely upon context! I'd sooner hire someone with tunnels who had the skills required to fulfill a particular role, than someone who was clean cut, who didn't.

I wouldn't hire a chef if I needed a software developer, and vice versa, because even though both are skilled professions, they require different skills.

Haznat

lanos wrote: »

name them please

Financial services (AIB)
Retail
Sales rep.

All over the last 15 years.

lanos

Haznat wrote: »

Financial services (AIB)
Retail
Sales rep.

All over the last 15 years.

well I'm a bit sceptical but thanks for your input.

Haznat

I have no reason to lie so there you go. I'll be heading to work in the morning in one of them roles as well.

lanos

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I'd sooner hire someone with tunnels who had the skills required to fulfill a particular role, than someone who was clean cut, who didn't.
I wouldn't hire a chef if I needed a software developer, and vice versa

yeah I do believe we have covered this already

if I was looking for a software developer I would
A. Choose a person with knowledge of various platforms and languages
B. Choose a person with experience and a proven track record of completing projects on time.
C. Choose a person with excellent teamwork skills
D. Choose a person with neat conventional appearance so that I would not need to worry about them meeting potential or existing clients.

I believe I could easily find a candidate with all those attributes and more and I would not need to sacrifice D to achieve A, B & C

One eyed Jack

lanos wrote: »

yeah I do believe we have covered this already

if I was looking for a software developer I would
A. Choose a person with knowledge of various platforms and languages
B. Choose a person with experience and a proven track record of completing projects on time.
C. Choose a person with excellent teamwork skills
D. Choose a person with neat conventional appearance so that I would not need to worry about them meeting potential or existing clients.

I believe I could easily find a candidate with all those attributes and more and I would not need to sacrifice D to achieve A, B & C

I actually agree with what you've just said above. But do you see on your very own list then, that a person's physical appearance was last on the list?

My question to you is -

If "Candidate X", met criteria A, B and C, and "Candidate Y", only met criteria D, which one then would you hire?

Candidate X has tunnels.
Candidate Y has none.

lanos

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I actually agree with what you've just said above. But do you see on your very own list then, that a person's physical appearance was last on the list?

My question to you is -

If "Candidate X", met criteria A, B and C, and "Candidate Y", only met criteria D, which one then would you hire?

Candidate X has tunnels.
Candidate Y has none.

I would hire neither candidate
I would not sacrifice D because I realise how important appearance can be to some clients
I would re-advertise the job and offer more money

money talks

bodice ripper

lanos wrote: »

I would hire neither candidate
I would not sacrifice D because I realise how important appearance can be to some clients
I would re-advertise the job and offer more money

money talks

So more should get their lobes stretched. Everyone wins.

One eyed Jack

lanos wrote: »

I would hire neither candidate
I would not sacrifice D because I realise how important appearance can be to some clients
I would re-advertise the job and offer more money

money talks

Your clients don't give a fiddlers fcuk what your employees look like as long as they can fulfil criteria A, B and C, so not only would you lose out on potential revenue, you'd waste even more money going through the same rigmarole again and again because you'd still be forced to choose at some point between candidates X and Y, and eventually you would have to make that call.

Money doesn't talk, people talk, and if your hiring decisions are anything indicative of the way you do business - indecisive money waster, people tend to notice that sort of thing, and potential investors avoid your sort like the plague as the only thing consistent about you is that you are unreliable.

If you project an image of yourself as unreliable, how do you think that's going to reflect on your business? Your business too will be seen as unreliable, and your products will be seen as unreliable, to be avoided.

Clearly you don't have a clue about how business development works, and I for one would never hire someone who didn't have a clue, no matter how clean cut or how clever they think they are. I'd want to have more money than sense to be so utterly clueless.

lanos

katydid wrote: »

Absolutely stomach churning. I've no problem with piercings in general, but those make me want to puke. I teach young people, and several of them have those things. I've had to tell them straight out I can't look them in the face because I find them (the ears, not the students) revolting.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Your clients don't give a fiddlers fcuk what your employees look like as long as they can fulfil criteria A, B and C

That is just your opinion, its not a fact although you would like us to think it is.
Anecdotally, the opposite seems to be the case.

Clients are people and so is the poster Katydid
she is a teacher and she is forced to teach these kids if she wants to continue working in that particular job.
but she still tells them straight that she has issues with them, fair play to her.

A valuable business client has a lot more clout
if he has a problem he will definitely say it.
and he will use it to his advantage too.
if a project hits a speedbump and a deliverable might be late, the client can use it to kick some ass.
a correspondence might go like this:

why is this deliverable late, it is very important that this rollout happens on time. what are you guys doing over there. the left hand doesn't seem to know what the right hand is doing. oh and now that i think of it. that scruffy bloke Jack with the weird jewelery on his ears. my staff don't like his appearance. send somebody else next time.
and what will the manager say in response ?
yes sir

and why will the manager not defend his employee ?
he could say something like:
but hes our best developer
and the response would go something like
why am i not surprised by that statement
listen, i don't want excuses, i want results, shape up.

thats why the manager wont defend his scruffy employee.
thats the reason he wont employee a scruffy employee.

One eyed Jack

lanos wrote: »

That is just your opinion, its not a fact although you would like us to think it is.
Anecdotally, the opposite seems to be the case.

Clients are people and so is the poster Katydid
she is a teacher and she is forced to teach these kids if she wants to continue working in that particular job.
but she still tells them straight that she has issues with them, fair play to her.

A valuable business client has a lot more clout
if he has a problem he will definitely say it.
and he will use it to his advantage too.
if a project hits a speedbump and a deliverable might be late, the client can use it to kick some ass.
a correspondence might go like this:

why is this deliverable late, it is very important that this rollout happens on time. what are you guys doing over there. the left hand doesn't seem to know what the right hand is doing. oh and now that i think of it. that scruffy bloke Jack with the weird jewelery on his ears. my staff don't like his appearance. send somebody else next time.
and what will the manager say in response ?
yes sir

and why will the manager not defend his employee ?
he could say something like:
but hes our best developer
and the response would go something like
why am i not surprised by that statement
listen, i don't want excuses, i want results, shape up.

thats why the manager wont defend his scruffy employee.
thats the reason he wont employee a scruffy employee.

All of the above, you said it best yourself -

lanos wrote: »

That is just your opinion, its not a fact although you would like us to think it is.

petes

lanos wrote: »

well I'm a bit sceptical but thanks for your input.

It doesn't matter what anyone says to the contrary you aren't going to listen.

aine92

I think that you've just got to have a bit of cop on. I personally don't have a problem with piercings or whatever but you don't know the person who will interview you so you should err on the side of caution, especially if you've been having trouble.

It's just common place really; I wear jeans to work everyday but I wore a skirt suit to my interview. It's just the done thing whether you like it or not and these are the kind of things you have to do to get a job. :o

Medusa22

aine92 wrote: »

I think that you've just got to have a bit of cop on. I personally don't have a problem with piercings or whatever but you don't know the person who will interview you so you should err on the side of caution, especially if you've been having trouble.

It's just common place really; I wear jeans to work everyday but I wore a skirt suit to my interview. It's just the done thing whether you like it or not and these are the kind of things you have to do to get a job. :o

I'm in agreement with you, I have facial piercings but I take them out for interviews. Just like you, I usually wear jeans and I wear converse shoes most of the time but I'm not going to wear either of those to an interview either.

lanos

One eyed Jack wrote: »

All of the above, you said it best yourself -

finally


The message below if not for anybody who has posted on this thread

Its a message to the kids out there who may be thinking about their future lives.
if you want to look mad
get a mohican----hair grows back
walk around naked....and get dressed later
get a henna tattoo on your forehead....they are not permanent.

and if you aspire to living in a nice house, drive a cool car, travel frequently for work or leisure, get a good job that requires a proper third level education.

do not mess with your face

do not get your ears stretched

There may be misguided people who tell you
its ok, employers couldn't give a fiddlers how you look.
i challenge you to go to a busy place and find a person with stretched lobes and observe him. follow him if you wish, discreetly. no harm its just an experiment.
you will NOT see him climbing into a shiny new BMW
99 times out of 100 he will be a bum.