Tattoos in the kitchen

9
10
Joined Jan 7, 2011
If you can cook, you can F)(****ckin cook! it doesn't matter what you look like. Corporate places are just that way I guess.Win them over with your charm!
 
5,192
295
Joined Jul 28, 2001
I don't want your charm. I want your passion.

Kyle. if you brought something posative to our business  you would be hired. I certainly have to think in a profitability way.

As long as you could be OUR kyle it wouldn't matter.
 

pete

Moderator
Staff member
4,508
995
Joined Oct 7, 2001
I hav a tattoo on my forearm.is this cause any problem in my chef career?
You might find a few doors closed to you-some corporate gigs, some institutional work, and possibly some higher hotel positions, but overall it shouldn't be much of a problem in today's industry.
 
2
0
Joined Jul 31, 2017
This thread amazes me.
I've never worked in a kitchen where there were no tattoos, and I've worked in fine dining and cafes, caterings and the like.(And I'm not talking about 20 years ago, I've worked in the last 7 years, and still do)It was never an issue, in fact, often chefs check out each other's tattoos, Head chef and sous-chefs as well, no one cares.

If any profession is indifferent to tattoos it's this one.

I'm sorry to say this, it might shock most of you in this thread who are against tattoos, but the majority of chefs are not the creme of the crop, they usually come from the lower ranks of society and a large part of them end up being chefs because they had no other options.
Chefs are very savory people, not neat businessmen, slick entrepreneurs or doctors. They are a rough, gritty crowd.
And they will have tattoos.
That's just how it goes. Get over it.
 
22
12
Joined Jun 24, 2017
business have a right to project whatever image they want.. my place refuses to hire ppl with tattoos for the foh.. boh is fine though.. cause we dont see the public.. head chef does.. but i wouldnt know if he has any or not.. his sleeves are always down..
 
5,361
825
Joined Oct 10, 2005
I'm sorry to say this, it might shock most of you in this thread who are against tattoos, but the majority of chefs are not the creme of the crop, they usually come from the lower ranks of society and a large part of them end up being chefs because they had no other options.
Chefs are very savory people, not neat businessmen, slick entrepreneurs or doctors. They are a rough, gritty crowd.
And they will have tattoos.
That's just how it goes. Get over it.



Are you sure you want you stereo type ALL the cooks and Chefs? Not the tattoo crap, because Ive seen doctors, neat businessmen, and slick entrepeneurs with ink. Matter of fact the Gm of my hotel is inked, his sleeve covers it up, his secretary has dome kind of a birthdate or wedding date inked on her shoulder, and the 50 's something accounts payable has something inked on her boob.

But here is something for you to think about: Met a woman the other day with lots of ink, nothing registered untill she told me she was a grade 3 teacher. I asked her why she didn't opt for ink under normal work attire. She is--well my gr. 3 teacher was, and many other teachers were role models. I mean she has great influence over a lot of kids.

Thoughts?
 
1,779
510
Joined Aug 15, 2003
I'm sorry to say this, it might shock most of you in this thread who are against tattoos, but the majority of chefs are not the creme of the crop, they usually come from the lower ranks of society and a large part of them end up being chefs because they had no other options.
Chefs are very savory people, not neat businessmen, slick entrepreneurs or doctors. They are a rough, gritty crowd.
And they will have tattoos.
That's just how it goes. Get over it.
One thing to remember is that this thread is 6 years old or so. You might end up responding to someone who is long gone.

It also sounds like you've read too much Kitchen Confidential. I would be cautious about painting the entire industry with such a broad brush. I've never encountered a "majority" anything in this industry. It is so varied and widespread that it defies any pigeon holing we want to assign it.

But here is something for you to think about: Met a woman the other day with lots of ink, nothing registered untill she told me she was a grade 3 teacher. I asked her why she didn't opt for ink under normal work attire. She is--well my gr. 3 teacher was, and many other teachers were role models. I mean she has great influence over a lot of kids.

Thoughts?
I don't see a problem? Sounds like you are assuming that someone with tattoos can't or shouldn't be a role model or have influence over kids? Doesn't make sense. As you so helpfully pointed out in your post the people who have tattoos run the gamut in all walks of life. Does having a tattoo preclude someone from being influential or a role model?

Tattoos are so commonplace now as to be near a non issue.
 
5,361
825
Joined Oct 10, 2005
Here's my line of thinking...

We send our kids to school to prepare them for thier future, right?
As many others have noted, visible tats dont fly for a significant portion of prospective jobs.
So what is a gr. 3 teacher saying with visible tats? "Don't do as I do, but do as I say?" That never worked for me

Like I said, what is under your work clothes is none of my business, so why the visible tats on a gr. 3 teacher?
 
1,779
510
Joined Aug 15, 2003
Here's my line of thinking...

We send our kids to school to prepare them for thier future, right?
As many others have noted, visible tats dont fly for a significant portion of prospective jobs.
So what is a gr. 3 teacher saying with visible tats? "Don't do as I do, but do as I say?" That never worked for me

Like I said, what is under your work clothes is none of my business, so why the visible tats on a gr. 3 teacher?
Again, you seem to be equating someone that has a visible tattoo as someone who shouldn't or can't be a role model...which is not true. So, whilst I think you've made your opinion on tattoos abundantly clear in this thread, it is becoming less and less of an issue for society at large. As evidenced by the fact that a third grade teacher has visible tattoos. It just ain't that big of a deal anymore.

And again, your value judgment of "don't do as I do, but do as I say" is moot because getting a tattoo is an adult decision that is made when someone becomes old enough...there aren't too many third graders with tattoos. I highly doubt that the teacher is encouraging young kids to get a tattoo, unless your argument is going to be that only by virtue of their existence on her body she is encouraging. Which is silly. And again, tattoos no longer have the social stigma they once had (back in the day a long, long, long, long time ago)...they are more of a fashion choice than anything (albeit a permanent one).

What confounds me is that beyond your simple and apparent distaste for tattoos, you seem to think that the world at large agrees with your perspective, when I find it to be less and less the case. I've seen people in every walk of life, every profession, every income level with visible or non-visible tattoos. Honestly, NBD.
 
5,361
825
Joined Oct 10, 2005
your value judgment of "don't do as I do, but do as I say" is moot because getting a tattoo is an adult decision that is made when someone becomes old enough...there aren't too many third graders with .
Mmm.... shoulda been at my kid's grad this May. About a quarter of the kids had ink, some home made, some professionaly done. A couple of the
girls had their b/f's names inked on, I hadda ask one girl with a name displayed on her, uh... chest how long she'd been going with "Kyle", 6 mths and counting. Yep, adult decision awright. That ink ain't going anywhere.

Moot point or not, a tat has only one purpose, and that is to attract attention. If it didn't, you wouldn't see them. Why people want to attract attention has occupied my attention ever since I can remember.
 

pete

Moderator
Staff member
4,508
995
Joined Oct 7, 2001
I have no problem with tattoos. I have a number of them-all non-visible. While I agree that tattoos have become much, much more acceptable, not every profession has a neutral stance on visible tattoos. There are still many professions, and companies, that require any visible tattoo to be covered-easy if it's an arm or leg sleeve, not so much with hand, neck and head tattoos. This is one reason I have made the choice to keep all my work non-visible. I never know when I might switch positions or go into an aspect of foodservice where visible tattoos might keep me from getting a job. Chances are, if you have visible ink you may never know that that is the reason you didn't get the job. In some cases, the company will just disqualify you, without giving you a reason, and it may be if you are up against someone with equal experience they might choose the non-inked person over the inked one. There is no way of telling, and seeing that tattoos are not a "protected" status, a company has every right to disqualify you because of visible ink.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom