Tattoo Thread - including current policy [MERGED]

[Towards_the_gap]

A guy at my unit got a sleeve tattoo that went down over his knuckles onto his fingers. He wasn't ordered to have it removed, nor did he face any disciplinary action for it.

But we all made fun of him for having it.

Take that as you will.

 

[Sunnyns]

As far as I know if you have them before joining then you can keep them, but don't get them after.  If you do get one because Bloggins did it last weekend and got away with it, is it worth the risk to you?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

You've been given the directive.

Do with it as you will, at your own peril.

We're done here.

---Staff---

 

[adamius]

Long story short...got two small circles with stars in them on each hand and a tribal tat that can be seen just above the collar while i was in the army and i got out in August 2008..never heard a word from anyone about them. Tried to join the reserves here in my city and did all the paper wrk..guy calls me in and says "ok you did everything we need..but a new rule came out in 2011 that there is no tattoos on the neck or hands...sorry"

Now I know..that rule didnt just come out in 2011..cause i read the same thing years ago...he had no clue about it i think..

Wondering if it has changed and also..

On the cf recruiting website under FAQs it only states "Non-offensive visible tattoos, with the exception of tattoos on the face, are allowed."
and that is it...
  Also i read that you will be allowed in with them...but cannot get any more once in.

and thoughts?

Kind of a kick in the ass when ive been in for 12 years before that and cant even get in the reserves afterwards...because of that.

 

[mariomike]

and thoughts?

Some here.

New (2012/2013) Tattoo Policy?
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/110180.0

 

[The_Falcon]

Everyone who throws in the part about no tats on hands is either willfully ignorant of the what the regs actually say, or they have piss poor reading comprehension skills.  As long as you aren't getting a swaztika or something in that vein, have at'er.

 

[ModlrMike]

and thoughts?

Kind of a kick in the *** when ive been in for 12 years before that and cant even get in the reserves afterwards...because of that.

I'm going to presume this comes from the recruiting centre. If it's the reserve unit, ignore him and go to the recruiting centre.

If you're getting stymied from the recruiting center, then ask him to show you the regulation.

If he still gives you grief, write a letter to the CO of the recruiting station outlining your complaint. Ensure you include the reference from the dress manual, and point out that it doesn't say anything about enrollment. Keep pushing. This guy doesn't have the authority to prevent your application from going forward.

 

[George Wallace]

I'm going to presume this comes from the recruiting centre. If it's the reserve unit, ignore him and go to the recruiting centre.

If you're getting stymied from the recruiting center, then ask him to show you the regulation.

If he still gives you grief, write a letter to the CO of the recruiting station outlining your complaint. Ensure you include the reference from the dress manual, and point out that it doesn't say anything about enrollment. Keep pushing. This guy doesn't have the authority to prevent your application from going forward.

Unfortunately, Reserve units can be selective, as any employer, to hire whom they think are the best candidates.  They are also restricted as to numbers that they can hire.  Thus, they will select the Prospects with the most potential to meet the criteria they have set for hiring.

The Recruiting Center has no input as to whom the Reserve unit may want to hire/enroll.  They only process the Prospects applications to join the CAF as a Reservist. 

If one Reserve unit does not want or can not hire you; try another.

 

[JorgSlice]

Nope, not anymore.

I was required to declare any tattoos upon enrolment and was required to document what they were and their location.

I have also heard from a friend that on the annual medical, they require you to redeclare, document, and apparently they photograph them so that in the event you're blown to smithereens they can identify you using the tattooed chunk of flesh.

Is it still the case? Do you know when it was changed?

 

[PMedMoe]

Not a clue.  When I got my first one, I asked at the Ident Sect (as that is where they used to be recorded) and they said they didn't need to know.  I've never been asked about them (I now have five) during a medical and they've never been documented or photographed during one either.

No offense, but either your friend is full of crap or whoever did his medical is.

Yes, they can be used as a means of identification.  If you were decapitated.  ID from a single "tattooed chunk of flesh"?  I doubt it.  It's not like we have Gil Grissom or Sara Sidle working for us. 

 

[JorgSlice]

Not a clue.  When I got my first one, I asked at the Ident Sect (as that is where they used to be recorded) and they said they didn't need to know.  I've never been asked about them (I now have five) during a medical and they've never been documented or photographed during one either.

No offense, but either your friend is full of crap or whoever did his medical is.

Yes, they can be used as a means of identification.  If you were decapitated.  ID from a single "tattooed chunk of flesh"?  I doubt it.  It's not like we have Gil Grissom or Sara Sidle working for us. 

Interesting. I haven't had issues or interrogations about mine either so I really didn't care for what he said.

 

[OldSolduer]

I was required to declare any tattoos upon enrolment and was required to document what they were and their location.

I have also heard from a friend that on the annual medical, they require you to redeclare, document, and apparently they photograph them so that in the event you're blown to smithereens they can identify you using the tattooed chunk of flesh.

Is it still the case? Do you know when it was changed?

A load of BS.

 

[TCM621]

Not a clue.  When I got my first one, I asked at the Ident Sect (as that is where they used to be recorded) and they said they didn't need to know.  I've never been asked about them (I now have five) during a medical and they've never been documented or photographed during one either.

No offense, but either your friend is full of crap or whoever did his medical is.

Yes, they can be used as a means of identification.  If you were decapitated.  ID from a single "tattooed chunk of flesh"?  I doubt it.  It's not like we have Gil Grissom or Sara Sidle working for us. 

My tattoos and visible scars used to be on my ID but then they just stopped doing it for some reason. The TEMP ID card still has the spot for it. As for declaring tattoos, I have had a number of buddies who have had their tattoos questioned. Mainly to ensure they were not gang or racist tattoos (because often they have been co-opted by these groups eg irish tats and skinheads).

 

[Goose15]

My tattoos and visible scars used to be on my ID but then they just stopped doing it for some reason. The TEMP ID card still has the spot for it. As for declaring tattoos, I have had a number of buddies who have had their tattoos questioned. Mainly to ensure they were not gang or racist tattoos (because often they have been co-opted by these groups eg irish tats and skinheads).

This is correct. Speaking with an MCC he told me that checking for tattoos is mostly to check for gang affiliations. There was actually a guy at the recruiting centre I am affiliated with who was turned away because he had not removed his Crips (I believe) tattoo even though he had been out for 8 years.

Edit: He was turned away at the interview stage as that was when he was asked.

 

[BeyondTheNow]

I've found this thread particularly interesting and would like to add what I was instructed (as an applicant) regarding 'ink', both in my initial interview in 2011, as well as my update interview this past Winter/Spring.

In both instances I was asked where my ink was and what it was. After I informed the MCCs, I was asked if it held meaning to me/nature of it. Once they ascertained that it was non-offensive in any way (a butterfly on my ankle), I was then told that if I wished to get more tattoos I would have to seek permission first. To clarify, not 'notify' them, but to actually seek permission.

I didn't get the impression that the MCCs were speaking in terms of after I am enrolled. It was definitely implied that they meant from that point forward.

They didn't get into locations that would be off limits, but I would assume that's why they wanted to know my intentions beforehand should I choose to get any more.

 

[Goose15]

I was then told that if I wished to get more tattoos I would have to seek permission first. To clarify, not 'notify' them, but to actually seek permission.

I didn't get the impression that the MCCs were speaking in terms of after I am enrolled. It was definitely implied that they meant from that point forward.

They didn't get into locations that would be off limits, but I would assume that's why they wanted to know my intentions beforehand should I choose to get any more.

Really? My MCC just said that as long as they adhered to the current standards of placement (nothing below wrist and ankle and not above collar of a shirt) and were not offensive or gang-related ,new tattoos were a non-issue.

Edit: This was July 2013.

 

[BeyondTheNow]

Really? My MCC just said that as long as they adhered to the current standards of placement (nothing below wrist and ankle and not above collar of a shirt) and were not offensive or gang-related ,new tattoos were a non-issue.

Edit: This was July 2013.

Yep, that's why I've found this thread so interesting, and I'm aware of others being told what you were informed as well.

 

[Goose15]

Yep, that's why I've found this thread so interesting, and I'm aware of others being told what you were informed as well.

Gotcha, yeah that is interesting and rather odd.

 

[Container]

There is nothing in the policy regarding wrist or ankle and below tattoos.

Nor is there is a prohibition on enrolling with throat/neck tattoos.

I have all of those tattoos and was enrolled without issue. The policy was checked and I was fine. It was this year.

The policy was again checked as recently as this week regarding my neck and it was fine. I was not allowed to obtain any other throat/neck tattoos once I was enrolled. Those that were present prior to enrollment were fine.

 

[Goose15]

There is nothing in the policy regarding wrist or ankle and below tattoos.

Nor is there is a prohibition on enrolling with throat/neck tattoos.

I have all of those tattoos and was enrolled without issue. The policy was checked and I was fine. It was this year.

The policy was again checked as recently as this week regarding my neck and it was fine. I was not allowed to obtain any other throat/neck tattoos once I was enrolled. Those that were present prior to enrollment were fine.

Fair enough. Did not mean to give misinformation, that is simply what I was told by a recruiter.