Suche
Contact
29.06.2021 | KPMG Law Insights

Admissibility of tattoos in civil service law

Admissibility of tattoos in civil service law

For many people, tattoos are an expression of their personal experiences and personality. Often, the colorful motifs also decorate the body of its wearer only as a fashion accessory. A 2019 survey shows that every fifth person in Germany has a tattoo. Especially among young people between 20 and 29 years tattoos are becoming more and more popular. However, especially large tattoos, which are often reluctantly hidden as body jewelry, can be a hindrance in the job search, since many people and especially employers are critical of tattoos.

Thus, visible tattoos can also be a problem in civil service law. Against the background of the duty of neutrality and the representative function of civil servants, German courts have often had to deal with the question of whether and to what extent tattoos are permitted on civil servants. For example, it was not a hindrance to hiring a police officer that he had a large lion’s head with bared teeth tattooed on his chest. In another case, a police officer was banned from having the words “Aloha” tattooed on his forearm as a reminder of his honeymoon in Hawaii. Often, judicial decisions have been based on whether the tattoos are visible while wearing the summer uniform or disappear under the service uniform.

However, there is no general ban on tattoos for civil servants. In the Federal Government and in some of the Länder, the appearance of civil servants has hitherto been regulated by administrative regulations or circulars based on the authority to regulate official uniforms. For federal civil servants, such a tattoo ban was based on § 74 BBG. § Section 74 of the BBG provides that the Federal President or a body designated by him shall make regulations concerning the official dress customary or necessary in the performance of the office.

The Federal Constitutional Court objected in a decision that these circulars and administrative regulations do not constitute a sufficient enabling basis for a tattoo ban, since such a ban would infringe on the general right of personality of civil servants under Article 2 (2) of the Basic Law. 1 GG in conjunction with Art. 1 para. 1 GG is interfered with. Such a ban would also be an intrusion into the private lives of civil servants.

On the basis of this, the Bundestag adopted the new version of Section 61 para. 2 BBG and of § 34 para. 2 BeamtStG resolved. In terms of content, § 61 para. 2 BBG and § 34 para. 2 BeamtStG with identical wording. They regulate that the visible wearing of certain items of clothing, jewelry, symbols and tattoos may be restricted or prohibited by the highest service authority. Such restriction or prohibition is possible if it is required by the functioning of the administration or by the duty of respectful and trustworthy behavior. This is assumed to be the case in particular if the tattooing goes beyond the usual extent and the official function of the civil servant is thereby pushed into the background.

With the amendment, however, not only tattoos, piercings and other types of body jewelry can be banned in public service, but also features with religious and ideological connotations, such as the headscarf or the yarmulke. However, such a prohibition is only possible if these features or symbols are objectively capable of impairing confidence in the neutral conduct of official duties.

The new version of the regulations creates enabling legislation to regulate the appearance of civil servants. The new regulation also empowers the Federal Ministry of the Interior, for Building and the Homeland to regulate details of the external appearance by statutory order.

Furthermore, both in § 7 para. 1 No. 4 BBG as well as in Section 7 para. 1 No. 4 BeamtStG that a person may not be appointed as a civil servant if he or she has unchangeable features of appearance that are incompatible with the fulfillment of duties pursuant to Section 61 (1) of the Civil Service Act (BeamtStG). 2 BBG are not compatible.

The approval of the Bundesrat thus created a basis for authorization that enables the employer to prohibit tattoos and other body adornment and thus to regulate the external appearance of civil servants. How this will be implemented in practice remains to be seen.

Explore #more

16.07.2024 | KPMG Law Insights

The AI Act is coming: EU wants to get a grip on AI risks

For many people, artificial intelligence (AI) is the great hope for business, healthcare and science. But there are also plenty of critics who fear the…

15.07.2024 | In the media

Guest interview in the Fachfragen Podcast: Is antitrust law becoming “greener”? – An update

Sustainability goals and criteria – i.e. ESG aspects in the broader sense – continue to be the focus of social debate and determine consumer behavior.…

12.07.2024 | Business Performance & Resilience, In the media

Guest article in the IPE Dach: Necessary contract adjustments for DORA implementation

Deadline January 17, 2025: Financial companies and other service providers should start implementing the rules of the “Digital Operational Resilience Act” today, because the preparations,…

08.07.2024 | In the media

Article in In-house Counsel with KPMG Law Statement: Have software modules delivered, assemble, fine-tune, done

The article from 05.07.2024 contains an article with a statement by KPMG Law expert Kai Kubsch. IT applications for the legal department programmed by…

05.07.2024 | In the media

Guest article in Deutscher AnwaltsSpiegel: Transformation in legal departments

The KPMG Legal Department Report, now in its tenth edition (see here), has established itself as the standard work for general counsel since 2005…

03.07.2024 | KPMG Law Insights

BImSchG amendment to speed up approval procedures

On 17.05.2024, the traffic light parliamentary groups agreed on the amendment to the Federal Immission Control Act (BImSchG). The law is intended to create faster…

01.07.2024 | In the media

Guest article in Business Punk: Startup insolvency – bargain for investors or incalculable risk?

The issue of June 25, 2024 contains a guest article by KPMG Law experts Stefan Kimmel and Gunars Urdze. The Covid-19 pandemic and the…

01.07.2024 | In the media

Guest article in IT-Zoom: The path to safe and ethical AI

The June 25, 2024 issue of IT-Zoom contains a guest article by KPMG Law expert Francois Maartens Heynike and KPMG Law expert Kerstin Ohrem.…

28.06.2024 | KPMG Law Insights

Podcast series “KPMG Law on air”: ESG and employment law

Sustainable corporate governance is increasingly becoming a legal obligation. The HR department is also affected. Because “sustainable” also includes social aspects. Accordingly, companies have numerous…

25.06.2024 | In the media

Guest article in the ESGZ: Is antitrust law becoming “greener”? – An update

The June issue of ESGZ contains a guest article by KPMG Law expert Jacqueline Unkelbach. Sustainability goals and criteria – in a broader sense…

Contact

Private: Kristina Knauber

Senior Manager

Barbarossaplatz 1a
50674 Köln

tel: +49 221 271 689 1498
kknauber@kpmg-law.com

© 2024 KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH, associated with KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft, a public limited company under German law and a member of the global KPMG organisation of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a Private English Company Limited by Guarantee. All rights reserved. For more details on the structure of KPMG’s global organisation, please visit https://home.kpmg/governance.

 KPMG International does not provide services to clients. No member firm is authorised to bind or contract KPMG International or any other member firm to any third party, just as KPMG International is not authorised to bind or contract any other member firm.

Scroll