Perceptions of tattoo discrimination in the Maltese private sector

Abstract

Tattoos have become significantly more popular in recent years, with several millennials admitting to having a tattoo. However, even if it is illegal to discriminate against people based on sex, ethnicity, race, and religion, it is not illegal for companies to discriminate against people for having a tattoo. There is a research gap in Malta about tattoo discrimination, and this study is intended to help address this gap. The main research question of this study was whether tattoos are perceived to be grounds for discrimination in the Maltese private sector. This study sought to understand and compare the perceptions of hiring managers and visibly tattooed individuals regarding tattoo discrimination, if any, in the Maltese private sector. This study also aimed to discover why, how, and in what contexts visibly tattooed individuals are discriminated against when compared to other non-tattooed individuals. Given the nature of the research question, a qualitative methodology and cross-sectional design were chosen for this study. A total of 16 semi-structured interviews were carried out with two groups of participants: hiring managers and visibly tattooed individuals in the Maltese private sector. Eight interviews were held with hiring managers from different employment sectors to understand their opinions on visible tattoos at the workplace and their recruitment policies. A further eight interviews were held with visibly tattooed employees to understand their employment experiences. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data collected from the semi-structured interviews. A total of eight themes emerged, describing the perceptions and opinions of the participants. The findings suggest that tattoos are highly charged with personal meaning, and people do tattoos for different reasons. It seems that in Malta, several socioeconomic changes such as secularisation and multiculturalism are contributing to making visible tattoos more acceptable at the workplace and to decreasing tattoo stigma more broadly. Even so, the majority of participants insisted that tattoos still invoke strong impressions, with the majority of these impressions characterised by negative stereotypes. Most visibly tattooed employees expressed their belief that their visible tattoos did not affect their work experience in any way, insisting that they do not regret doing their tattoos. However, most participants prefer to disclose their visible tattoos immediately to their employers, to avoid any possible problems in the future. Hiring managers, on the other hand, are most concerned about how visibly tattooed employees might negatively affect customers’ perceptions of the company and thus damage the brand. Some companies adopt a dress code policy that promotes the image they want to portray to their customers. All hiring managers and tattooed participants agreed that tattoos should not be taken to indicate or predict the capabilities of an applicant or employee, and that it is only their capabilities that should be considered in recruitment or promotion. Finally, several participants agreed that the government has an important role, both as an employer and as a regulator, to help address tattoo discrimination. The study concludes by providing several recommendations for future policies and research studies.