Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Disneyland employee told to remove head scarf. Options · View
Magical_felix
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 9:02:23 AM

Rank: Wild at Heart

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 5,196
Location: California
I heard a story on the radio this morning about a woman that was told to remove her head scarf because it was against Disneyland's dress code for employees. She's a hostess at a restaurant and wasn't wearing the head scarf when she was first hired. She said she began wearing in observance of Ramadan.

So my question is: Should employers be able to set whatever rules they like for their employees along as they are explained to them before they begin working? Should head scarves and Yamakas be exempt from employers dress codes? Is this a form of religious discrimination or Disneyland just trying to keep the rules for all employees the same?



MrNudiePants
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 9:11:15 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,191
Location: United States
It's not "religious discrimination", it's "Code of Conduct." More than likely, she got a copy of the company's employment manual (and had to sign that she had read it and understood it) when she was hired. If the manual states that no head coverings will be worn other than in a prescribed manner, then she should expect that rule to be enforced, Ramadan or not. A similar story happened at Disneyworld here, and the woman was given two options: either dress according to the company handbook, or work at a company's outlet off-property, where the dress code was not as strict. She chose to work off-property, then sued because her new position came with a drop in her commissions, hence a drop in her salary. The court ruled that she had no right to seek redress of her "lost" wages since she had precipitated the whole event. Disney has set standards that they expect all employees to adhere to. If the employee chooses to disobey, I see it as just another way of saying they're choosing to look for a new job.


Guest
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 9:11:49 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
there are dress codes for all kinds of jobs. at the hospital tats have to be coverd..nose rings out. teachers have dress codes, office workers have dress codes. personally, i dont think just because you claim religion you shouldnt be allowed to go against the code of the employer. its their business its their decision. if you dont like it then seek employment where your desired look or dress is appropriate or accepted.

now, we all just posted on Nics thread about how we'd run the site if it were ours. most of us had the opinion that more violence should be let in..and yay that we voiced it. but we will all comply with the rules as they are currently are. if we have stories that dont comply then we are free to post somewhere else. same with dress codes if you ask me. you wanna wear head dresses, tats..whatever...then find a place where you can.
Jacknife
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 10:20:07 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/27/2008
Posts: 197
Location: United Kingdom
There was a similar case over here in the Uk with a woman working for British Airways and a cross that she was told to remove by her management. Big case, lots of over blown and totally inappropriate comparisons with historical dictators from some religious leaders. She lost

Personally as long as a company is consistent throughout and ethier all religious symbols and clothing should be removed or none of them I really don't see there should be a problem. Headscarfs, Crosses, etc just be consistent
WellMadeMale
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 11:22:25 AM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,451
Location: Cakeland, United States
It amazes me constantly. This level of tolerance from our public. Tolerance for willing subjugation at the feet of our corporate masters. At the behest of our open/liberal governments.

geek

I'm not criticizing anyone...just voicing my observation.

If ya can't beat 'em... pay someone to do it for you.
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 11:36:07 AM

Rank: Alpha Blonde
Moderator

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,553
Location: Your dirty fantasy
There wouldn't be any issue if she was working in an office building.

The issue for Disney is that she is interfacing with the public in a costume-specific role as a hostess, and therefore Disney has a specific image they require their employees to project. As a corporation, I think it's their right to be specific about what is not allowed with these "public image jobs", provided it is specified at the time they hire someone. They aren't saying that she can't work at Disney because she wears this religious scarf, just that she cannot work as a hostess due to 'costuming requirements'.

As another example, I'm sure there was many a small-breasted, or full-figured woman that was turned down for waitressing at Hooters because she couldn't fit the 'wardrobe requirements' or didn't project the image the company wants their female staff to.

The point is that a company that hires people for public roles where their image is representing the company, should have the right to determine what they want that image to be. If Disney does not want religion attached to that image, then that's their right. As they said, there are many other jobs at Disney were people can have more personal freedom to express themselves as they prefer.

MrNudiePants
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 11:54:48 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,191
Location: United States
WellMadeMale wrote:
It amazes me constantly. This level of tolerance from our public. Tolerance for willing subjugation at the feet of our corporate masters. At the behest of our open/liberal governments.

geek

I'm not criticizing anyone...just voicing my observation.


Nobody's being subjugated. She has a choice. Work at a job that has specific dress code requirements, or don't work at that job. In my work, the men have to wear personal protective equipment (PPE). This is a must. It can save eyesight, it can prevent burns, it can prevent head and extremity injuries. Lots of guys don't want to wear the PPE. If they don't, they can be fired. It's no different.

When I open up my beachfront boutique, I'm gonna cater to the nudist crowd. All of my employees are going to be required to do their work naked. If they choose not to, then don't have to work for me. Just sayin'...
Rembacher
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 11:57:59 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/16/2008
Posts: 1,107
LittleMissBitch wrote:
there are dress codes for all kinds of jobs. at the hospital tats have to be coverd..nose rings out. teachers have dress codes, office workers have dress codes. personally, i dont think just because you claim religion you shouldnt be allowed to go against the code of the employer. its their business its their decision. if you dont like it then seek employment where your desired look or dress is appropriate or accepted.


I have an issue with this line of thinking because it essentially limits a devout religious person to a particular set of jobs, which is a form of discrimination. I don't consider a head covering to be equivalent to a nose ring. One is an aesthetic choice which is often removed or altered (ring or stud) while a head covering is worn consistantly. This case is slightly diffferent because she wore the head covering only for a limited time, so I think she doesn't have as much of a case. Yes, it is Ramadan, but other Muslims have made adjustments for employment during Ramadan. Specifically athletes make adjustments to make Ramadan work with their jobs.

If a person wears any type of head covering regularly for religious purposes, then their employer should make every effort to compromise. The only exception to this for me is safety. A Sihk man, or for that matter, any other person should not be allowed to wear a head covering on a construction site if it means that they can not wear a helmet.

My personal experience saw this co-operation with a different group of people. I grew up in a community with a lot of mennonite people. I worked at a store with a few mennonite women as co-workers. Even though the dress code was black pants, a red company shirt, and no hat, the company allowed these women to work wearing their regular dresses with a red vest embroidered with the company logo over top. The world is a diverse place. Every company should make an effort to include people rather than exclude.
Guest
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 12:04:40 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
[/quote]If a person wears any type of head covering regularly for religious purposes, then their employer should make every effort to compromise. [/quote]

why? why must we make special concessions for religion? ive never understood that.
MrNudiePants
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 12:04:45 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,191
Location: United States
Jebru wrote:


If a person wears any type of head covering regularly for religious purposes, then their employer should make every effort to compromise. The only exception to this for me is safety. A Sihk man, or for that matter, any other person should not be allowed to wear a head covering on a construction site if it means that they can not wear a helmet.


I can appreciate this line of thinking except for the fact that if you mandate that the employer MUST compromise, or "should make every effort" to, then you open up the field for all kinds of silly crap. Imagine a Middle-Eastern dancer suing a ballet company because they won't let her perform in a burkha. Under your guidelines, she'd win. Imagine an Amish man suing an over-the-road delivery company because they prefer to use trucks and won't hire his horse-drawn cart.

Sure, these are extreme examples, but... Not long ago, right near where I live, a group of African-American police officers sued their parent agency because the agency refused to allow them to wear dashiki's and dreadlocks on duty, in place of their readily-identifiable uniforms, and uniform hair cuts. This shit really happens!
Guest
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 12:05:28 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
and WHY cant my blonde ass work these damn quotes right?! sheesh!
Guest
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 12:22:25 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
When I first moved to Florida I applied to Disney World. They have not only a paper application for you to fill out but, they show you a movie and a HR person gives a talk on the policies and requirements of being a "cast" member for the company. This is even before an interview. You either accept it, the policies, when applying or you don't. It's all laid out very clearly to everyone. Jewelry, hair requirements, including facial hair, clothing if not in a uniform of some kind, body modifications and art. The list goes on and on. If you accept these conditions, then you may,may be asked to return for an interview. They then talk to you again about everything I just mentioned. They're very specific about it so you have no surprises. That includes religious paraphernalia. They have vast amounts of lawyers on retainer to make sure they're following the law to the letter.
I didn't accept the job in their medical department. Not because of those requirements but because the pay was too low for my taste.
Rembacher
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 12:23:30 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/16/2008
Posts: 1,107
LittleMissBitch wrote:
Quote:
If a person wears any type of head covering regularly for religious purposes, then their employer should make every effort to compromise.


why? why must we make special concessions for religion? ive never understood that.


I could just as easily ask why not? If you want to be an inclusive society, then you need to allow for the tenets of all religions. You can't complain about a society being restrictive for as an example, forcing a woman to wear a burqua wherever she goes, and then turn around and force another woman to not wear one in your society without being just as restrictive.
SilverArdorDragon
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 12:30:27 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/7/2009
Posts: 1,774
Location: Helena, Montana, United States
I understand that some places have to have a dress code, and for good reason. However, depending on where in the park she worked, I don't think it should matter if she wears a head scarf. She was wearing it in observans of one of her religous holidays, telling her that she has to remove it is like telling a Chistain that they have to take of thier cross or a Wiccan that they have to remove thier pentagram. It's not right, unless the item put the person or others at risk on the job.

Sorry about miss spelled words.
Guest
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 12:40:49 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
Jebru wrote:
LittleMissBitch wrote:
Quote:
If a person wears any type of head covering regularly for religious purposes, then their employer should make every effort to compromise.


why? why must we make special concessions for religion? ive never understood that.


I could just as easily ask why not? If you want to be an inclusive society, then you need to allow for the tenets of all religions. You can't complain about a society being restrictive for as an example, forcing a woman to wear a burqua wherever she goes, and then turn around and force another woman to not wear one in your society without being just as restrictive.


but we dont allow for all tenets...as far as i know smoking dope is illegal even if you are Rastafarian. and why is tenets of religion more important that my personal choices? and i dont complain that women choose to wear a burqua, and mind you it is their choice, they could throw it off at any time. im just saying i dont understand why when we cry "for my religion" others are automatically required to submit..."oh, ok, well if its for religion then you go ahead and do as you like while the rest of the company complies to the directives"

its like religion gets special dispensation when all others have to follow the rules. its that i dont get. we are all so careful not to offend the religious sensibilities. even im guilty. at my brothers dinner table..i hold hands and bow my head with the rest even tho i dont believe. and if i ask to not be included well then, i am just rude and disrespectful;even though the disrespect my own views all the time. but that begins the discussion of religious hypocrisy... something utterly different
Guest
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 12:59:42 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
Quote:
She was wearing it in observans of one of her religous holidays, telling her that she has to remove it is like telling a Chistain that they have to take of thier cross or a Wiccan that they have to remove thier pentagram. It's not right, unless the item put the person or others at risk on the job.


It is right because it's the policy of the company she works for. You're told going in what you can and cannot wear/do. If you don't accept company policy then you don't want to work for that company.
Rembacher
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 1:08:06 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/16/2008
Posts: 1,107
LittleMissBitch wrote:
Jebru wrote:
LittleMissBitch wrote:
Quote:
If a person wears any type of head covering regularly for religious purposes, then their employer should make every effort to compromise.


why? why must we make special concessions for religion? ive never understood that.


I could just as easily ask why not? If you want to be an inclusive society, then you need to allow for the tenets of all religions. You can't complain about a society being restrictive for as an example, forcing a woman to wear a burqua wherever she goes, and then turn around and force another woman to not wear one in your society without being just as restrictive.


but we dont allow for all tenets...as far as i know smoking dope is illegal even if you are Rastafarian. and why is tenets of religion more important that my personal choices? and i dont complain that women choose to wear a burqua, and mind you it is their choice, they could throw it off at any time. im just saying i dont understand why when we cry "for my religion" others are automatically required to submit..."oh, ok, well if its for religion then you go ahead and do as you like while the rest of the company complies to the directives"


To me, it's more about respecting their beliefs than bending over backwards for them. And while I am for the legalization of marijuana, I think your example would fall under my safety exception. You still have to abide by the laws that are designed to keep people safe. You are right, religion is a choice of sorts, but it is a one time choice. You make the choice of religion, and then you immerse yourself in it, and follow all of the rules. It's not something where you can decide when you are going to follow the rules and when you won't. If you do that, your belief is meaningless.
Guest
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 1:16:35 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
Jebru wrote:
LittleMissBitch wrote:
Jebru wrote:
LittleMissBitch wrote:
Quote:
If a person wears any type of head covering regularly for religious purposes, then their employer should make every effort to compromise.


why? why must we make special concessions for religion? ive never understood that.


I could just as easily ask why not? If you want to be an inclusive society, then you need to allow for the tenets of all religions. You can't complain about a society being restrictive for as an example, forcing a woman to wear a burqua wherever she goes, and then turn around and force another woman to not wear one in your society without being just as restrictive.


but we dont allow for all tenets...as far as i know smoking dope is illegal even if you are Rastafarian. and why is tenets of religion more important that my personal choices? and i dont complain that women choose to wear a burqua, and mind you it is their choice, they could throw it off at any time. im just saying i dont understand why when we cry "for my religion" others are automatically required to submit..."oh, ok, well if its for religion then you go ahead and do as you like while the rest of the company complies to the directives"


To me, it's more about respecting their beliefs than bending over backwards for them. And while I am for the legalization of marijuana, I think your example would fall under my safety exception. You still have to abide by the laws that are designed to keep people safe. You are right, religion is a choice of sorts, but it is a one time choice. You make the choice of religion, and then you immerse yourself in it, and follow all of the rules. It's not something where you can decide when you are going to follow the rules and when you won't. If you do that, your belief is meaningless.



isnt that just it though?! so many claim to be religious but they pick and choose from their religion what to follow. christ preached love and peace and turn the other cheek and i know a lot of christians that are pro death sentence and would love to see gays burn. but we are kissing religious hypocrisy again. we do, as a society, give more consideration to peoples religious needs than personal ones. so to get back to the matter at hand....NO it should nto matter that you wear whatever for religious beliefs..if the company rules are no hats then its no hats. go find a job where you can where your headdress or body cover or long skirt or whatever. furthermore, why would you want to work for a company that went against your religious tenents? just to buck the system, stir the pot..quick lawsuit? just sayin.
mercianknight
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 2:14:18 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/11/2009
Posts: 2,027
Location: whispering conspiratorially in your ear, Bermuda
MrNudiePants wrote:
Jebru wrote:


If a person wears any type of head covering regularly for religious purposes, then their employer should make every effort to compromise. The only exception to this for me is safety. A Sihk man, or for that matter, any other person should not be allowed to wear a head covering on a construction site if it means that they can not wear a helmet.


I can appreciate this line of thinking except for the fact that if you mandate that the employer MUST compromise, or "should make every effort" to, then you open up the field for all kinds of silly crap. Imagine a Middle-Eastern dancer suing a ballet company because they won't let her perform in a burkha. Under your guidelines, she'd win. Imagine an Amish man suing an over-the-road delivery company because they prefer to use trucks and won't hire his horse-drawn cart.

Sure, these are extreme examples, but... Not long ago, right near where I live, a group of African-American police officers sued their parent agency because the agency refused to allow them to wear dashiki's and dreadlocks on duty, in place of their readily-identifiable uniforms, and uniform hair cuts. This shit really happens!


Right on thumbup

Disney made no secret of the dress code and they have been consistent in its enforcement - she gets no sympathy from me. Do not bore me with any more crap about religious tolerance etc we are the most tolerant societies on the plant.

Check this out for example. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-10981494


"Whoa, lady, I only speak two languages, English and bad English." - Korben Dallas, from The Fifth Element

"If history repeats itself, and the unexpected always happens, how incapable must man be of learning from experience?" - George Bernard Shaw
Guest
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 6:40:55 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
The key here is the case at hand, from what I read the points are:

"She asked her supervisors if she could wear the scarf and was told they would consult with the corporate office, Qazi said. Boudlal didn't hear anything for two months and was then told she could wear a head scarf, but it had to be designed by Disneyland's costume department to comply with the Disney look, Qazi said.
She was fitted for a Disney-supplied head scarf but was not given a date when the garment would be finished and was told she couldn't wear her own hijab in the interim."

All sources read stated the same thing about Disney trying to accommodate her, albeit from the ladies own mouth and her attorney/advisor. There is also a Union dispute active at this time, where the Union is backing the Moroccan woman so there are some unseen players involved and juxtapositioning here that we are not privy to at the moment.

Point is that Disney would have not slightly acquiesced here if there was no loophole that the lady found in the language she read about in the Equal Opportunity Employment language on religious practice in the work place, or Disney did not see in their own contractual language.

I've seen enough frivolous lawsuits on contractual language and citizen self importance to bear this one too much mind. In the end, it's either black or white. No you can't wear this and that or yes you can. Make it clear and stop being so damn politically correct.
Jillicious
Posted: Thursday, August 19, 2010 6:59:24 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/28/2009
Posts: 1,293
MrNudiePants wrote:
When I open up my beachfront boutique, I'm gonna cater to the nudist crowd. All of my employees are going to be required to do their work naked. If they choose not to, then don't have to work for me. Just sayin'...


I could see how well that would work out with some of the waiters... "Excuse me sir, your penis has somehow found its way into my drink."
And also some of the waitresses... "Excuse me ma'am, would you mind removing your nipple from my food? Thanks."

Thousands of user submitted stories removed from the site. You are nothing without your users or their freely submitted stories.
MrNudiePants
Posted: Friday, August 20, 2010 5:02:10 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,191
Location: United States
Jillicious wrote:
MrNudiePants wrote:
When I open up my beachfront boutique, I'm gonna cater to the nudist crowd. All of my employees are going to be required to do their work naked. If they choose not to, then don't have to work for me. Just sayin'...


I could see how well that would work out with some of the waiters... "Excuse me sir, your penis has somehow found its way into my drink."
And also some of the waitresses... "Excuse me ma'am, would you mind removing your nipple from my food? Thanks."


It would not be a cafe, just a little boutique. I think our main sales loss leader would be sun block, with free installation as needed...
Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.