Muslim woman denied employment because she insisted on wearing

[napi21]

her hijab on the job. She had applied for the job of a cashier at a local restaurant. They told her it was not in compliamce with their dress code. What do YOU think? This was a Folks restaurant in Ga. She has sued them for millions for religious descrimination.

I don't have a link. It was just on our local news at 11PM.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. I don't like any kind of discrimination, but I'm also a bit turned off by that atire in a restaurant that is marketed as a southern family place too.

I'll liik for a link and add it if I find one.

[noamnety]

1. I don't see why it would be a problem in a southern family place.

Women with hijabs have families. And some of them live in the south.

[Name removed]

139. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Chovexani]

140. Thank god you showed up

I thought I was losing my mind.

[Karenina]

162. It would be interesting if just 2 or 3 people

asked themselves this question HONESTLY.

[brentspeak]

168. What the hell would you know about the people of Georgia?

You live in Australia, and probably know all you know about the USA through watching television sitcoms.

[Karenina]

169. BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

[LeftyMom]

165. Just as long as it HOT PINK like that woman in the documentary on American Muslims in Texas.

Texans. :sigh:

[gateley]

2. If they have a dress code, I think they have a right. If a nun took a job, she'd

probably leave her habit back at the convent and wear street clothes to work, don't you think?

[Manifestor_of_Light]

71. Most nuns do not wear a habit.

They all take a vow of poverty so they don't get paid, whatever they do.

[bean fidhleir]

76. I think you're mistaken

Most nuns do wear a habit, though not often the mediaeval "penguin" one. "Nun invisibility", where nuns couldn't be picked out of a crowd by their clothing, was temporary, when it looked like the church was going to be dragged into the 20th century.

Nuns can and do hold paying jobs - they turn the money over to their order.

[undeterred]

92. Most nuns who are taking jobs out in society

dress simply but do not wear a habit when they work. It depends on which order they belong to.

[Dorian Gray]

104. The nuns

at my husband's school (where he teaches) all dress in street clothes. The nuns that I deal with who run Good Shepherd Services, a charitable organization, also wear street clothes.

They've been trying to cut back on their pesky little old habits! Ba da dum!

[Wizard777]

99. So we will defend the US Constitution from every enitity on this earth except a Corporation?

Laws passed by Congress cannot take precedence over the US Constitution. But a corporate dress code or policy can?

:wtf: :silly: :crazy:

[Ino]

3. I think she should apply at Hooters next. (n/t)

[AlCzervik]

4. i see plenty of women wearing them here and if she was working in the kitchen

she'd probably have to wear a hair net, maybe they should it her hijab like that.

[Fed_Up_Grammy]

5. I have no problem with dress codes.

[Canuckistanian]

6. Both points above are valid

But IMHO, a nun's habit is slightly more ungainly than a simple headscarf.

[Hoof Hearted]

37. She applied as a cashier so "ungainly" is moot.

I guess that's why they have dress codes. I can understand why businesses need them, and why they need uniforms.

It tears away your individuality and basically tamps your human dignity into a little corporate whole. Perfect.

[jmm]

7. I've seen a woman a Target in a red hijab

I can't see any good reason for them to object to it. I'm sure it could be worked into any color scheme/style they're going for.


I personally like the idea of people serving me food covering their hair.

[noamnety]

10. That thought crossed my mind, too.

When we ran a soup line of sorts at a local school, even though headcoverings were against the dress code at the school, students helping wore headcoverings of their choice to be in compliance with the health code. Even our register people had headcoverings. Seems to me a hijab would be better than a baseball cap for covering hair.

[madeline_con]

15. Colors would depend on the country of origin...

of her family.

In some areas, colors are considered risque in the world of hijab fashion. In other places, women are "allowed" to be creative and match their hijab to their clothing.

[Djinn]

36. not country

There is no homogenous Muslim nation. I know women from very progressive Saudi, Pakistani and Afghan families. Which country do you think has this blanket view?

The difference would relate to custom and the interpretation of the Islam the woman (and yes often her family) subscribe.

Your quotations around 'allowed' are offensive. I'm an atheist and find all religion ridiculous and all of the main monotheistic religions inherently sexist, but I'm also not so insular that I am unaware of the millions of Muslim women who CHOOSE to wear the hijab and even the niqab.

A few women I know had never worn a headscarf (hijab refers more generally to covering) and neither had any of their female relatives, but have recently decided to do so, in what is a more political than religious move. They CHOOSE to do this and your assumption that every veiled Muslim woman has no say in her life is simply ignorant.

[madeline_con]

173. There are countries who profess to be Muslim countries.

My quotes around allowed are meant to illustrate that many women have their "choice" of fashion dictated to them by the men in their live,s whatever the religious beliefs of said men may be.

Sorry you misunderstood the post and saw fit to call me ignorant. That sucks. :(

[IronLionZion]

122. You can't go shopping in Minneapolis, without being served by

Somali women wearing hijabs. Some will wear "Target red" if they work at Target or whatever. Calvin Klein and other fashion designers makes hijabs (or similar items) with their logos displayed prominently. Many Somali women will wear a hijab to match the store they work in.

You'd have a hell of a time getting employees (or customers) in Minneapolis if you didn't allow women employees to wear head scarves.

[geardaddy]

161. Yep.

Target seems to have no problem with headscarves in their dress code in Minneapolis.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AspenRose]

16. Thank you

:thumbsup: Well said.

[brentspeak]

170. Self-righteous much?

[razors edge]

9. Let me know if she wins,

I'll start the First Church of the Nicotines the next day.

[Clark2008]

93. LOL!

I'm a woman... can I still be a deacon in your church?

[razors edge]

137. Sure.

We will also accept Marlboro miles as donations.

[Donnachaidh]

11. Refusing her a job because of a head scarf?

I can see them making a stink if she insisted on a Berka -- but a head scarf? And she applied for the cashier's job - nothing at all to do with food preparation. Hell, I wish more people making food in restaurants wore some sort of hair restraint.

I live in GA too. And you cannot call it anything but discrimination. If this restaurant told someone they couldn't wear a cross while making change for people, you'd be hearing that case caterwauled from rooftop to rooftop. This is a part of her belief system. And her head scarf isn't likely to jump off her head and strangle someone.

She's right to sue.

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

89. Hi Donnachaidh! I think your right about banning the cross.

I can see them screaming about discrimination if it happened to them.


Funny story at my last job, I didn't notice many people wearing their crosses ( and I wasn't looking either ) UNTIL we hired a new van driver...let me put it this way...I really thing he thought he was at church every day... When he started working wearing his cross proudly then all the others came out and did it too.

First first five years were pretty much religious free till he showed up.

[Donnachaidh]

95. I have Arabic friends here and the women catch grief ALL the time

In this so-called *polite* area of Georgia there doesn't seem to be any problem with pointing and staring at Arabic women with headscarves. Now if it were reversed, and people made comments about crosses, or even Mormon missionary attire - you'd see all sorts of shit storms about that.

[sandnsea]

12. First Amendment right

There's no question about it. I could understand the burqua because we're accustomed to seeing each others' face here, although I don't know how somebody would argue that in court. But not the hijab. Jewish men have a right to all their dress, Muslim women should have the same rights.

[leftynyc]

82. First amendment only concerns government

interference in expression. This business has every right to a dress code. That said, I think the employer is a moron.

[BoneDaddy]

109. A private business has a right to instill a dress code

If this was a government or civil job I would argue for her.

She has the right to decline the job if they ask her to remove it.

[LiberalFighter]

13. She's not paid to practice her religion at work.

If she agrees to wear clothing in compliance with their dress code then it would be illegal not to hire her if based on her religion.

I hope she doesn't expect to have time provided for praying. I don't know if the women are also expected to comply with this but in the restaurant business there generally aren't break times.

[EFerrari]

Wtf?

:wtf:

That's not liberal fighting.

[Chovexani]

18. "Reasonable accomodation"

That is what the law calls for in these situations. She's not in food preparation, so it can't pose a safety risk (though, FWIW, we had a Muslim cafeteria lady at my high school who wore a hair net over her hijab). Head coverings fall under reasonable accomodation.

As a practicing Pagan, I'm well-versed in Title VII. When you're of a minority religion in this country it's damn near required. :(

[madeline_con]

14. "I'm also a bit turned off by that atire ..."

:wtf:

Whatever. I'm a bit turned off by your helping perpetuate the persecution of Muslims because some of them want to wear a hijab for modesty's sake!

I looked for a link, BTW, and can't find one.

[napi21]

22. I looked too. It was aired on TV46 in Atlanta. BTW, I'm not trying to persecute anyone!

When I go to a Chinese restaurant, I love it when the staff is wearing their native dress. When I go to a mexican restaurant, Ienjoy the mariachi band and the staff wearing sombrero's. I would find it pretty weird if the guy at McDonalds was wearing that garb though.

[Chovexani]

24. ...

I don't really know how to explain how batshit insane you sound.

I'll just say that the brown, yellow and red folk of this country are just as American as you are, we are not quaint curiosities here to dance like monkeys for your amusement, and that what you think is "weird" is intrinsic to some folks' religious beliefs.

[NMMNG]

31. Let that be a lesson to you

If you get a crappy job in the service sector don't be wearing your Dashiki. Some people just can't handle diversity.

[Chovexani]

42. I can't believe this shit

I guess I'm just a sheltered latte sipping NYer, but I'd think in 2007 we'd be over this shit.

[napi21]

32. I never daid anyone wasn't American. I would feel the same way

if a Catholic priest wanted to wear his cassock while being the cashiere there. Sorry if you don't like that, but I've had enough religion inserted into everything by Shrub!

[Djinn]

39. I'm as atheist as you get

an not being American I find ANY insertion of religion into PUBLIC life very very offensive. Thankfully it's not an issue where I live.

However I don't see how anyone wearing a hijab, yarmulke or a crucifix necklace is "inserting" religion into my life?

When I wear my ratty old fave Exploited t-shirt am I inserting anarchy and punk into your life?
When someone wears a suit a they inserting conservatism into your life?
When someone wears a rainbow badge are they inserting (argh) homosexuality into your life?

How does it effect you at all? Are your own views so fragile that can't even withstand evidence of another viewpoint? sheesh.

[Chovexani]

46. Nice try, kemosabe

But don't try to spin this as some kind of blow against church-state separation when your Freudian Klan robes started slipping with your OP and all through this thread.

Keep on digging, though, you're entertaining. :hi: :popcorn:

[napi21]

53. Hmmm..Klan? I'm looking at this as if I owned the restaurant.

If ANYONE would decide not to frequent my business for a reason I have control over, I will try to eliminate that problem. If you think you can toss the klanh label on me because I live in Ga, you're wrong. I'm a yankee transplant to here, and the damn klansmen scare the hell out of me! So do the RW finatics! I guess I'm not alowed to have an opinion anymore. There are a lot of atires I don't like, and wouldn't frequest a restaurant if their staff wore them. That's MY option on where to spend my money, don't ya think?

[Chovexani]

55. You're a marvel of assimiliation, it would seem.

I'm from NY-fuckin-City and saw more cross burnings on the news, in Long Island, than I ever did in my summers with the family in SC. One does not necessarily need to have moonshine in one's veins to think like a racist.

But let me clue you in since you're not actively crazy, you just can't seem to help yourself: when you comment on a particular form of dress that has ethnic and religious significance to a minority group as "weird" and insinuate that it's not fit for a "southern, family" atmosphere (whatever the fuck that means), and go so far as to say you won't frequent a restaurant that's staffed by said people...

...congratulations, you might just be a racist. Special bonus points when you use terms like "native dress" when talking about your local Panda Express, and can't tell the difference between It's a Small World and real colored folk.

[noamnety]

51. hey hey, that's not fair.

The OP isn't being a white supremacist - they are simply trying to explain that it's just common decency for people of color to refrain from wearing their funny little exotic outfits in the presence of white Americans (excepting of course when they are dressing up to pleasure and delight the "normal" people).

:patriot:



(;) )

[Chovexani]

52. Oh I see!

We're only allowed to be colored at Disney World!

It's a small mind, after all...

[noamnety]

58. The Epcot part and small world only.

Not wandering around the whole area; that would be too confusing for children. They're not paying to see that kind of thing in other parts of the park.



(I don't know anymore if I should laugh or cry when I see some of this stuff)

[Chovexani]

61. I resort to mockery because if I didn't

My head would explode. Daily.

[Quantess]

121. Aside question: Is the phrase "people of color" still viable?

Sounds fine to me, but, another DUer ripped me a new one for using it.

[noamnety]

132. It's still certainly viable among WOC activists and their blogs

http://alliedmediaconference.org/sessions/incitetrack
http://nosnowhere.wordpress.com/2007/06/24/live-blogging-from-the-allied-media-conference-2/ (see blogroll categories, lower right)
http://www.genderracepower.com/?p=217
http://blackademic.com/?p=132

I'd be curious to hear what the other DUer's complaint was exactly. It's an inclusive term that incorporates solidarity/recognition of common struggles among various people who have historically been oppressed by white capitalists/white supremacists.

[Quantess]

134. Mostly I was wondering if it was okay or not.

This particular DUer criticized every single part of my post, justified or not, just for the sake of viciousness. That DUer is the only person on my ignore list, due to his unnecessary, unrelenting, level of hostility to me, in one thread. So probably, we shouldn't take his opinion on the term "people of color" seriously.

Anyway, thanks for clearing that up.
:)

[Chovexani]

138. I use it all the time

More often, POC for shorthand.

I always err on the side of calling folks what they wish to be called though.

[noamnety]

145. I keep spelling it out on DU

cause I always assume folks here won't know what it means, even in context. I almost spelled out WOC for that reason even though it's right in the conversation about the term POC.

Valid concern, you think? Or am I not giving folks enough credit?

[Chovexani]

146. I used to think it was really well known

But I guess not. There's folks on here who don't know what GLBT stands for.

[AlCzervik]

27. why is that weird to you? I see many women wearing hijabs, my sister's mil

wears one, one of my neighbors is Sikh and he wears the traditional head wrap. Are you not in a part of the coutry that has much diversity? i'm asking that to kow and not to be snarky.

[blogslut]

35. That's funny

Because in all of the Chinese/Thai/Japanese/Vietnamese restaurants in my town, the servers, cashiers and assorted staff wear western uniforms. Actually, the only place I can think of where the staff must wear costumes is at a cowboy-type tourist trap.

Exactly what is a Southern Family look? Antebellum hoop skirts? Perhaps head kerchiefs and gingham aprons?

[Chovexani]

45. Maybe the OP means this upstanding southern family

[blogslut]

48. Don't make me cry

I had such hope for those two and now it's gone with the uh...hmmm, help me out here....

[Chovexani]

49. Camelot has fallen

:(

[Djinn]

38. you're making it worse

seriously, read over that post and tell me it doesn't sound like the post of a brain crying out for oxygen...at best.

"their native dress"

When you're in a Chinese restaurant do you have the faintest idea whether the owners/chefs/wait staff are from Sichuan or Qinghai or Henan? do you have the faintest idea whether they speak Mandarin, Cantonese or Wu?

How on earth would you even know what their "native dress" was.

Urgh it sounds like tourists disappointed to find Melbourne's indigenous community doesn't run around in possum skins playing the didge.

[Hoof Hearted]

44. OMG. I swear, I think I met you at a Native American conference at the University

You were the boomer "mature" lady who, when the Q&A part came up after the lecture WOULD NOT SHUT UP about this wonderful Crazy Horse impersonator you met and how he was so authentic and he was really some Italian guy from Ohio so he had the "right look".

BTW, I'm kidding, but it SO could have been you.

Robert Merton classified four types of race/discrimination patterns

Active bigot: prejudice person who discriminates.
Timid bigot: prejudice person who does not discriminate.
Fair-weather liberal: non-prejudiced person who discriminates.
All-weather liberal: non-prejudiced person who does not discriminate.

I have often thought there needs to be a fifth category entitled

Ignorant bigot: prejudice person who does not understand their own bigotry

[MichaelHarris]

57. When I go to Red Lobster

I want everyone wearing claws.

[Chovexani]

69. At Long John Silver's

Everyone should be dressed like pirates.

[MichaelHarris]

70. hahahahaha

and if you eat at Joe's Crab Shack you need to wear a crab costume dammit!

[EnviroBat]

105. Or at least have crabs...

[msongs]

33. how come muslim men never wear a hajib for "modesty's sake? nt

[Djinn]

41. for the same reason western men don't wear bikini tops?

guess what there are different standards of dress for men and women pretty much everywhere.

Many Muslim men DO cover up however. Maybe I just share a neighborhood with a lot of Muslims, but I see plenty of men in robes and a Kufi.

Yes in many Muslim families woman are held to a very different standard of modesty and appearance...sort of like a lot of non Muslim families.

[madeline_con]

172. Actually, men of the Taureg tribe of Africa wear veils. n/t

[TahitiNut]

17. This is written up in the Atlanta Business Chronicle. The EEOC filed the suit.

That puts a different light on it, right? :eyes:

Tuesday, December 18, 2007 - 9:53 PM EST
EEOC sues Folks Inc.
Atlanta Business Chronicle

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) reported Tuesday night it has filed a religious discrimination lawsuit against Folks Inc., alleging the metro Atlanta restaurant chain violated federal law when it refused to hire an applicant because of her religious attire.

Folks Inc. operates 16 restaurants in northern Georgia and has a dress code policy for servers and hostesses. According to the EEOC, company officials allegedly refused to accommodate Erica Campbell's request to wear an Islamic religious headdress called a hijab, contending that it would violate the company's dress code. When Campbell told a hiring official that she must abide by her religious beliefs, the employer allegedly rescinded its job offer.

The EEOC said it filed the suit after first attempting to reach a voluntary settlement.

[Chovexani]

21. Where oh where is the Alliance Defense Fund?

Oh that's right, "religious freedom" doesn't apply to "Islamofacists". :puke:

[napi21]

25. Thanks for finding the link. I was getting the feeling some thought

I was making this up.

[EFerrari]

30. I don't think stuff like this can be made up. n/t

[supernova]

19. If it's a cashier's job, then it's fine

it's not like she would be waiting tables and expected to wear a waitress uniform.

Although, I give her props for being willing to work in a place that serves wall to wall pork. :P

[EFerrari]

20. What is the difference between wearing hijab out of modesty

and being unwilling to wear a skirt that is two inches long?

Women have been coerced by employers into serving up their bodies in public for so long, we find it odd when they refuse?

:wtf:

[TahitiNut]

23. If Hooters has waitresses with big boobs, what restaurant has waitresses with one leg??

IHOP.

:silly:

[Chovexani]

26. Get thee to hell, TN

Do not pass Go, do not collect $200. :spank:

[TahitiNut]

125. (grin) Well .. since the devil made me do it ...

... I must've been there. No? :dunce:
Since I've only been to Hooters once (for lunch) and not to IHOP for over 30 years, it's the only explanation I can come up with. :evilgrin:

[AlCzervik]

28. and they're all named Eileen.

:D

[EFerrari]

29. . . .

:spank:

lol

[conscious evolution]

114. LMAO!!

[Hoof Hearted]

34. My employer decided to require "awe and reverence for God" as a condition for employment

when they switched management systems, after I already worked there.

Now - I'm a practicing Christian so it's not the biggest deal in the world for me personally BUT on behalf of all the agnostics, atheists, and Poly-deists out there I am genuinely offended about it. There's the added outrage of any employer having the nerve to tell me how I need to feel about God.

None. Of. Your. Business.

Turns out, employers can discriminate on the basis of religion whenever they feel like it. Ask some of the Swift workers in Grand Island, NE.

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_5904327

[Chovexani]

47. LOL, I'd have asked which one

I have awe and reverence for lots of gods. Mercury, Thoth, Ganesh...

[Hoof Hearted]

59. EXACTLY! I have many friends with all kinds of belief systems. We ALL deserve the same respect.

That being said, I have to admit I don't know exactly how to feel about this case yet. What if a Catholic woman demanded the right to wear an "Abortion Kills" button on her uniform because she felt it was an important part of her religious expression?

If I own the joint, I would really want to reserve the right to tell her to get rid of the pin or take a walk.

[Chovexani]

63. Title VII is tricky

It's all about reasonable accommodations, and sometimes there are grey areas.

Using myself as an example: I wear a pentacle at work, because I'm Pagan, and it's a symbol of my particular belief system. I also wear bindis (those would be the dots you see some Indian women wear on their foreheads), as a symbol of commitment to my patron Goddess. However, my messenger bag with the "My Goddess Gave Birth to Your God" pin on it stays at home. I realize that the born again guy in the office might take offense to that. That pin isn't essential to my religious expression, but my pentacle and bindi are. If I'm ever questioned on it (and I haven't been, I receive compliments and when I explain it's for spiritual purposes, they leave it alone), I can explain that the pentacle is a consecrated amulet of protection and the bindi marks my bond to my Goddess as Her priestess.

The case of the anti-abortion pin is trickier. This is something that is deliberately inflammatory, potentially to customers and other staff members alike. I think it would be an unreasonable request to ask to wear something like that.

It's a fine line, admittedly, but that's why we have the EEOC and courts, and I support the Muslim woman in her claim against the restaurant, just as I support the right of the Christian high school students to wear their crosses.

[Hoof Hearted]

66. Good point. How about "Adoption saves a beating heart"?

A deeply committed Roman Catholic could very well see it as sacred to their faith, a way of carrying the church into their everyday person-hood and life. It is, as you said, a Grey area/fine line. It's definitively subjective. In that case discretion must be granted to someone. If it's a private employer I can see why discretion is usually granted to them. I may hate their bigoted asses and not dine there anymore, but hey, that's their call.

[Djinn]

64. apples and oranges

wearing an "abortion kills" badge is not viewed as a requirement of faith for any Catholic as far as I'm aware.

Compare it with not allowing a Jewish man to wear a yarmulke.

[Hoof Hearted]

67. The hijab is not required in Islam. It is an expression of faith.

What else you got?

[Djinn]

74. that depends on one's interpretation

doesn't it. Many Jews don't view the wearing of the yarmulke a requirement of Judaism, some do. Many Christians don't think believing that Jesus was resurrected is a requirement of of Christianity, many do.

I am unaware of anyone or any sect who believes an abortion kills badge is a faith requirement.

Some Muslim women do not view any kind of covering as a requirement of their faith, MANY DO, but hey billions of devout and intelligent Muslims throughout history must be wrong because clearly YOU alone can deduce the words of Allah :eyes:

Oh and just to be pedantic - you do know that hijab does NOT specifically refer to a headscarf right.

[Hoof Hearted]

128. Of course I know that, but I chose to use the terminology of the OP, for the sake of clarity.

And I know your little rolly eyes thing and snark was supposed to make me feel bad but actually I believe you're making my point for me. It's subjective. It's personal. It's a gray area. If a person has, say 150 employees do they leave that kind of discretion to each individual they employ? Ideally, I think they should whenever possible but where the fine line is drawn is pretty subjective, and hard to legislate without putting us all in Mao suits or forcing employers in general to hire people totally unsuitable for available jobs. Do I think this womans attire was unsuitable? No, I do not. But I don't own the place. The food industry has been requiring people to conform to all manner of ridiculous code and dress since forever. Think "flair".

[Gormy Cuss]

120. What about a cross, a crucifix, or a star of David?

If the restaurant or business allows those to be visible and not in violation of the dress code I don't see how a hijab would be any different, providing that it didn't present an health or safety issue.

[Warpy]

40. The hijab is a simple head scarf

Big deal, in other words. There's a cashier at a local TJ Maxx who wears an abaya, the head to toe black robe so that only her face and hands are showing, so what? She's a nice lady and a good cashier. We're talking about CLOTH here and a woman's choice in what to wear.

I find women hanging out of too short and too deeply cut and skin tight attire a little more jangling than anyone in a simple head scarf is.

This is religious discrimination. Telling a strict Muslim woman to work without covering her hair would be like requiring all female workers to go topless in this culture.

She's already going to get enough grief from morons. She doesn't need it from me.

[Djinn]

43. lots of women working where I live

wearing the abaya, doctors, lawyers, shop assistants, teachers.

I find people in ties weird - something about voluntarily hanging a noose around your neck, it's just strange. Oddly I manage to go about my day in the CBD without cringing in fear of them though.

[Chovexani]

56. When I see white guys in suits and ties I run for the hills

Gotta watch out for those white collar criminals.

:sarcasm:

[Warpy]

112. Yeah, ties are weirder

but it's amazing what a little tolerance will do, isn't it?

[depakid]

50. Turn the tables- and consider that this is Georgia

where a group of fundies sued the University for the "right" to harass and demean gays and lesbians on campus, in violation of the school's hate speech policy.

I think that pretty much tells you what's REALLY going on here....

[Djinn]

65. huh?

what's the comparison? In one people want to interfere with other people's lives - to harass and demean them, in the other a woman wants to wear a piece of material on her head which effects no-one but herself :eyes:

[Chovexani]

68. I think they were pointing out hypocrisy

Fundies love to talk about religious freedom, but it really means the freedom for them to harass other people who don't live like they do. When someone just wants to quietly wear a scarf in accordance with their traditions, then it's "unfamily" or some crap.

But I'm doped up on cold meds and could be wrong.

[brentspeak]

166. What does that have to do with anything?

There have been similar actions by fundamentalist groups in California.

Yeah, that Red state known as "California"...

[MattSh]

54. Even if they said such a thing,

they could always argue that they found someone better qualified. I mean the job is cashier. Not a job that requires a particularly high level of qualifications. And a job that probably gets a whole shit load of applicants.

[KitchenWitch]

60. Good for her, she SHOULD sue!

[NuttyFluffers]

62. dude, she's wearing a "hair net" willingly at all times! hire her!

think of the time saved in training! no "put your hair net back on, Bob." "Bob, I said put your hair net back on." "Bob, I know you're exploring this facial hair phase, but we have to have a talk about a 'beard net' now..."

easy peazy, it's all good. the hijab doesn't mask her face or anything. it's not some niqab or something which might cause problems for hard of hearing people who might need to read lips. what's with this "concern" whe you can get an employee who'll willingly follow extra health codes without being reminded?!

sometimes i just don't get my fellow americans. dude, it's just a head scarf. not seeing her hair is not the end of your freedoms -- or hers if she chooses it willingly.

EDIT: just registered this is a Southern style Family restaurant. y'know, make a happy compromise that she wears a happy "Southern Belle" style bonnet or other elaborate head scarfy/hat thingies from the ante bellum south. it'll be an attraction and everything! jeez, the lack of imagination over simple compromises is laughable. follow health code, support potential employee's marginal dress requirement, turn it into a win-win for all parties. not hard at all.

[Smith_3]

72. If her religion requires a scarf as sign of modesty, how does digging for millions agree with that??

:wtf:

Seriously, if the company has a dress code and she is not fine with that, she doesn't have to get a job there.

[Djinn]

75. seriously if an employer

doesn't like black people/gay people/women/rednecks/republicans then none of those people have to work there.

If you don't like having sex at 12 years old don't do it.
If you don't want to buy drugs, just don't.
If you don't want to get married to someone of the same gender, just don't.

Laws and regulations are made in a society (ostensibly) for the benefit of everyone, if you don't like it look into free market libertarianism, or if you're of a leftie bent anarcho syndicalism perhaps.

[Smith_3]

98. Me likes anarcho syndicalism

:-)

[Chovexani]

77. Hmm, I think you took a wrong turn somewhere.

:shrug:

[Smith_3]

78. I'm a living paradox

;-)

[Chovexani]

79. Okay!

Say, that Alan Rickman fellow sure is hot.

[harun]

84. How do you know they have an actual dress code, in writing,

that covers cashiers?

[Smith_3]

97. I don't...

In fact, if it is not in the contract and doesn't hold for all employed cashiers of the company, then i say the charges of racism are justified.

However I do believe that a company should be able to set a dresscode for their employees, as long as it is in the contract and is the same for all employess with similar positions.

BTW I think our approach to islamic (and other religious) symbols should be modelled by that of Turkey. IRC Turkey is a secular state despite its islamic background and religious symbols like the veil are banned for all public officials. I don't know how it works in the private sector there though.

[harun]

110. Turkey takes it too far

For example, one cannot even go on a College campus there if one has a beard. That wouldn't fly in the United States and for good reason.

The veil there is not banned for all public officials, it is banned in government buildings. If you see pictures of the current president with his wife you will see she always has the veil on.

I agree with the spirit of what you are saying though, you don't want strong religious symbolism represented in government for many reasons. In my opinion I think it cheapens the religion they are trying to symbolize (like it needs special advertising or something) and it also makes all those people in the society governed, not of that religion, feel they are not being represented properly and not part of the body politic.

[Chovexani]

113. The (for profit) technical school I work for has a dress code

Doesn't allow beards. They're very big on teaching professionalism in addition to how to fix cars, and the students have to wear uniforms, long hair is not allowed, nor is facial hair. I work in the financial aid office as an admissions guide, and I have a Muslim student who's going to the upcoming start who wears a beard for religious reasons. I had to fight tooth and nail to get a special dispensation for him to keep his beard, but he can.

Then you've got places like Bob Jones University and their crazy dress codes. The idea is not non-existent here, it's just not as common.

[tom_paine]

73. Perhaps a pointy white hood would be more welcome there.

Naah, as we all know most Bushies long ago dropped the white hoods and robes in exchange for suits and ties, went from being KKK to being CCC and suppressing minority voters with compuetsr, vote caging and more subtle intimidation and criminalization of registering minorities, rather than lynching them.

[Thothmes]

81. So did the Senator from West Virginia

[tom_paine]

129. Oh Lordy, another Bushie Talking Point!

:puke:

You cannot see the difference between Byrd not only renouncing his previous affiliation and joining the party that helped give blacks the right to vote, a right now being eroded into meaninglessness by modern Bushies by less violent methods, rather than switiching to the Republic Party after Reagan in 1980 went down to Philadelphia, MS to help celebrate the murders of those Liberals in 1964 and give a wink to all the Dixiecrats that the Republic Party was now open for business to all the disenchanted racist Dixiecrats who hated the fact the the Democratic Party was now the Party of, as the Bushies put it when they think no one is listening, N*gger Lovers?

No, no one could be that ignorant and blind could they?

You're busted, troll. BUSTED!

[Thothmes]

141. Talking Point

Yes there is a difference and I do understand that difference. But before you start attaching the klan labels to people, even if republicans. Do you have any evidence that any of the current administration were members of the klan. Or is it just oral flatulence. I consider the KKK one of the lowest form of scum on this planet. Most are criminals as far as I am concerned. I do not like to see the klan label attached to anyone without serious consideration of the accusation.

[tom_paine]

149. Oh, I have considered it, all right.

Most Bushie klan-types now belong to the CCC (Council of Conservative Citizens, get it?) and don't do violence, which is out of fashion.

Look into it. Look into the CCC. Look into Ronald Reagan's 1980 visit to Neshoba County to kick of his campaign (wink wink).

Look into voter caging and the way the Bushie Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division has become the Department of Minority Voter Suppression and Voter Registration Intimidation. Look into the Attorney's Scandal as it relates to voter supression and electoral malfeasnace.

Sure, the Bushies have the plausible deniability of not being directly affiliated with the klan. It's only smart marketing if you want to create Klan-style voter suppression and intimidation by other, nonviolent methods.

Sure they don't need to lynch Black people to steal and suppress their votes, but the outcome is the same.

So I call them Klan-by-Other-Methods or whatever the hell you want to call them, but in the end Reagan STILL went down to Philadelphia, MS in 1980 to (wink wink) celebrate with the locals and chose to kick off his campaign in a place famous for one thing, and one thing only.

The murder of three dirty, filthy, hippie, liberals. It was a bright neon sign to anyone who cared to watch that the Party of Lincoln was now the Party of Lee.

And I damn sure have given it plenty of consideration and more than two decades of observation before I make my assertions.

But you go right ahead and get caught up in the "technical" incorrectness that yes, the Bushies don't run around in white robes these days burning crosses, but they make sure that the black vote is diluted back to 3/5ths of a vote in other ways.

I am sorry I "yelled" at you, but goddamn it, we do the work of the Bushies when we get hung up in their plausible deniablility bullshit. When we examine and let them squirt their squid-ink of

Judge ye them by their actions.

And if you don't know what I am taking about when I say voter caging, Reagan's 1980 campaign kickoff and plausible deniability, then you have some research to do.

I stand by my words.

[Thothmes]

151. Fair Enough

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

80. Suing for "millions" may be a bit much

She should certainly win a suit against the restaurant. Her garb would not interfere with doing her job.

"Millions" may be out of line. Something more in line with her lost salary, plus a nice chunk of change for the affront. A religious slur doesn't translate into a lottery win, imho.

I'd be curious about the dress code. Such as, is it written? And how does the garment violate it?

That's just my view. In Detroit, hijabs are as common as baseball caps. I don't know if they're common at Hooters. I may have to check that out and report back.

[leftynyc]

85. If the restaurant has an established dress

code, she's entitled to bupkis. If that's the rule and has been enforced on others, she can save her money for her lawyer and work somewhere else.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

88. That's probably correct ...

especially if the established dress code is (and has been) in writing. If it's just a verbal, customary code, it's a little less certain - she could still win that one.

[AspenRose]

90. You would not see a woman in a hijab working at Hooters

since the Koran encourages modest dress. So much for Hooters.

And the "millions" could be used to establish some sort of Muslim anti-defamation organization for women, or some sort of legal defense fund, since this type of issue keeps cropping up; who's to say what she'd do with the money? We don't know her intentions. :shrug:

We DO know her religious rights were violated, though.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

108. I know that, sheesh

I wuz just looking for a "high-minded" reason for a little "recon".
:rofl: (just joking)

If the court feels that the restaurant should finance an organization, let the judge order it. I don't think this is a "class-action" suit. Just an individual suit for damages because, yes, her religious rights are violated.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

160. hooters can claim business necessity for clothing, whereas a cashier at a restaurant

doesnt have the same business necessity (in technical terms bonafide Occupational qualification) to justify the adverse impact

[EFerrari]

118. It depends what your goal is. Suing for milliions gets press.

Got our attention. :)

[rucky]

83. I'm sure how I feel about this:

Religious discrimination - straight-up.

[Le Taz Hot]

86. I think I've lived in California too long

but, even in the conservative San Joaquin Valley, people wouldn't give it a second look. Hell, half of my wardrobe is Moroccan. I forget that there are still places where non-Western attire is considered "abnormal." It's just too weird.

[slackmaster]

102. Same in conservative San Diego

As long as it doesn't violate a health code or create a safety hazard, only chains like Friday's dictate strictly what their people can wear on the job.

[gollygee]

106. I live in Michigan and it seems odd to me that anyone would even think twice about it too

but we do have a large Islamic population in Michigan so maybe I'm just used to that specific kind of attire. But I can't imagine why on earth it would make any difference. People not liking to look at it isn't really enough IMO.

[JHB]

87. Can't find anything about their dress code, but did find their employment policy:

Folks Incorporated will not tolerate any form of discrimination, harassment or retaliation affecting its employees or applicants due to race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, age, marital status, medical condition, or disability.
http://www.folkskitchen.com/employmentpolicy.htm


What's the usual uniform for this place, anyway?

[NashVegas]

91. Discrimination of Religion vs Against the Expression of Religion on Private Property

Is what it comes down to, methinks.

[Bentcorner]

94. I'm guessing that if I wanted a job in Saudi I wouldn't be allowed to wear a cowboy hat and chaps.

[JHB]

96. Sure you could, even if you are a woman...

...just not in public.

[AspenRose]

154. I didn't know a cowboy hat was an expression of religion.

Oh, wait....

[La Lioness Priyanka]

157. saudi is a theocracy. do you want america to be a theocracy?

america's motto should NOT be "we could we worse".

[gollygee]

100. What possible difference could it make if she wears a hijab?

You're turned off by that attire? That's *your* problem, not hers.

We went to a birthday party at Chuck E. Cheese (ugh) and there was a girl working there wearing a hijab, and long sleeves under the uniform short-sleeved shirt. It was still Chuck E. Cheese. The pizza sadly tasted the same. And any given restaurant's food will taste the same regardless of what people there are wearing on their heads.

So you don't like that attire in a place marked at a "southern family" place? What does that mean? Is a hijab not family-friendly? My god. Get over yourself.

[slackmaster]

103. Other than the possibility it might get stuck in a cash register drawer

I can't think of a valid reason.

[noamnety]

133. Maybe she's concerned that she's not getting

the full "white American" experience that she's paying for?

I remember my (racist) grandma having some WASP newsletters lying around on her end tables (seriously, it had WASP right in the name). It had helpful articles like where you could go for vacations where you wouldn't have to interact with those other people.

[slackmaster]

101. How many pieces of flair does that place require its employees to wear?

[BoneDaddy]

107. I think a private company has a right to dictate a dress code

the citizen has the right and choice not to work there.

Multiculturalism is about working to reach mutual understanding between cultures. It is not about having to accept every cultural nuance, norm, dress, ritual or behavior.

[Chovexani]

116. And I'm going to sound like a broken record again

Title VII, Title VII, Title VII. I think you got lost on the way to Libertarian Underground.

Employers are obligated to make reasonable accomadations of employees' religious needs. Does that mean "every cultural nuance, norm, dress, ritual or behavior" has to be "accepted"? No, it doesn't. But it means employers can't do things like promise a prospective hire that a job requires no weekend shifts and then once they're hired, make them work the Sabbath every week. As long as it doesn't interfere with the ability to do her job or pose a safety risk, she has the right to wear hijab. The law is crystal clear on this.

The ignorance and sense of privilege on this thread is astounding. Of course she has the "right" not to work there, because there are so many places in freakin' Georgia beating down the door of hijab-wearing Muslim women to hire them.

[BoneDaddy]

142. Thanks for the insults

I truly appreciate them. I do not disagree with what you are saying. I was responding to the plethora of posts that claim people can do "whatever they want" and still deserve to be hired. That is plainly ridiculous. This woman is protected under our laws and I do think, overall, that that is a good thing.

But...and here is my big but. I also think there is PLENTY of room to discuss the symbology of the hijab or any muslim required "headgear", it's relationship to patriarchy, misogyny and control and how liberals often defend "multiculturalism" without looking at the dangerous interconnections of what it means.

Relax, smoke a joint or have a drink...you are wound a bit too tight.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

158. seconded.

[LanternWaste]

111. the cashier is not responsible for the ignorance of the general public.

If the religious clothing not interfere with his/her duties or the rest of the uniform, then to me it's simply a non-issue.

I find it absurd (at best) that a person's work ethic and work-practice is going to be judged on religious/cultural attire. That's a bug that only enjoys the environment of xenophobes, racists, and small minds.

Does making change for the consumer at that restaurant in any way change the taste of southern-styled chicken-fried steak? Does it lessen the sweetness of down home iced-tea? Does it in some way transform the patron's gas-guzzling 4x4 into a burrow-drawn cart?

Or (and this I find a bit more likely) does the patron's disturbance lie in the fact that they may actually be small minded?

Sorry, the way I see it, the cashier is simply not responsible for the ignorance of the general public.



I'm much more worried about wait staff wearing flip-flops

[guitar man]

115. well, I'd like to wear

my old jeans, black Harley T-shirts, bandanna and my biker vest to work, but I can't. I work as a manager in an office and I must adhere to the manner of dress prescribed by my employer. If I don't like it, I can go get another job.

I don't see a lot of difference in this case, but hey, if she wins the suit, maybe I can wear my bandanna at least and my employer won't be able to make me take it off, eh?

[Chovexani]

117. Unless you're a minister in the Church of Harley-Davidson

That has shit all to do with this case.

The restaurant was in violation of Title VII, which states employers have to make reasonable accommodations of employee's religious beliefs. Case after case has shown that employers have to let employees wear things like hijab, yarmulkes and the like if they don't interfere with the job or pose a safety risk.

But thanks for playing.

[guitar man]

119. well, my bandanna

has a bigger signicance than just a corporate logo like the rest of the stuff...it was given to me by a brother biker who later went down and died in an accident. It does have a real spiritual value to me, so maybe if she wins this one I can wear it at work when I want to.

[EFerrari]

123. That must be a really small office up in that tower.

:)

[guitar man]

124. ??

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

126. I just read your profile. n/t

[guitar man]

127. oh, ok

doh!! I forgot I put that in there :D

[La Lioness Priyanka]

156. personal taste is not protected by law. religion is.

[Forkboy]

130. I have some questions.

Did they interview her first? Was it in person? If so, was she wearing the hijab during the interview? And if that is so, why the hell didn't it come up then?

I think this shit is so stupid. Let's discriminate or we might lose the idiot dollar. :crazy:

Legally, I would think if she signed any rules of conduct that stated the dress code she might not win. I know I've signed some that state any type of clothing that promotes anything religious was a no-no.

Need more info, but on principle I really hate this kind of thing.

[Name removed]

131. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

167. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SweetThingy]

135. Having a dress code is not religious discrimination

I've seen dress codes that say men cannot have beards, that hair cannot be died, that jeans cannot be worn , etc.

If you want to wear (jeans, hair dye, hijab, burka, kippa, bathing suit) to work and your employer won't let you, then accept it or find somewhere else to work.

[Raine]

136. I agree

here in the Los Angeles area when the Disney Corp bought the Queen Mary their dress code wouldn't allow beards, mustaches, nail polish etc. they even said what kind of underwear was required. Lots of people found work somewhere else especally the men who wanted to keep their beards and mustaches other people stayed and abided by the dress code. No one charged religious discrimination.

[blonndee]

143. Would you say the same if they said no crosses at work? n/t

[SweetThingy]

148. sure

if you don't like it, no one is forcing you to work there.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

152. you are wrong. if a dress code is shown to have adverse affect w.out business necessity

the company can be sued.

[LanternWaste]

159. However, since we are a thinking people...

"accept it or find somewhere else to work."

However, since we are a thinking people, I would assume that there are more options than just two you presented. Accommodations, exceptions, allowances and compromises can be made-- as long as neither party is stuck in a rigid, one-dimensional thinking process.

Regardless of whether you may or may not think this is religious discrimination, I'm sure you can easily recognize the mulishness and obstinacy of the establishment's owner/management.

And I'm still trying to figure out how her dress affects the taste or the health of the food being served... in other words-- the reason the business is actually open. :shrug:


"Having a dress code is not religious discrimination"
You're a lawyer who is aware of the precise and relevant context of all information presented?

[SweetThingy]

163. Thinking a little deeper

A restraunt doesn't just care about the taste or health being served ... that's a bit simplistic no? Otherwise McDonalds and Denny's wouldn't be around operating.

I agree that it is not a wise managerial decision. If I was running it, I wouldn't mind a bit. But I'm not running it and neither are you. I've worked for places that didn't allow facial piercings? Do piercings affect the ability of the business to operate. Absolutely not. But it's how the managers want their business operated, and managers are allowed to make stupid decisions.

And why can only lawyers decide what is and isn't. Don't you find this kind of thinking favors those who have access to lawyers?

[rucky]

144. People, this is OVERT religious discrimination.

I can't believe the responses here.

[noamnety]

147. Nonono, this is seriously a concern for white folks.

I myself had a terrible experience today. I went out to buy fresh bread, and 2 (two) customers in the store were wearing hijabs. I went ahead and bought the bread, but as you can imagine, it was practically ruined. :)

[La Lioness Priyanka]

153. you know what i love, if we had a discussion about islam, someone would be sure

to say how islam is oppressive to women.

ofcourse when we dont let the woman in a hijab work, thats not oppression by christianity.

:eyes:

[behonest]

150. Is it required?

I guess its a question of whether she is absolutely required to dress that way in her religion or if it is a choice.

If she has to dress that way for her religion, then its a bit unfair not to let her earn a living.

If it is not required, then she should follow the companies dress code.

[Horse with no Name]

155. They deny the woman the right to wear a religious symbol

Yet allow Christians to wear crosses I assume.
However, even more insidious, they ALLOW pharmacists to make decisions on what prescriptions they will fill based on THEIR belief system.
What a disconnect with reality.

[SweetThingy]

164. No one is denying her the right to wear a religious symbol

They are saying they don't want to pay her money to work there because her religious symbol deviates from the dress code. They might say the same thing about a facial tattoo, a short skirt or who knows what else.

[Horse with no Name]

171. Then they need to ban ALL religious symbols

The Christianists freak out if someone wishes them "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas"...can you imagine the outrage if they were denied wearing their crosses and angel pins?

[SweetThingy]

175. who is "they"

All that happened is that one restraunt said headscarfes are not in compliance with the dress code.

No one has banned any religious symbols. Relax.

[Horse with no Name]

176. Maybe they haven't banned "YOUR" religious symbol

But I am guessing that you only care about your own. Typical.:eyes:

[SweetThingy]

177. Who is they?

What has gotten banned?

Easy Tiger.

[Karenina]

174. Better headline:

No Headscarfs Allowed.