To think you're not a special snowflake if you can't adhere to company policy.

[ScreechingWeasel]

New employee in my department. Policy states no visible tattoos, neat appearance, clothing regulations and sensible hairstyles.

Within a month new employee has coloured her hair pink, had a sleeve tattoo and refuses to stick to uniform policy. She claims she's being discriminated against and should be allowed to express herself. Employer obviously disagrees.

AIBU to think you are not exempt from the rules just because you feel like it? Other people in the office think she should be left alone and are making me feel like an old fussy woman!

Jackelope I once worked with a woman who resembled that description, plus free swinging pendulous boobs and dodgy buttons on her top. She got the hump once when I tried to delicately advise her she was flashing. She thought I was inappropriate!

Just noticed you say others in the office think you are fussy. If you are the boss you have every right ( and in my experience, keeping standards high is good for everyone in the long run) if you are not bit your lip but still have that quiet word if you feel this person is worthwhile but maybe a bit naive.

I think it depends on the job a bit. Eg I expect police officers to look neat (don't mind tattoos though - coppers are meant to be a bit hard)
What job is it OP?

Yanbu. It is annoying when someone gets away with breaking the rules.

I do wonder what company still has these kinds of rules. I see people in customer facing roles with tattoos all the time. I have a friend with pink hair who is a nurse. I'm guessing it's a bank or something.

What does To think you're not a special snowflake if you can't adhere to company policy. actually mean?

I don't really have anything to add other than that I hate that phrase, it is so denigratory and dismissive.

Other people in the office think she should be left alone and are making me feel like an old fussy woman!

If you're using phrases like 'special snowflake' in that weird way, you're probably just annoying them.

We have a special snowflake kid at school. Mother is an utter utter nightmare. Prime Jeremy Kyle material.

Her son has a shaved head and sticking up Mohawk. Not just brushed up but full on punk mowhawk. In year 4. Head seems to scared to take the mother on and he gets away with it.

Every other kid has to adhere to the rules. I don't even care about the rules but I do care when there are rules for everyone except one person!

If she's deliberately flouting these rules so soon, how long will it be before she thinks that other parts of the contract don't apply to her either?

When you accept the job, you agree to the terms, so if she doesn't like them then she should find a job somewhere else and express herself there instead.

SnatchedPencil If a no-beards policy is discriminatory against anyone it is against men, who are more inclined to have beards, isn't it? The company which applied the policy would have to have sound evidence to justify it - which of course it might have.

The colleague does not know what discrimination is.

I agree, YABU to use the "special snowflake" cliché. But I suspect that realistically there is little chance that this person will survive probation, and indeed that may be what she's waiting for.

We have a special snowflake kid at school. ... Her son has a shaved head and sticking up Mohawk. Not just brushed up but full on punk mowhawk. In year 4. Head seems to scared to take the mother on and he gets away with it.

Now, that one wouldn't bother me. I can't see how a child's hairstyle conceivably affects his learning, and schools need to be much more relaxed about trivia like this.

I'm so bored with the "special snowflake" thing.

Busybody much?

As others have said she sounds like trouble. Would be surprised if she makes it passed her probation. But it really irks me wear a uniform for work, don't like it but it is part of the job when people decide the rules don't apply to them. Yanbu op.

Well calling her a special snowflake is unreasonable but believing that someone should follow company policy isnt. It is up to each company to set its policy on these things and whilst this one seems a little strict (good luck with recruitment over the next decade with the tattoo thing) its up to them.

Just because someone doesnt want to follow the rules doesnt mean that the rules are wrong.

The real question is whether the policy itself is appropriate

Yes, I'd wonder about this as well.

I agree with you that your colleague sounds irritating for saying she should be "alllowed to express herself" rather than arguing on the basis of "this does not impact the job in any way".

Hmm - I guess it'll just be up to your employer to sort it out with her. They may find that she picks a fight if she's dismissed for it. In your shoes I'd be inclined to stay out of it and wouldn't let it bother me. The only way it really affects you is if you would prefer a bit more latitude with the dress code. If that's the case, and she passes her probation period, I'd get on it with the hair dye and whatever else floats your boat, and tell your employers that she'd set a precedent .

It would be one thing if people were bringing it up now but she had exhibited the pink hair/tattoo/quirky dress style at the interview but she was still hired anyway.

I'm not sure the new employee actually had the pink hair, etc at the interview. It would be interesting to know.

OP said "Within a month new employee has coloured her hair pink, had a sleeve tattoo"

I don't see why pink hair doesn't count as a sensible hairstyle. It's not exactly unusual now. The tattoo I think depends. If it's a sleeve tattoo and she's wearing vest tops then the company is perfectly entitled to pull her up on it and make her wear long sleeves. If she's wearing long sleeved tops and you can see a little bit of the tattoo around the wrist then I think you're making a fuss over nothing.

YANBU if this has been a policy for years and is explained when someone is offered a job. Only unfair if not consistently applied.

Depends on the job. Employers need to have specific reasons to justify their appearence policies & if they don't then they can quite rightly be open to challenge. I work for a bank and we only have a 'smart business attire' policy for front line investment managers because we want to attract more youth - society is changing, younger employees do want employers to benefit them (not just get paid a wage), and the talented ones are not going to stick around to wait for a company to change.

They may find that she picks a fight if she's dismissed for it.

What fight could she pick? She's been there under a month and is almost certainly on probation.