Tattoo Policy Update: Apply Now with a CDR's Endorsement - Thoughts?

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 16 Sep 2014 17:40:27 -0400

Soldiers who could not commission due to changes in the tattoo policy now have the ability to commission through the use of a CDR's endorsement.

I know a few Soldiers personally who were affected by the previous AR 670-1 update. I'm glad they can now apply. The last changes came swiftly and caught many Soldiers off guard. What's your take on this?

"The revised policy makes clear that soldiers may request a commissioning or appointment so long as they have their commander’s endorsement. The Army tightened up its tattoo rules in its March 31 update of 670-1. The rules, which remain unchanged today, mandate that soldiers have no more than four visible tattoos (smaller than the size of the wearer’s hand) below the elbow and knee. Bands must be no more than 2 inches wide. Sleeves on the legs and arms are also outlawed." via ArmyTimes

http://www.armytimes.com/article/20140916/NEWS07/309160066/Army-releases-new-rules-tattoos-hair

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 17 at 2014 10:18 AM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 17 Sep 2014 10:18:24 -0400

LTC Heinlein, I like the grandfathered portion of it. I have tattoos as well, so I have a dog in this hunt, but when I had them done, I used the old policies to guide where I had them placed...just in case. It didn't stop me from getting tattoos...it just reduced the size of the canvas. There aren't any rules about not getting ANY tattoos. Why not allow them on the face and scalp? Or should it be up to the individual compunction of each Soldier to determine what is right for them? I'm happy to see the change, as I think it is the right thing to do for those who joined the Army when they did. I had a Soldier who could not become an officer based on this policy and he was the right choice to become an officer. I will get him to apply again under teh revised policy. As far as Soldiers joining today, they need to make an informed decision.

Response by 1SG Chris Brown made Sep 17 at 2014 1:43 PM

1SG Chris Brown — Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:43:04 -0400

This has to be a record for a republishing of AR 670-1. Remember when we went years wondering if they'd ever update it? And here we are less than 6 months from the major changes we've waited for years to get and they have the change to the change out already! Well at least someone up there on DA staff realized they needed to get the info changed ASAP. Probably didn't hurt to have a little Congressionial scrutiny on some of the changes.

Response by CPT Zachary Brooks made Sep 17 at 2014 4:19 PM

CPT Zachary Brooks — Wed, 17 Sep 2014 16:19:27 -0400

I'm glad they recanted this change, it shows that the higher ups listen to us to some extent. I know a high speed E-5 who has been considering putting on a bar, and this should be good news to him.

Response by WO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 19 at 2014 12:33 PM

WO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 Sep 2014 12:33:45 -0400

The power of social media. Soldiers take to web to vent their frustration and big Army listened. I always felt like a decent amount of combat experienced NCOs were being denied a wonderful opportunity to continue their leadership as a commissioned officer or warrant. So glad to see this. Hopefully I will be a walking warrant within the next couple of years and it is great to know my tattoos will no longer destroy that dream.