Read the Business Decision Case Stink Over Ink? Victims of Tattoo Layoffs, found on page 349 in your text. Answer questions 1-5 and submit as an attachment. Be sure to cite any additional resources you use. 1. Yes they should be protected under nation’s employment laws because they are human just like everyone else. Just because you have tattoos don’t mean you shouldn’t have a job. 2. Employee’s may choose to have a dress code that requires that body art be covered because some tattoo’s display religious choices and derogatory things and everyone shouldn’t have to be subjected to that some tattoo’s may be offensive so you should cover them up to not offend anyone. The only jobs that should allow tattoo’s to be visible is a job that is not dealing with the public. 3. Yes because if he had the tattoos when he was hired and he didn’t acquire any new tattoos I don’t see what the problem was there wasn’t a problem when he was hired so what changed and he was covering them up so I don’t think it was because of customer complaints so on what merit did they have for firing him and why was he the only one targeted out, there was others with tattoos why weren’t they fired as well. No tattoos are all the same no matter if it’s on a man or a woman. Woman tattoos can be just as offensive as men sometimes even worse. 4. Yes I’ve worked with several people with piercings and body art and they are perceived just like any other person. They just are outwardly expressive and there’s nothing wrong with that. I don’t care how many tattoos a person has just as long as it doesn’t interfere with them doing their job. 5. Yes companies need to revise their dress code policies because majority of society have at least one tattoo and if your policy is no tattoos then they won’t have any employees to run their business, as long as there covered and not offending anybody