In sporting events (amateur and/or professional...any level) can an athlete be made to cover a tattoo?

[TriPolar]

What about Maori facial tattoos? They aren’t commercial or offensive images, could they withstand a ‘no visible tattoos’ rule?

[Telemark]

The Yankees have a no long hair and no facial hair except mustaches policy that’s been strictly enforced for nearly 50 years. As far as I know it’s never been challenged on religious means.

New York Yankees appearance policy

[TriPolar]

Has anyone with long hair or facial hair as a religious expression ever played for the Yankees? I don’t know if the tattoo issue has ever come up. The SCOTUS seems to be evolving on this issue. I think the US military allows beards for religious reasons. There may be no factual answer to this sub-question. Attitudes about tattoos have evolved just as they did with hair styles and gender specific uniforms.

[Whack-a-Mole]

Can I refuse to hire you with the stated reason being I don’t like your tattoos?

(and when I say, “Can I…” I mean absolutely any potential employer in the US.)

[OldGuy]

I’d think as long as they weren’t religious you could refuse, yes, though IANAL.

[kenobi_65]

Being tattooed isn’t a “protected class” in U.S. employment law; faith/religion is a protected class, but though IANAL either, I’m not sure if simply having “religious tattoos” would qualify as being protected, unless, perhaps, such tattoos were mandated as a part of one’s faith.

[Whack-a-Mole]

@OldGuy

I’d think as long as they weren’t religious you could refuse, yes, though IANAL.

@kenobi_65

I’m not sure if simply having “religious tattoos” would qualify as being protected, unless, perhaps, such tattoos were mandated as a part of one’s faith.

Doesn’t the bible forbid tattoos? So, if you have (say) a cross tattooed on you couldn’t I use that as a reason to not hire you?

IANAL either

[kenobi_65]

@kenobi_65

Being tattooed isn’t a “protected class” in U.S. employment law; faith/religion is a protected class, but though IANAL either, I’m not sure if simply having “religious tattoos” would qualify as being protected, unless, perhaps, such tattoos were mandated as a part of one’s faith.

A little research produced this webpage from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, on religious discrimination. A few relevant passages:

(Title VII prohibits) denying a requested reasonable accommodation of an applicant’s or employee’s sincerely held religious beliefs or practices – or lack thereof – if an accommodation will not impose more than a de minimis cost or burden on business operations

Religious observances or practices include, for example, attending worship services, praying, wearing religious garb or symbols, displaying religious objects, adhering to certain dietary rules, proselytizing or other forms of religious expression, or refraining from certain activities. Whether a practice is religious depends on the employee’s motivation. The same practice might be engaged in by one person for religious reasons and by another person for purely secular reasons (e.g., dietary restrictions, tattoos, etc.).

Similarly, requests for accommodation of a “religious” belief or practice could include, for example: a Catholic employee requesting a schedule change so that he can attend church services on Good Friday; a Muslim employee requesting an exception to the company’s dress and grooming code allowing her to wear her headscarf, or a Hindu employee requesting an exception allowing her to wear her bindi (religious forehead marking); an atheist asking to be excused from the religious invocation offered at the beginning of staff meetings; an adherent to Native American spiritual beliefs seeking unpaid leave to attend a ritual ceremony; or an employee who identifies as Christian but is not affiliated with a particular sect or denomination requests accommodation of his religious belief that working on his Sabbath is prohibited.

tl;dr: It appears that, if a tattoo is an expression of a “sincerely held religious belief,” it may be protected.

Edit: source provided.

Questions and Answers: Religious Discrimination in the Workplace

[Whack-a-Mole]

@kenobi_65

tl;dr: It appears that, if a tattoo is an expression of a “sincerely held religious belief,” it may be protected.

What about my sincerely held religious belief that no one should be tattooed? (for the sake of argument…I do not really hold that belief…but someone might since it is actually in the bible)

[kenobi_65]

@Whack-a-Mole

What about my sincerely held religious belief that no one should be tattooed? (for the sake of argument…I do not really hold that belief…but someone might)

As an employer? You’re allowed to believe that, but as per Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, you aren’t allowed to let that enter into your hiring decisions if you have 15 or more employees. As per the site I shared above:

(Title VII prohibits) treating applicants or employees differently based on their religious beliefs or practices – or lack thereof – in any aspect of employment, including recruitment, hiring, assignments, discipline, promotion, and benefits (disparate treatment)

However, there is an exemption in that law for religious organizations, though it’s limited to organizations in which the “purpose and character are primarily religious” – so, churches count, but secular businesses run by members of a particular faith don’t qualify for the exemption.

[Whack-a-Mole]

But…

Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores (US Supreme Court)

The Green family owns and operates Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., a national arts and crafts chain with over 500 stores and over 13,000 employees. The Green family has organized the business around the principles of the Christian faith and has explicitly expressed the desire to run the company according to Biblical precepts, one of which is the belief that the use of contraception is immoral. Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), employment-based group health care plans must provide certain types of preventative care, such as FDA-approved contraceptive methods. While there are exemptions available for religious employers and non-profit religious institutions, there are no exemptions available for for-profit institutions such as Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. - SOURCE

Seems employer religious beliefs matter.

[brad_d]

Nick Symmonds is an American former 800-meter runner who auctioned off (on eBay) space on his shoulder for a temporary tattoo in 2016. T-Mobile won the auction with a bid of $21,800. He was required - and clearly stated in the listing that this would be the case - to cover the tattoo in competition because it displayed a sponsor logo. (Sanctioning bodies in track and field very tightly restrict advertising on athletes and their uniforms, and in fact the entire exercise was a protest against this state of affairs.)

Symmonds did something similar in the previous Olympic cycle, in 2012.

[muldoonthief]

It wasn’t a sporting event but Survivor contestant/winner Ben Driebergen had a bandage covering a tattoo during both his seasons. The official explanation is that it was John Deere logo and couldn’t be shown because it’s copyrighted. I think that’s shading the reason a bit - I’m sure John Deere would have been happy to get the free advertising on a popular show. But CBS likely didn’t want to give them free advertising, especially since it would be problematic with any potential sponsors who compete with JD.

[Telemark]

@muldoonthief

I’m sure John Deere would have been happy to get the free advertising on a popular show.

Not necessarily if the contestant was a real jerk.

[muldoonthief]

He wasn’t though. He was an extremely popular player, with both his fellow contestants (they voted him $1 million after all) and the fans. He’s also a Marine veteran who served in Iraq. Sure, the producers wouldn’t have known how popular he was the first time around, but they made him wear the bandage in his second season too.