GayandRight

My name is Fred and I am a gay conservative living in Ottawa. This blog supports limited government, the right of the State of Israel to live in peace and security, and tries to expose the threat to us all from cultural relativism, post-modernism, and radical Islam. I am also the founder of the Free Thinking Film Society in Ottawa (www.freethinkingfilms.com)

Friday, October 13, 2006

Why exemptions for muslims and sikhs?

She shouldn't have been suspended...
A Christian woman has been banned by British Airways for wearing a small cross necklace to work - while muslims and sikhs are allowed to wear headscarves and turbans.

Heathrow check-in worker Nadia Eweida was sent home after refusing to remove the crucifix which breached BA's dress code.

Her treatment by BA - which styles itself as the "world's favourite airline" - brought condemnation both from Christian groups and members of other faiths last night.

BA's chief executive Willie Walsh has upheld the action against Miss Eweida for failing to comply with "uniform regulations" despite himself coming under fire recently for failing to wear a tie.

Miss Eweida, who has an unblemished record during seven years at BA, is suing her employer for religious discrimination after being suspended from work without pay for two weeks.

She said her treatment was all the more extraordinary as she and fellow employees had just undergone "diversity training" - including receiving advice from pressure group Stonewall on how to treat gays and lesbians in the workplace.

The airline's uniform code states that staff must not wear visible jewellery or other 'adornments' while on duty without permission from management.

It makes exceptions for Muslim and Sikh minorities by allowing them to wear hijabs and turbans.

Under rules drawn up by BA's 'diversity team' and 'uniform committee', Sikh employees can even wear the traditional iron bangle - even though this would usually be classed as jewellery - while Muslim workers are also allowed prayer breaks during work time.

9 Comments:

Blogger hunter said...

Well, I think we need to be aware of blatant disregard for rules, but now the rules are getting too slanted. This is reverse discrimination, and not helpful to any minority. Stretch the laws too far and the rubber band will come back and hit you in the eye!

12:21 AM  
Blogger Neo Conservative said...

"fred said... Sikh employees can even wear the traditional iron bangle"

bangle my ass, who cares about that? an observant sihk is also required to carry a kirpan at all times.

for those of you not totally steeped in multicult nonsense... that's a big-ass knife.

my next flight to anywhere is el-al.

12:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There's a big difference between items that a religion requires you to wear/carry and those you choose to wear to demonstrate your faith. There is no requirement to wear a cross around your neck so I don't see how you can use religion in this case as a basis for ignoring a simple and clear dress code rule.

2:31 AM  
Blogger Suricou Raven said...

Its simpler than that, I think. Someone, writing the rules, included a list of religious exceptions. And overlooked christianity, because it is just so common people dont worry about discriminating against it. The protections of multiculturalism, by convention, go primarily to any and all minority groups. Christians are not a minority group.

7:44 AM  
Blogger Roy Eappen said...

It is just another example of attacks on Christianity. It is all the rage these days. Look at the federal fiberals here. I am very disappointed with British Airlines, an airline I frequently use. There should be no exemptions or all religious itens should be exempted. I have worn a cross around my neck my earliest childhood. This is traditional with many Christians in Asia, South America and Africa.

8:47 AM  
Blogger Mr Ed said...

What if the woman wasn't even a christian and just had the cross as a reminder of a loved one who had passed on??? Would that manager have done anything if it were a jewish Star of David? I think that this is more likely a manager that needs sensitivity training as he was power tripping on his position within the airport.

11:58 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Islamic Republic of Britain wins again..

2:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think one misleading thing in the original description here is that she wasn't told not to wear it. She was asked to to wear it underneath her shirt rather than on top.

So its not a case of being asked to remove it, and hence a lot of your comments are invalid.

4:24 PM  
Blogger The Commentator said...

Anonymous, whoever you are. Completely disagree with your assertions. Regardless of 'requirement' or not apparently there's freedom of religion in our society. It's not supposed to be subservient to secular corporate laws. There's clearly a double standard here. The RCMP made a famous choice to break a 'dress code rule' a few years back. Many corporations do so. I believe the Royal Bank will be allowing Muslims to pray during working hours. Does this work against all estbalished concepts of work in Western culture? How is this just to allow one but not the other to pray in public places? There ARE many practicing Christians here. Alas, they are called FUNDAMENTALISTS and we simply have accorded ourselves the right to disciminate against them. For shame. Technically, Christians are 'required' to do many things but we ignore it or hide behind secularism to work around uncomfortable religious demands. I respect those who choose to adhere to it. It's a faith and should be required. British Airways are simply wrong. "Sure, wear your little cross....but hide it. We don't want to offen others..." What kind of bull shit is that?

9:37 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home