hair salon owner is being sued for religious discrimination

[stewart38]

Im on the fence on this one


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...8/nhair108.xml

Initially it was yes get rid of her how stupid

Then i though shouldnt she be judged on her work

Some top hairdressers (men) are bald for god sake !

what do poeple think ?

[Barry Shnikov]

Originally Posted by stewart38

Im on the fence on this one


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...8/nhair108.xml

Initially it was yes get rid of her how stupid

Then i though shouldnt she be judged on her work

Some top hairdressers (men) are bald for god sake !

what do poeple think ?

Personally, I see absolutely no reason why someone should insist that their employer has to put up with visible and tangible signs of their superstition.

Legally, I think the employment tribunal will determine that a hijab is not a requirement of the islamic faith and therefore the girl is wearing it out of choice rather than religious imperative, and that an employer who requires her not to wear a scarf is not discriminating on religious grounds.

[David Bailey]

Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov

Personally, I see absolutely no reason why someone should insist that their employer has to put up with visible and tangible signs of their superstition.

That's a shockingly original revelation from you Barry

Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov

Legally, I think the employment tribunal will determine that a hijab is not a requirement of the islamic faith and therefore the girl is wearing it out of choice rather than religious imperative, and that an employer who requires her not to wear a scarf is not discriminating on religious grounds.

I think you're right. Having said that, what if she were a Sikh man - wearing a turban is clearly a part of their religion, so would that be religious discrimination?

But yes, I think the hairdresser is reasonable to say that she's selling hair, in the same way that people don't generally recruit overweight people as gym staff or models. Sometimes, appearance is an essential part of the job.

And I also think that there are numpties who try it on everywhere, and this woman sounds like one - crying "discrimination" all the time.

[Dreadful Scathe]

seems fair enough to be honest - there is nothing in the article that suggests it was anything other than the headscarf that was the problem - so anyone applying for a job who refused to take off a headscarf (even if they were bald) would not have been employed. Its annoying that it is made out to be anything other than that - it doesn't sound like religious or racist reasons to me. Of course discriminating based on clothing may not be seen by a courts as a good enough reason to not hire someone - looks like we'll find out

[straycat]

Forgetting the religious angle for a moment:

She didn't get the job, and is suing for lost earnings plus 15 grand because the salon owner 'injured' her feelings? Completely nuts. Many of us have felt hurt at not getting a job we really wanted. You get over it.

In today's over-the-top climate, I'd say the salon owner was somewhat foolish in her reaction - keeping quiet, going ahead with the day's tryout, then saying 'no' would have been a tad more adviseable. I imagine her hindsight is currently telling her exactly that...

Also - if the salon owner is promoting the young funky image that she claims, if I'm going to be very harsh, the headscarf is probably not the only issue.

[straycat]

Originally Posted by DavidJames

And I also think that there are numpties who try it on everywhere, and this woman sounds like one - crying "discrimination" all the time.

[(probably) true tale a friend told me]
There's a gentleman of an ethnic persuasion down Leeds way who had a nice little scam going. He'd apply for jobs twice with identical applications and CVs - except that on one he'd use an English-sounding name, and on the other he'd use his real name. Everytime a company invited his 'English' identity for an interview without inviting his 'genuine' identity, he'd sue them for racial discrimination.

He used to win the cases too - although ultimately, the local courts got so sick of him they started awarding him such tiny damages that it was no longer worth his while to keep it going.
[/(probably) true tall tale]

[Martin]

Originally Posted by straycat264

In today's over-the-top climate, I'd say the salon owner was somewhat foolish in her reaction - keeping quiet, going ahead with the day's tryout, then saying 'no' would have been a tad more adviseable. I imagine her hindsight is currently telling her exactly that...

This was probably what the other 25 who rejected her at interveiw stage did.

At least this salon owner, gave the girl a fair chance and said that the headscarf has to go.
The potential employee could have respected her honesty, looked at her options, taken off the scaff and have a job.

What is the betting she did not have a funky hairstyle under that headscarf.

I am all for equality, she was given a chance to be "equal" to the other stylist and come under the same set of rules for sound commercial reasons.

I hope all costs and earnings lost due to the court case gets awarded to the salon owner.

This is nothing to do with racism IMHO

[Barry Shnikov]

Originally Posted by straycat264

the headscarf is probably not the only issue.

What are the small black animals stuck to her forehead, just above her eyes?

[Isis]

Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov

Personally, I see absolutely no reason why someone should insist that their employer has to put up with visible and tangible signs of their superstition.

Legally, I think the employment tribunal will determine that a hijab is not a requirement of the islamic faith and therefore the girl is wearing it out of choice rather than religious imperative, and that an employer who requires her not to wear a scarf is not discriminating on religious grounds.

I'm adopting a new policy of agreeing with every word Barry says.

(This is not because I'm in the middle of a horrendous David v Goliath legal battle and think it wise to suck up to a lawyer, you understand)

[Isis]

Originally Posted by Isis

I'm adopting a new policy of agreeing with every word Barry says.

Aye right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I work as an optician but I have perfect eyesight and don't need specs.

Would it be reasonable for someone to refuse to hire me on the grounds that the essence of my line of work is the sale of specs and it's absolutely basic that the public should be able to see me wearing specs?

I think not.

[Martin]

Originally Posted by Isis

Aye right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I work as an optician but I have perfect eyesight and don't need specs.

Would it be reasonable for someone to refuse to hire me on the grounds that the essence of my line of work is the sale of specs and it's absolutely basic that the public should be able to see me wearing specs?

I think not.

What is wrong with wearing specs with clear glass?

It showcases the product (or is that religious discrimination)

[batnurse]

Originally Posted by Isis

Aye right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I work as an optician but I have perfect eyesight and don't need specs.

Would it be reasonable for someone to refuse to hire me on the grounds that the essence of my line of work is the sale of specs and it's absolutely basic that the public should be able to see me wearing specs?

I think not.

I work as a microbiologist - and I don't have syphilis. Should I resign?

[Gav]

Originally Posted by batnurse

I work as a microbiologist - and I don't have syphilis. Should I resign?

I know a place in Norwich that could help you out with that

[Lynn]

I think that we make our choices about how we live our life and we need to be aware that those choices might restrict or affect what career or jobs we do.

For example, as a Christian I don't want to work on a Sunday. If I went for a job interview and if told at that stage I had to work on a Sunday, I would say I wouldn't because of my beliefs. If I then wasn't offered the job I wouldn't complain that I was discriminated against on religous grounds. I would simply see it that my personal beliefs and the requirements of the job didn't match up.

[Isis]

Originally Posted by Martin

What is wrong with wearing specs with clear glass?

It showcases the product (or is that religious discrimination)

There's nothing wrong with showcasing the product but should it be compulsory?

Would it be an issue for you whether your optician was or wasn't wearing specs themselves?

[Aleks]

After being turned down 25 times, I think her only opportunity is to set up her own salon - that would solve her employment problem immediately!

[David Bailey]

Originally Posted by Isis

Would it be reasonable for someone to refuse to hire me on the grounds that the essence of my line of work is the sale of specs and it's absolutely basic that the public should be able to see me wearing specs?.

Not really a good analogy.

More accurately would be, if you did have specs, but refused to wear them - on religious grounds. No-one wants an optician to wander round half-blind.

[Barry Shnikov]

Originally Posted by Isis

I'm adopting a new policy of agreeing with every word Barry says.

(This is not because I'm in the middle of a horrendous David v Goliath legal battle and think it wise to suck up to a lawyer, you understand)

Of course not. But if you were, I would help you whether you agreed with me or not...

[Double Trouble]

Originally Posted by Gav

I know a place in Norwich that could help you out with that

Not personally I hope.

Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov

Personally, I see absolutely no reason why someone should insist that their employer has to put up with visible and tangible signs of their superstition.

I'm so glad you said that. I dunno why but I had a feeling you were going to go all lawyer-like on me and say it was an infringement of her human rights or summit.

Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov

Legally, I think the employment tribunal will determine that a hijab is not a requirement of the islamic faith and therefore the girl is wearing it out of choice rather than religious imperative, and that an employer who requires her not to wear a scarf is not discriminating on religious grounds.

I really hope you are right. How wrong would it be if the employer lost everything, including their business because of this. I look forward to the outcome in January.