tattoo policy

[Topstop]

One definate no no is "pig" on the little finger side of the right hand.

Like wise "F uck off"

 

[Guzzler]

Can you rephrase that to make it comprehensible please?

am suprised you never done it for me

Don't get a strop on la - I genuinely don't understand your question, so if you'd kindly make it understandable I'd be glad to offer advice.

 

[jockgolly]

It's the bloody same. No neck, face or hands. End of dit.

 

[Ninja_Stoker]

It's the bloody same. No neck, face or hands. End of dit.

Correct.

The difference is that for those yet to join, it's a bar to entry & we cannot advise surgical procedures for removal to enable an individual to join.

Once you join a Commanding Officer has the authority to deliver the ultimatum - "lose it, or leave".

 

[burnsy85]

Can you rephrase that to make it comprehensible please?

am suprised you never done it for me

Don't get a strop on la - I genuinely don't understand your question, so if you'd kindly make it understandable I'd be glad to offer advice.

wernt getin a strop on lad haha any way what is the policy about geting new tatoos once your in the navy?

 

[burnsy85]

Can you rephrase that to make it comprehensible please?

am suprised you never done it for me

Don't get a strop on la - I genuinely don't understand your question, so if you'd kindly make it understandable I'd be glad to offer advice.

wernt getin a strop on lad haha any way what is the policy about geting new tatoos once your in the navy?

Are you taking the pi$$?

Have you read the posts in this thread?

just read them then,i replyed before reading

 

[jockgolly]

Can you rephrase that to make it comprehensible please?

am suprised you never done it for me

Don't get a strop on la - I genuinely don't understand your question, so if you'd kindly make it understandable I'd be glad to offer advice.

wernt getin a strop on lad haha any way what is the policy about geting new tatoos once your in the navy?

Are you taking the pi$$?

Have you read the posts in this thread?

just read them then,i replyed before reading

Add to your 'to do' list: Learn to think before gobbing off, it'll help when you're in the Mob.

 

[Guzzler]

Can you rephrase that to make it comprehensible please?

am suprised you never done it for me

Don't get a strop on la - I genuinely don't understand your question, so if you'd kindly make it understandable I'd be glad to offer advice.

wernt getin a strop on lad haha any way what is the policy about geting new tatoos once your in the navy?

Are you taking the pi$$?

Have you read the posts in this thread?

just read them then,i replyed before reading

The main concern that you should have is that, though you may have further tatoos (aka tatoo's in some circles) whilst serving in the Royal Navy, if you do then transgress the regulations currently in force, despite the wishy-washy lefty new Armed Forces Act, the Royal Naval Articles of War are still in force for some matters, and depending on circumstances you could actually face the death penalty as a security risk.

Don't worry that much though, they rarely go ahead with it.

 

[bikerman]

FFS don't any of this numties ever read old posts or use the search or even worse listen to the bods at the AFCO. Because if they don't their applications should be binned in the round filling case. :blob6:

 

[Stirling]

One definate no no is "pig" on the little finger side of the right hand.

or ''Cheers cnut'' when one had to parade and salute for your pay, '' Pay please'' tat on the palm of left hand

 

[RNMA]

Hey everyone. been quite a long time since i have posted on this site. did join up eventually, over three years ago now, and not as an MA, but anyway thats not why i'm posting.

A friend of mine went to the careers office this morning with the intention of joining up, but was told he could not join because he has a tattoo on his back. Now i don't quite understand this as the tattoo on his back is not visible when wearing a shirt, i.e No.4's/3's or his 1's. They claim that during basic training in PT with a U shaped t-shirt, when he bends down it would be visible. I really do not understand how that would bar him as its not visible in working rig or 1's. does anyone know where i can find out the rules outlining this in a BR or something so i can give him some further advise??

 

[BreathingOutOnTheWayUp]

Hey everyone. been quite a long time since i have posted on this site. did join up eventually, over three years ago now, and not as an MA, but anyway thats not why i'm posting.

A friend of mine went to the careers office this morning with the intention of joining up, but was told he could not join because he has a tattoo on his back. Now i don't quite understand this as the tattoo on his back is not visible when wearing a shirt, i.e No.4's/3's or his 1's. They claim that during basic training in PT with a U shaped t-shirt, when he bends down it would be visible. I really do not understand how that would bar him as its not visible in working rig or 1's. does anyone know where i can find out the rules outlining this in a BR or something so i can give him some further advise??

RN Tattoo Policy was covered at RR not so long ago:

Re: Barred from joining RN due to a tattoo

http://www.navy-net.co.uk/Forums/vi...=15209/postdays=0/postorder=asc/start=15.html



Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 2:58 pm
Author: Scouse_Scribbler Location: The Mighty Lusty
RNTM 066/08 deals with this.

RNTM 066/08 Guidance on Tattoos

1. Recent cases have highlighted that the regulations clearly laid down in BR81 are either not understood or are being ignored, and are not being enforced by the chain of command throughout the Service. This guidance clarifies the position for all Naval Service personnel considering tattoos and those involved in recruitment.

Guidance

2. It is the responsibility of all Naval Service personnel to project the Service in a positive light and not to bring the Naval Service into disrepute. Like any other UK employer whose uniformed personnel are expected to maintain public confidence, the Service sets policy on the appearance in uniform of its men and women, and this includes the nature, extent and location of tattoos.

3. Tattoos which are visible when No 1 uniform is being worn, whether because they extend beyond the collar or cuff, or because they are being worn on the face, neck or hands, are not acceptable, are contrary to current regulations and must not be acquired. Officer and Senior Rate tropical No1 uniform do expose forearms and lower upper arms. Regulations permit the exposure of tattoos in these areas, provided they conform to the rules governing all tattoos wherever they may be.

4. Tattoos are not acceptable if they are judged by the Commanding Officer, or at the recruiting stage the Recruiting Officer, to be reasonably likely to:

a. Undermine the authority or dignity of the Service or bring discredit to the Service.

b. Offend others or invite provocation, for example because they are obscene, lewd, crude, racist, sexist, homophobic, or intimidating.

c. Affect the employability of the wearer, for example by making it unacceptable for that person to parade or stand guard in public, or, depending on Branch/Specialisation and career profile, to engage on special operations.

In addition, visible tattoos must not be garish or numerous or particularly prominent (which will depend on its size and location). Commanding Officers may order personnel with tattoos which contravene the provisions at Para 4 above, but which are not visible in No1 uniform, to cover them up.

5. Serving personnel who presently have tattoos which contravene the regulations will be dealt with on a case by case basis by the chain of command who will make a judgement based on when the tattoo was acquired and under what circumstances. From today personnel acquiring tattoos which contravene the Service policy set out at Para 4 will be invited to have their tattoos removed at their own expense. Acquisition of tattoos in contravention of the regulations and policy will result in disciplinary action and subsequent failure to remove tattoos is most likely to result in administrative discharge SHORE after an appropriate period on warning.

6. This guidance supplements that contained in BR81 (Royal Navy and Royal Marines Uniform Regulations). The guidance in BR 689 (Recruiting Instructions for the Naval Service) and SGOs will be amended at the next available opportunity to conform with this policy.


.... Some time ago and those Refs at Para. 6 might be more up to date now.

 

[TattooDog]

A friend of mine went to the careers office this morning with the intention of joining up, but was told he could not join because he has a tattoo on his back.

Does anyone know where I can find out the rules outlining this in a BR or something so I can give him some further advice??

It may also be something to do with the tattoo itself - what exactly is it?

 

[dabbzie]

Quoted from news article on first page of thread.
Phil, 45, said: “It’s a shame when the Navy are struggling for numbers that they turn down a fit, keen young lad over something like this.â€

struggling for numbers? i dont think so!
Rules are rules now feck off

 

[Guzzler]

A friend of mine went to the careers office this morning with the intention of joining up, but was told he could not join because he has a tattoo on his back. Now i don't quite understand this as the tattoo on his back is not visible when wearing a shirt, i.e No.4's/3's or his 1's. They claim that during basic training in PT with a U shaped t-shirt, when he bends down it would be visible. I really do not understand how that would bar him as its not visible in working rig or 1's. does anyone know where i can find out the rules outlining this in a BR or something so i can give him some further advise??

Further advise (sic) which overrides that he was given in the AFCO?

 

[BreathingOutOnTheWayUp]

A friend of mine went to the careers office this morning with the intention of joining up, but was told he could not join because he has a tattoo on his back. Now i don't quite understand this as the tattoo on his back is not visible when wearing a shirt, i.e No.4's/3's or his 1's. They claim that during basic training in PT with a U shaped t-shirt, when he bends down it would be visible. I really do not understand how that would bar him as its not visible in working rig or 1's. does anyone know where i can find out the rules outlining this in a BR or something so i can give him some further advise??

Further advise (sic) which overrides that he was given in the AFCO?

RNMA

Tell the "Friend" to visit a different AFCO........................ and try a different Service when he gets there.

 

[RNMA]

remembered why it has been so long since i have been on this site, as clearly some people are absolutely twats. i wont be back.

however thankyou to the few genuine people on here who actually gave some some decent advise.

 

[soleil]

I'm sorry you feel that way, RNMA. It would have been good to have you on board.

May I ask more about this tattoo? What does it depict? How large is it?

 

[JonnoJonno]

remembered why it has been so long since i have been on this site, as clearly some people are absolutely twats. i wont be back.

however thankyou to the few genuine people on here who actually gave some some decent advise.

Blimey, that was a bit uncalled for. I don't think anyone was particularly rude to you.

That was until I turned up, because I think you're a teddy throwing junior rating who has had a mean Sea Daddy, and is a bit of an anus to boot.

 

[BreathingOutOnTheWayUp]

remembered why it has been so long since i have been on this site, as clearly some people are absolutely twats. i wont be back.

however thankyou to the few genuine people on here who actually gave some some decent advise.

Soliel; you have tried your best. As someone who gave both a reference for advice (Tue May 04, 2010 12:40 pm) and who later added a little smatter of banter (Wed May 05, 2010 3:31 am) I am also among those still puzzled as to what it was about RNMA's friend's Tattoo that would have barred him from RN entry.

But if:

a. RNMA could not be bothered to respond,

b. Has now logged off in some kind of huff over our banter,

then I guess we will just have to accept him as a lost cause as far as RR is concerned. A pity - especially as he is serving, but it does takes all sorts....


Bob


PS The other side of the coin.

In the days of yore (pre- the Notice-giving era) there were a good many disgruntled matelots who would be prepared to try almost any ruse to secure an early release. That said I never encountered anyone who tried to gain their discharge by adorning themselves with an 'offensive tattoo'. Perhaps they all missed a trick there?