Scottish woman ‘sacked 15 minutes into shift’ at prestigious golf club over ‘tattoos’
https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news/edinburgh-news/scottish-woman-sacked-15-minutes-33906788
Posted by Forward-Answer-4407
Scottish woman ‘sacked 15 minutes into shift’ at prestigious golf club over ‘tattoos’
https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news/edinburgh-news/scottish-woman-sacked-15-minutes-33906788
Posted by Forward-Answer-4407
38 Comments
I hate her tattoos too, but if she she interviewed with them on view as she claimed, and they accepted them, she shouldn’t have been booted.
Why hire her in the 1st place? Surely they’d have seen these at the interview?
On another note, this is why you don’t get covered in daft looking tattoos, especially on your hands and neck which aren’t the easiest to hide
Also that septum ring says a lot
I have plenty of tattoos myself, but on my upper arms and chest, easily covered by the most basic of clothes. Neck tattoos and you’re willfully bringing in that kind of risk.
Not for me
I can see why, but they shouldn’t have employed her
I don’t personally think someone should be sacked for tattoos but one thing I noticed. She said she showed off her tattoos at her re interview.
It states the reinterview was the 17th April and then states she got her neck tattoo on 19th April. So she didn’t show her neck tattoo to them before being hired?
She was accepted for the job prior to the neck tattoo.
I’m a big fan of tattoos and I have a lot of ink myself. If you work in customer facing roles, especially at “prestigious” locations, you have to be able to cover your tats. I deal with a lot of C level execs face to face, but when I wear a shirt all of my ink is completely covered. If I had tattoos on my face and neck my career would be short lived.
She has tats all up her neck and massive tunnels, and is surprised that didn’t go down well at the golf club?!
Nothing like airing your grievance by going to a newspaper. Most likely because she has no recourse against her former employer as others have identified. Class.
The one thing the article does mention is she didn’t have the tattoo during the interview phase. This is likely how they’ll explain their decision. With that being said… its 2026 and people/organisations are still testy over visible tattoos for no reason, really.
Pretty insane that she would get fired from a low wage job for having some ink. I am a registered professional in a high wage job. Covered in tattoos. It doesn’t affect my ability to work, or work ethic, and I work alongside the public and many high level individuals, including stakeholders. I’ve won awards for my work.
The whole “image” issue is an outdated trope from over 50 years ago about “thugs” having tattoos. I wish we could leave it behind.
The only difference between people with tattoos and people without them is people with them don’t have a problem with people without them.
I find it insane that HR would even give her a reason, rather than just “thanks, but no thanks”.
Reddit has a weirdly “alternative” view on tattoos. If you took your opinions from here you’d think it’s like wearing a different colour of socks.
Anyone who would even _consider_ getting one, never mind actually going through with it, is probably already socially excluded from most respectable circles.
So if I read it correctly, she got the neck tattoo *after* the face to face interview?
I’m fairly sure I remember her posting a tiktok saying that she’d been sacked after getting her new tattoo (the neck one) so I think she had the job before the tattoo which, as much as I wish it wasn’t so, isn’t called a job stopper for nothing
Similar thing happened to me with Vue cinemas.
Interviewed, got the job and undertook a month of training at different sites and got sacked in my first shift by the area manager because I had some stars tattooed on my forearm.
Well well well, if it isn’t the consequences of my actions.
I dont think she should be fired but the article says she reinterviewed on the 17th, got the neck tattoo on the 19th and got the contract on the 21st. How did she interview with the neck tattoo if she got it 2 days after the reinterview?
She I interviewed on 17th April then got a new neck tattoo on 19th April so the employer at that point hadn’t seen how far it went up her neck. I do wonder why anyone would get a giant neck tattoo a few days before starting a new job.
Why did they employ her in the first instance if it was an issue?
I’m surprised at all the people here, especially with tattoos, saying they understand the decision.
I’m a completely un-inked guy and honestly I couldn’t care less, I genuinely thought society had moved past caring about tattoos. My wife manages a nursery and they love staff with tattoos because it shows the kids that there’s all sorts out there.
The sooner we move past this 19th century nonsense, the better. Fortunately, it does seem like most companies are not actually enforcing policies like this, even if they’re still technically on their conduct books.
Woman gets shit tattoos she doesn’t have to look at.
People paying her decide they also don’t want to look at shit tattoos
Got herself a big new tattoo between times. Hasn’t got a leg to stand on.
It’s a bit bizarre she can’t understand why she was sacked.
I’m heavily tattooed, neck and hands are considered job stoppers and most tattoo artists wont even do them unless you’ve essentially ran out of space.
She also added to the neck tattoos post being approved, but I’m honestly stunned she was hired in the first place, it’s not really the place for tattoos like that.
Hiring and firing are seemingly not the same people.
Don’t get me wrong, tattoos get some conservative hatred and silly opinions from dinosaurs, but for me it’s a time and a place thing, I’m a teacher, I have amazing tattoos in places students cannot see them, I don’t care if they do or the parents do see them really, but I also understand that you don’t wear jeans to a black tie event.
Have a friend that is a tattoo enthusiast. 75% covered. Except below the wrist, ankles and never would he contemplate anything above the neckline. Why? because he says that he can still wear a suit and shirt in certain types of company – business and social. And appear respectful to the company that he is in.
Have another friend with full arm sleeves but with nothing beyond the wrist and nothing above the collar line. Again, for the same reasons.
It’s not a protected characteristic, and like it or not they’re well within their rights to let her go during this phase of her employment.
Pretty sure I read she got the full neck tattoo 2 days after the interview.
Personal thought, it seams lots of people nowadays think there are no consequences for their choices and act on impulse, but in my opinion if you act impulsively you cannot complain when the consequences don’t go your way.
Good for her getting the tattoo she wanted. Good for the Golf club sticking to their convictions and policy. Both parties have potentially missed out here, though I suspect only one will have long term regrets.
The article said she interviewed on the 17th April but got the neck tattoos on the 19th April so it’s looks like her existing tatts were OK it was the neck tattoos that were the issue.
She looks a mess. But if she had the tattoos when she was interviewed in person it’s a rough.
‘Tattoos’…? Why the inverted commas? Were they not really tattoos after all?
Make foolish decisions and you’ll find yourself in foolish circumstances. In an ideal world tattoos shouldn’t really matter but we don’t live in that world.
Golf isn’t known for liberal progressive attitudes.
What’s funny is that the thing that made visible tattoos “cool and edgy” was that they pretty much excluded you from getting a regular job.
Meaning you were expeessing the fact you had other ways of making money. Either Crime, independent wealth, army or navy.
So to not really understand the symbols you’re wearing is just dense.
Like believing that a picture of you with the hat on makes you the pope.
Bless her.
Tattoos are a choice, choices have consequences. Of course these dumb millenials go whine on social media the moment they get confronted with those consequences.
Sadly not surprised, love golf but there’s a lot of the culture which is very backwards.
Most probably resent having to hire women.
Having tattoos now days should not be a reason to sack someone, it’s a non issue. (Unless of course it’s a hate tattoo or extremely offensive symbol)
It’s 2026 get over it. What someone decides to do to their body it’s their choice and should not be judged by others.
Fair enough. Arm tats are one thing (can be covered up). Neck tats look scruffy and say a lot about someone’s class – doesn’t fit into a golf club understandably.