Muslim worker demands to wear head scarf with costume

[nab 74]

in this particular instance, it's part of being an american. other people have rights, whether you like them or not. if you don't like this aspect of the us, then go about the proper channels to change it. instead of banging on and on in an internet forum.

really? then why did a muslim woman win her case against alamo rent a car when they wouldnt let her wear a headscarf while waiting on customers? why do muslim men in newark's police dept have the right to wear beards for religious reasons even though it goes against their dress code? what are your qualifications vs. those of the ruling judges there?

i would hazard a guess on the alamo thing... she previously wore for 2yrs during Ramadan? if the company has always allowed it then now saying no it seems targeted to her specifically and that's a big no-no.

and just for the record, i have never heard the girl in question was a 'restaurant hostess'... in every report i've seen that mentioned what the job is they say she is a cast member 'on stage'. i'm curious where you got the hostess thing, i'd like to read that article, perhaps it has more info.

thanks

[thongd4me 69]

http://www.breitbart.tv/muslim-employee-disney-banned-head-scarf/

When you work in a themed restaurant (as most all of Disney's are) should you be have the right to wear additional items such as turbans head scarfs, burkas ,,just because they are important to you?

I can imagine Mickey with a WWI German "spiked" helmet.

Achtung, boys & girls!

[Sgt. McGee 27]

and just for the record, i have never heard the girl in question was a 'restaurant hostess'... in every report i've seen that mentioned what the job is they say she is a cast member 'on stage'. i'm curious where you got the hostess thing, i'd like to read that article, perhaps it has more info.

The confusion may relate to the fact that Disney refers to *all* of its staff as "Cast Members" and considers anything in public view to be "on stage". They have very, very strict rules around how people behave "on stage" and have a number of policies enforced to maintain their image (for instance, there are NEVER 2 instances of the same character "on stage" even if they're at opposite ends of the park.... just in case.

I wonder if Google adwords has a way to get this thread set up so that I could get a nickel every time someone threw out the word "bigot"? Hal and Sandoinista would be contributing mightily to my happy hour fund.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

except it doesn't work that way, except in yours, and other bigots' heads. the right to have your religious beliefs reasonably accommodated to trump a private business' rights to deny someone's religious headscarf because of their constructed dress code.

Quite with the bigot BS! I would care less if I was renting a car and the gal at the counter was wearing a head scarf. I would care if I went to Disneyland and Mini Mouse was wearing one. As you yourself have said context matters. These two scenarios are distinct. Now if the rental car agency had a specific uniform theme and a head scarf would clash with it I would say the company had a right to demand adherence to the dress code as well. I had to wear a pink shirt for years working at a bakery. Didn't once think it was a violation of my rights it was a condition of my work place uniform dress code.

[HAL 9000 96]

The confusion may relate to the fact that Disney refers to *all* of its staff as "Cast Members" and considers anything in public view to be "on stage". They have very, very strict rules around how people behave "on stage" and have a number of policies enforced to maintain their image (for instance, there are NEVER 2 instances of the same character "on stage" even if they're at opposite ends of the park.... just in case.

I wonder if Google adwords has a way to get this thread set up so that I could get a nickel every time someone threw out the word "bigot"? Hal and Sandoinista would be contributing mightily to my happy hour fund.

If good beer is involved, you're sharing.

Quite with the bigot BS! I would care less if I was renting a car and the gal at the counter was wearing a head scarf. I would care if I went to Disneyland and Mini Mouse was wearing one. As you yourself have said context matters. These two scenarios are distinct. Now if the rental car agency had a specific uniform theme and a head scarf would clash with it I would say the company had a right to demand adherence to the dress code as well. I had to wear a pink shirt for years working at a bakery. Didn't once think it was a violation of my rights it was a condition of my work place uniform dress code.

Minnie wearing a headscarf?

[Ban Hammer 13,137]

why not let her wear her headscarf, but transfer her to being mickey mouse, which is a complete costume?

[HAL 9000 96]

why not let her wear her headscarf, but transfer her to being mickey mouse, which is a complete costume?

That would be interesting... too bad we can't see the payscale for character cast members. It might be a promotion.

[Peikko 1,575]

If your only consideration is that the person wishing to wear a headscarf is being contrary, that they 'want' something different for some cosmetic reason, then clearly they have no leg to stand on - but wearing the headscarf is not equivalent to finding the costume ugly or not wishing to conform, it is a religious practice - or that is the contention. If it is deemed a religious practice then not allowing it, unless it materially effects the performance of the employees duties is discriminatory and religious discrimination is unacceptable in the work place - private companies are not exempt from that, as they are not exempt from other forms of discrimination.

[Danno 1,228]

I suspect next season when she returns to work she will insist that she also be permitted to wear slacks under her skit to cover her legs.

If she doesn't make this demand... the next "trouble maker" will.

[Peikko 1,575]

I suspect next season when she returns to work she will insist that she also be permitted to wear slacks under her skit to cover her legs.

If she doesn't make this demand... the next "trouble maker" will.

Who gave you the right to demean someone you don't know based on your assessment of their level of sincerity as regards their religious customs and practices? Why can't you take this at face value? Is it because it involves the religious practices of a faith you don't agree with? I guess it is easier for me because I favour no faith, they are all equally nonsensical to me - however I do understand that religious discrimination is unacceptable.

[HAL 9000 96]

Who gave you the right to demean someone you don't know based on your assessment of their level of sincerity as regards their religious customs and practices? Why can't you take this at face value? Is it because it involves the religious practices of a faith you don't agree with? I guess it is easier for me because I favour no faith, they are all equally nonsensical to me - however I do understand that religious discrimination is unacceptable.

Because diversity and multiculturalism to someone like Danno is 'the new racism.'

We can take that at face value to epitomize that side of the argument that hides in subtleties that fool very few.

[slim 1,514]

religious discrimination is unacceptable.

Discrimination is.

However, making special concessions is not required in most states and not too many folks would deem it acceptable.

[Danno 1,228]

Who gave you the right to demean someone you don't know based on your assessment of their level of sincerity as regards their religious customs and practices? Why can't you take this at face value? Is it because it involves the religious practices of a faith you don't agree with? I guess it is easier for me because I favour no faith, they are all equally nonsensical to me - however I do understand that religious discrimination is unacceptable.

You missed the ball again.

here let me pitch it slower.

After agreeing to the dress code and then working for several seasons under it she "discovered" a need to add a head covering to her costume.

It's not a stretch to suppose next season her faith might require her to be more modest......as many Muslims are.

This has nothing to do with our differing faiths Cleo on the whole I have a lot more in common with Most Muslims than I do with far left atheists like you

This is about Disney trying to create an atmosphere through costume. BY allowing this lady to alter the costume it opens the door for others too as well.

The rights of her and others to follow their faith should not dominate...... ultimately ruin these settings.

Yes we can chalk this up to another daily example of how Diversity has a big down side... and it only seems to grow as these conflicts are on the front pages every day.

Because diversity and multiculturalism to someone like Danno is 'the new racism.'

We can take that at face value to epitomize that side of the argument that hides in subtleties that fool very few.

DId you fart again?

When doing so it's polite to excuse yourself.

FU

[The_Dude 1,142]

I haven't read the entirety of this thread, but I have been following the story. I find the womans outrage about not being allowed to wear a hijab to be disingenuous. Why now? She is an adult with a family and has never felt the compunction to wear one in the past. As to whether or not she is allowed to wear it, I suppose a lot of that is dependant upon her employment contract. If she signed a contract that delineated a strict dress code, then she has to abide by her contract, or suffer the consequences.

[HAL 9000 96]

You missed the ball again.

here let me pitch it slower.

After agreeing to the dress code and then working for several seasons under it she "discovered" a need to add a head covering to her costume.

It's not a stretch to suppose next season her faith might require her to be more modest......as many Muslims are.

This has nothing to do with our differing faiths Cleo on the whole I have a lot more in common with Most Muslims than I do with far left atheists like you

This is about Disney trying to create an atmosphere through costume. BY allowing this lady to alter the costume it opens the door for others too as well.

The rights of her and others to follow their faith should not dominate...... ultimately ruin these settings.

Yes we can chalk this up to another daily example of how Diversity has a big down side... and it only seems to grow as these conflicts are on the front pages every day.

DId you fart again?

When doing so it's polite to excuse yourself.

FU

Danno, you fool noone.

I haven't read the entirety of this thread, but I have been following the story. I find the womans outrage about not being allowed to wear a hijab to be disingenuous. Why now? She is an adult with a family and has never felt the compunction to wear one in the past. As to whether or not she is allowed to wear it, I suppose a lot of that is dependant upon her employment contract. If she signed a contract that delineated a strict dress code, then she has to abide by her contract, or suffer the consequences.

Yes, we covered this a few pages back. She entered an agreement willingly. Her choice of venue to effect change is odd, IMO, but her case *may* have some merit.