Muslim girl plans to sue Disney.
12 Feb 2011, 7:04 pm
ikorack wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
ikorack wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
ikorack wrote:
Well I don't see any reason why you would have access to complaints about a specific employee. Define general appearance, more especially in relation to Uniforms, which is too say how can you make a statement about her general appearance according to a uniform without observing the environment where she works as a whole?
EDIT: And even then how does your opinion reflect on what other demographics or even other people might view as out of place?
She is in costume even if she is not a character she is meant to blend into the background, so people know what is part of the show and what is not.
Why would you think a cancer patient wouldn't be distracting in a Disney setting? They would likely either transfer her somewhere out of the eyes of the customers or fire her if she found that lacking, although they might also consider temporarily retiring her to avoid the bad publicity which comes from firing someone so vulnerable.
And its likely true about the whole them not hiring disabled people, and they do have a valid point it might put a downer on some peoples enjoyment. Disney world is not meant to be a facsimile(that the right word?) of reality.
EDIT: And even then how does your opinion reflect on what other demographics or even other people might view as out of place?
She is in costume even if she is not a character she is meant to blend into the background, so people know what is part of the show and what is not.
Why would you think a cancer patient wouldn't be distracting in a Disney setting? They would likely either transfer her somewhere out of the eyes of the customers or fire her if she found that lacking, although they might also consider temporarily retiring her to avoid the bad publicity which comes from firing someone so vulnerable.
And its likely true about the whole them not hiring disabled people, and they do have a valid point it might put a downer on some peoples enjoyment. Disney world is not meant to be a facsimile(that the right word?) of reality.
Why do you think I meant I could access specific complaints? I'm saying that there has been no comment in the media to the effect that she cannot perform her job properly, and that no complaints about her performance have been mentioned or brought to light.
Lack of presence of the media doesn't really mean there are no complaints.
Quote:
I'm using the video posted in the OP as the basis for determining the kind of uniforms Disney employees wear. She does not look out of place in comparison to other Disney staff in similar roles. Her wearing an otherwise unremarkable headscarf does not make her "stand out" or create a confusing image where you might think she was "part of a show" or animatronic or a member of the public. Watch the video. Google some staff. She REALLY doesn't look much different to anyone else. And anyone who is busy staring at the housekeeping and menial staff is probably missing the point of Disney all-together. "Oh look honey, that girl is wearing a plain white scarf on her head. How freakishly out of place next to the Giant DUCK with no pants on and the dog who can't talk being walked by a dog who can, and all those robot pirates."
I don't think the video is inside Disney land, even if it is I don't think it supplies that much of a view anyways. It basically only shows the woman out of context. Even if it does not stand out as confusing it could still be argued as unprofessional to show religious tendencies in a work environment.
Quote:
It speaks volumes about society that the appearance of a "disabled person" somewhere like Disney would be a downer. Best to keep them out back eh? Where they won't be seen by the wholesome folks...But what about disabled visitors? Those poor little kids in the wheel-chairs? Won't they bring everyone down as well? Maybe they should be kept safely to one side, perhaps behind some sort of barrier.... or just not let in at all. Repellent.
*shrug* not something I came to argue against or for.
Quote:
And just because it needs repeating.. its only a scarf.
No if it was just a scarf she would be told to take it off and thats that. It is however a religious symbol so there is actually justified conflict. If it was just a scarf you would have no argument whatsoever.
And I don't remember anyone proposing to deport this woman, that would be a bit disappointing to see from an American.
If there were any vexatious complaints about her abilities I'm sure that they would have been dug up and thrown into the argument by now.
Your certainty doesn't really mean anything.
Quote:
And yes, people in this thread have been saying if she doesn't conform she should "go home."
Well then they should have thought about why their country was founded before they spoke.
ON the first comment: Would you like me to rephrase it so that semantics are not an issue? If there were vexatious complaints about this woman's work, then they would definitely have surfaced. I'm personally sure of this fact, and endless previous arguments about almost everything on every subject of any similarity support me in believing this. If her work were being affected by her head-wear in any meaningful manner then Disney themselves would have stated as much. "Her headdress keeps falling in the soup/gets caught in the Pirates cogs/whatever." If they had received any direct complaints from customers about her head-dress, they would have mentioned the fact to support their case.
But I do agree on your second point.
_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]
12 Feb 2011, 7:18 pm
Macbeth wrote:
ikorack wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
ikorack wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
ikorack wrote:
Well I don't see any reason why you would have access to complaints about a specific employee. Define general appearance, more especially in relation to Uniforms, which is too say how can you make a statement about her general appearance according to a uniform without observing the environment where she works as a whole?
EDIT: And even then how does your opinion reflect on what other demographics or even other people might view as out of place?
She is in costume even if she is not a character she is meant to blend into the background, so people know what is part of the show and what is not.
Why would you think a cancer patient wouldn't be distracting in a Disney setting? They would likely either transfer her somewhere out of the eyes of the customers or fire her if she found that lacking, although they might also consider temporarily retiring her to avoid the bad publicity which comes from firing someone so vulnerable.
And its likely true about the whole them not hiring disabled people, and they do have a valid point it might put a downer on some peoples enjoyment. Disney world is not meant to be a facsimile(that the right word?) of reality.
EDIT: And even then how does your opinion reflect on what other demographics or even other people might view as out of place?
She is in costume even if she is not a character she is meant to blend into the background, so people know what is part of the show and what is not.
Why would you think a cancer patient wouldn't be distracting in a Disney setting? They would likely either transfer her somewhere out of the eyes of the customers or fire her if she found that lacking, although they might also consider temporarily retiring her to avoid the bad publicity which comes from firing someone so vulnerable.
And its likely true about the whole them not hiring disabled people, and they do have a valid point it might put a downer on some peoples enjoyment. Disney world is not meant to be a facsimile(that the right word?) of reality.
Why do you think I meant I could access specific complaints? I'm saying that there has been no comment in the media to the effect that she cannot perform her job properly, and that no complaints about her performance have been mentioned or brought to light.
Lack of presence of the media doesn't really mean there are no complaints.
Quote:
I'm using the video posted in the OP as the basis for determining the kind of uniforms Disney employees wear. She does not look out of place in comparison to other Disney staff in similar roles. Her wearing an otherwise unremarkable headscarf does not make her "stand out" or create a confusing image where you might think she was "part of a show" or animatronic or a member of the public. Watch the video. Google some staff. She REALLY doesn't look much different to anyone else. And anyone who is busy staring at the housekeeping and menial staff is probably missing the point of Disney all-together. "Oh look honey, that girl is wearing a plain white scarf on her head. How freakishly out of place next to the Giant DUCK with no pants on and the dog who can't talk being walked by a dog who can, and all those robot pirates."
I don't think the video is inside Disney land, even if it is I don't think it supplies that much of a view anyways. It basically only shows the woman out of context. Even if it does not stand out as confusing it could still be argued as unprofessional to show religious tendencies in a work environment.
Quote:
It speaks volumes about society that the appearance of a "disabled person" somewhere like Disney would be a downer. Best to keep them out back eh? Where they won't be seen by the wholesome folks...But what about disabled visitors? Those poor little kids in the wheel-chairs? Won't they bring everyone down as well? Maybe they should be kept safely to one side, perhaps behind some sort of barrier.... or just not let in at all. Repellent.
*shrug* not something I came to argue against or for.
Quote:
And just because it needs repeating.. its only a scarf.
No if it was just a scarf she would be told to take it off and thats that. It is however a religious symbol so there is actually justified conflict. If it was just a scarf you would have no argument whatsoever.
And I don't remember anyone proposing to deport this woman, that would be a bit disappointing to see from an American.
If there were any vexatious complaints about her abilities I'm sure that they would have been dug up and thrown into the argument by now.
Your certainty doesn't really mean anything.
Quote:
And yes, people in this thread have been saying if she doesn't conform she should "go home."
Well then they should have thought about why their country was founded before they spoke.
ON the first comment: Would you like me to rephrase it so that semantics are not an issue? If there were vexatious complaints about this woman's work, then they would definitely have surfaced. I'm personally sure of this fact, and endless previous arguments about almost everything on every subject of any similarity support me in believing this. If her work were being affected by her head-wear in any meaningful manner then Disney themselves would have stated as much. "Her headdress keeps falling in the soup/gets caught in the Pirates cogs/whatever." If they had received any direct complaints from customers about her head-dress, they would have mentioned the fact to support their case.
Definitely why? Her case isn't exactly getting that much media attention, and even then you assume that media outlets would be able to obtain such complaints without Disney's cooperation which likely would not happen. Disney has to keep such things in the dark, if any complaints enter the field it will likely be in a court shut to the media. At this point Disney does not have to defend itself through the media.
If Disney aired any complaints it would be a sign of tolerance for performance issues, how is that something positive?
Quote:
But I do agree on your second point.
13 Feb 2011, 7:48 am
ikorack wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
ikorack wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
ikorack wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
ikorack wrote:
Well I don't see any reason why you would have access to complaints about a specific employee. Define general appearance, more especially in relation to Uniforms, which is too say how can you make a statement about her general appearance according to a uniform without observing the environment where she works as a whole?
EDIT: And even then how does your opinion reflect on what other demographics or even other people might view as out of place?
She is in costume even if she is not a character she is meant to blend into the background, so people know what is part of the show and what is not.
Why would you think a cancer patient wouldn't be distracting in a Disney setting? They would likely either transfer her somewhere out of the eyes of the customers or fire her if she found that lacking, although they might also consider temporarily retiring her to avoid the bad publicity which comes from firing someone so vulnerable.
And its likely true about the whole them not hiring disabled people, and they do have a valid point it might put a downer on some peoples enjoyment. Disney world is not meant to be a facsimile(that the right word?) of reality.
EDIT: And even then how does your opinion reflect on what other demographics or even other people might view as out of place?
She is in costume even if she is not a character she is meant to blend into the background, so people know what is part of the show and what is not.
Why would you think a cancer patient wouldn't be distracting in a Disney setting? They would likely either transfer her somewhere out of the eyes of the customers or fire her if she found that lacking, although they might also consider temporarily retiring her to avoid the bad publicity which comes from firing someone so vulnerable.
And its likely true about the whole them not hiring disabled people, and they do have a valid point it might put a downer on some peoples enjoyment. Disney world is not meant to be a facsimile(that the right word?) of reality.
Why do you think I meant I could access specific complaints? I'm saying that there has been no comment in the media to the effect that she cannot perform her job properly, and that no complaints about her performance have been mentioned or brought to light.
Lack of presence of the media doesn't really mean there are no complaints.
Quote:
I'm using the video posted in the OP as the basis for determining the kind of uniforms Disney employees wear. She does not look out of place in comparison to other Disney staff in similar roles. Her wearing an otherwise unremarkable headscarf does not make her "stand out" or create a confusing image where you might think she was "part of a show" or animatronic or a member of the public. Watch the video. Google some staff. She REALLY doesn't look much different to anyone else. And anyone who is busy staring at the housekeeping and menial staff is probably missing the point of Disney all-together. "Oh look honey, that girl is wearing a plain white scarf on her head. How freakishly out of place next to the Giant DUCK with no pants on and the dog who can't talk being walked by a dog who can, and all those robot pirates."
I don't think the video is inside Disney land, even if it is I don't think it supplies that much of a view anyways. It basically only shows the woman out of context. Even if it does not stand out as confusing it could still be argued as unprofessional to show religious tendencies in a work environment.
Quote:
It speaks volumes about society that the appearance of a "disabled person" somewhere like Disney would be a downer. Best to keep them out back eh? Where they won't be seen by the wholesome folks...But what about disabled visitors? Those poor little kids in the wheel-chairs? Won't they bring everyone down as well? Maybe they should be kept safely to one side, perhaps behind some sort of barrier.... or just not let in at all. Repellent.
*shrug* not something I came to argue against or for.
Quote:
And just because it needs repeating.. its only a scarf.
No if it was just a scarf she would be told to take it off and thats that. It is however a religious symbol so there is actually justified conflict. If it was just a scarf you would have no argument whatsoever.
And I don't remember anyone proposing to deport this woman, that would be a bit disappointing to see from an American.
If there were any vexatious complaints about her abilities I'm sure that they would have been dug up and thrown into the argument by now.
Your certainty doesn't really mean anything.
Quote:
And yes, people in this thread have been saying if she doesn't conform she should "go home."
Well then they should have thought about why their country was founded before they spoke.
ON the first comment: Would you like me to rephrase it so that semantics are not an issue? If there were vexatious complaints about this woman's work, then they would definitely have surfaced. I'm personally sure of this fact, and endless previous arguments about almost everything on every subject of any similarity support me in believing this. If her work were being affected by her head-wear in any meaningful manner then Disney themselves would have stated as much. "Her headdress keeps falling in the soup/gets caught in the Pirates cogs/whatever." If they had received any direct complaints from customers about her head-dress, they would have mentioned the fact to support their case.
Definitely why? Her case isn't exactly getting that much media attention, and even then you assume that media outlets would be able to obtain such complaints without Disney's cooperation which likely would not happen. Disney has to keep such things in the dark, if any complaints enter the field it will likely be in a court shut to the media. At this point Disney does not have to defend itself through the media.
If Disney aired any complaints it would be a sign of tolerance for performance issues, how is that something positive?
Quote:
But I do agree on your second point.
How about "She was removed from a front-line post because her behaviour was unacceptable, not because she wears a headscarf." If anything like that were the case, they would have used it rather than say "Yes, its her religious hat we hate." because its an easier and less controversial.
But we start to digress. The headscarf clearly does not affect her ability to work. So why exctly is it so very wrong that she wear it? I've yet to hear a reason other than "negative image" yet it seems a bit fuzzy as to what that might actually BE.
_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]
13 Feb 2011, 2:00 pm
Macbeth wrote:
ikorack wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
ikorack wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
ikorack wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
ikorack wrote:
Well I don't see any reason why you would have access to complaints about a specific employee. Define general appearance, more especially in relation to Uniforms, which is too say how can you make a statement about her general appearance according to a uniform without observing the environment where she works as a whole?
EDIT: And even then how does your opinion reflect on what other demographics or even other people might view as out of place?
She is in costume even if she is not a character she is meant to blend into the background, so people know what is part of the show and what is not.
Why would you think a cancer patient wouldn't be distracting in a Disney setting? They would likely either transfer her somewhere out of the eyes of the customers or fire her if she found that lacking, although they might also consider temporarily retiring her to avoid the bad publicity which comes from firing someone so vulnerable.
And its likely true about the whole them not hiring disabled people, and they do have a valid point it might put a downer on some peoples enjoyment. Disney world is not meant to be a facsimile(that the right word?) of reality.
EDIT: And even then how does your opinion reflect on what other demographics or even other people might view as out of place?
She is in costume even if she is not a character she is meant to blend into the background, so people know what is part of the show and what is not.
Why would you think a cancer patient wouldn't be distracting in a Disney setting? They would likely either transfer her somewhere out of the eyes of the customers or fire her if she found that lacking, although they might also consider temporarily retiring her to avoid the bad publicity which comes from firing someone so vulnerable.
And its likely true about the whole them not hiring disabled people, and they do have a valid point it might put a downer on some peoples enjoyment. Disney world is not meant to be a facsimile(that the right word?) of reality.
Why do you think I meant I could access specific complaints? I'm saying that there has been no comment in the media to the effect that she cannot perform her job properly, and that no complaints about her performance have been mentioned or brought to light.
Lack of presence of the media doesn't really mean there are no complaints.
Quote:
I'm using the video posted in the OP as the basis for determining the kind of uniforms Disney employees wear. She does not look out of place in comparison to other Disney staff in similar roles. Her wearing an otherwise unremarkable headscarf does not make her "stand out" or create a confusing image where you might think she was "part of a show" or animatronic or a member of the public. Watch the video. Google some staff. She REALLY doesn't look much different to anyone else. And anyone who is busy staring at the housekeeping and menial staff is probably missing the point of Disney all-together. "Oh look honey, that girl is wearing a plain white scarf on her head. How freakishly out of place next to the Giant DUCK with no pants on and the dog who can't talk being walked by a dog who can, and all those robot pirates."
I don't think the video is inside Disney land, even if it is I don't think it supplies that much of a view anyways. It basically only shows the woman out of context. Even if it does not stand out as confusing it could still be argued as unprofessional to show religious tendencies in a work environment.
Quote:
It speaks volumes about society that the appearance of a "disabled person" somewhere like Disney would be a downer. Best to keep them out back eh? Where they won't be seen by the wholesome folks...But what about disabled visitors? Those poor little kids in the wheel-chairs? Won't they bring everyone down as well? Maybe they should be kept safely to one side, perhaps behind some sort of barrier.... or just not let in at all. Repellent.
*shrug* not something I came to argue against or for.
Quote:
And just because it needs repeating.. its only a scarf.
No if it was just a scarf she would be told to take it off and thats that. It is however a religious symbol so there is actually justified conflict. If it was just a scarf you would have no argument whatsoever.
And I don't remember anyone proposing to deport this woman, that would be a bit disappointing to see from an American.
If there were any vexatious complaints about her abilities I'm sure that they would have been dug up and thrown into the argument by now.
Your certainty doesn't really mean anything.
Quote:
And yes, people in this thread have been saying if she doesn't conform she should "go home."
Well then they should have thought about why their country was founded before they spoke.
ON the first comment: Would you like me to rephrase it so that semantics are not an issue? If there were vexatious complaints about this woman's work, then they would definitely have surfaced. I'm personally sure of this fact, and endless previous arguments about almost everything on every subject of any similarity support me in believing this. If her work were being affected by her head-wear in any meaningful manner then Disney themselves would have stated as much. "Her headdress keeps falling in the soup/gets caught in the Pirates cogs/whatever." If they had received any direct complaints from customers about her head-dress, they would have mentioned the fact to support their case.
Definitely why? Her case isn't exactly getting that much media attention, and even then you assume that media outlets would be able to obtain such complaints without Disney's cooperation which likely would not happen. Disney has to keep such things in the dark, if any complaints enter the field it will likely be in a court shut to the media. At this point Disney does not have to defend itself through the media.
If Disney aired any complaints it would be a sign of tolerance for performance issues, how is that something positive?
Quote:
But I do agree on your second point.
How about "She was removed from a front-line post because her behaviour was unacceptable, not because she wears a headscarf." If anything like that were the case, they would have used it rather than say "Yes, its her religious hat we hate." because its an easier and less controversial.
But the headscarf is part of her behavior and so that is why she is having issues with them.(And I doubt they are trying to move her because they hate her religion) And I already gave good reasoning for why Disney wouldn't air out its dirty laundry in a public arena.
Quote:
But we start to digress. The headscarf clearly does not affect her ability to work. So why exctly is it so very wrong that she wear it? I've yet to hear a reason other than "negative image" yet it seems a bit fuzzy as to what that might actually BE.
I explained exactly what negative image might mean in this context. Go reread some earlier posts if you have already forgotten.
22 Feb 2011, 8:01 am
Macbeth wrote:
ikorack wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
John_Browning wrote:
Craig28 wrote:
If they wear head scarves and work with machines and it accidentially came loose and got stuck in some machinery, then there would be some serious things being brought up. But anyway, Indian people always wear their turbans properly and if one did come lose, then that only proves to show that it was done on purpose in order to invoke a lawsuit.
Turbans and headscarves would be hazardous to wear during wood and metal work. Especially welding or using a cutting torch where anything put on your head has to be non flammable.
Curious then how Indian society has managed to last so long, through wars and industrialisation and everything else with "unsafe" headgear....
The Sikhs are not a large portion of Indian society. I'm not sure if this was true during their industrialization, I don't even know if they have passed industrialization yet.
EDIT: Also she served as a hostess allowing her head scarves could be argued to have a negative impact on public image, very important for Disney, especially its park. Also has anyone heard of the accommodations Disney offered and she denied?
Far as I can see, Sikhs get on quite well in all manner of tasks whilst en-turbanned.
Wait..'how is a headscarf going to create a negative impact on public image? Its just a kind of hat.
It is not that wearing something on your head makes you accident prone. And sikhs are minority and therefore it would not affect Indian economy if their turban affected their work. Sikhs are a prosperous community and their proportion in armed forces is huge. The point is that a muslim demanding anything on the basis of religion should be looked at cautiously because of what their religion teaches. The ultimate demand is submission of non-Muslims to allah or second class status if not extermination and the creation of an Islamic state. While sikhs demanding turban does not portends any thing bad. In fact the reason Guru Gobind Singh Ji founded the concept of khalsa, which requires sikhs to not cut their hairs, was to fight muslim religious opression of hindus and sikhs in India. So sign of turban can assure you that that guy can lay down his life for the protection of one's rights. I appreciate that that idealism is practiced by very few but still its foundations are completely different to that of head scarf.
Last edited by daspie on 22 Feb 2011, 8:15 am, edited 2 times in total.
22 Feb 2011, 8:07 am
murphycop wrote:
EnglishInvader wrote:
Where do you draw the line? Let's say, for the sake of argument, that a man works on a building site and his new religious belief dictates that he cannot wear a protective hat because to protect oneself against danger is to disregard the will of God i.e. if God means for him to be hit on the head by a brick, he should suffer the blow in full force or burn in Hell for all eternity. If this man gets the sack as a result of following his religion, can he sue for religious discrimination or can his employer legitimately sack him for refusing to comply with health and safety regulations?
Exactly. Thats why its not simpler to start wasting time trying to make sure every company lets people where a headscarf. And the headscarf couldn't be decorated, cause that would offend them too. I like how a certain person says its just a headscarf, and silly rules are made to be broken. Isn't it a pretty silly religious rule that they "HAVE" to wear the headscarf?
I think any secular government should be strict with Muslims as wearing the sign of crucifix in case of Christian, wearing the sign of David in case of Jews, wearing turban in case of Sikhs, wearing mark on forehead or wearing a thread on wrist in case of Hindus is completely different to muslim wearing their signs as that is beginning of fundamentalism, violence and civil wars. History is a witness.
22 Feb 2011, 8:10 am
Macbeth wrote:
Did you see the rest of her uniform? A waist-coat. Like the other woman cited as an example. It is in NO WAY a negative image. Its not as if she demanded that her Minnie Mouse costume involve a Burkha.
O.K. come on Macbeth, first of all a rule is rule. It does not matter what rest of her uniform is. Secondly, it is quite straightforward to realize that if she insists on head scarf to the level that she can sue the Disney then she would also be quite unhappy with wearing something which bares her legs. Then she might ask to let her wear something fuller. Later, she will insists on wearing burkha as her religious right.
Last edited by daspie on 24 Feb 2011, 12:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
23 Feb 2011, 10:05 pm
There are too many restrictions and laws on people to keep control. This is another example. People should be allowed to express themselves in a free world but this isn't the case. Disney fears that it would lose people/money if they had a girl wearing an Islam hat. This also smashes right into religion and why the need for it, I do not know. If you cannot find The Source through yourself then you are blind to the human condition anyway.
24 Feb 2011, 12:25 pm
I don't think religious people should have special privileges or else that could mean I can refuse to wear my work shirt to work and prefer to wear my regular tops and have it be my religion. When you get a job, you are to abide to their rules and to their uniform rules. She wasn't wearing that thing when she had the job and then decided to wear it all of a sudden. Disney was nice enough to try and accommodate her but she refused it. If she wore a hat that happened to be part of her uniform, then she could have worn it under her hat and no one would have known what she had under there.
Honestly I don't understand religion and why people feel they must follow it.
24 Feb 2011, 12:28 pm
consider also her monetary incentive.
Disney has a perfect track record of suing people straight to court and always settling outside of court when they get sued.
So this girl probably worked it out in her head...
muslim+religious discrimination lawsuit+ disney = i get fat out of court settlement from mickey mouse!
24 Feb 2011, 2:04 pm
SaNcheNuSS wrote:
There are too many restrictions and laws on people to keep control. This is another example. People should be allowed to express themselves in a free world but this isn't the case. Disney fears that it would lose people/money if they had a girl wearing an Islam hat. This also smashes right into religion and why the need for it, I do not know. If you cannot find The Source through yourself then you are blind to the human condition anyway.
In England, you can express yourself if you're a woman, Muslim, gay, couloured etc, but not otherwise. But I agree, everyone should be able to express themselves. As should Disney.
_________________
'Ave we had a national f**king stroke!??
25 Feb 2011, 12:31 am
League_Girl wrote:
I don't think religious people should have special privileges or else that could mean I can refuse to wear my work shirt to work and prefer to wear my regular tops and have it be my religion. When you get a job, you are to abide to their rules and to their uniform rules. She wasn't wearing that thing when she had the job and then decided to wear it all of a sudden. Disney was nice enough to try and accommodate her but she refused it. If she wore a hat that happened to be part of her uniform, then she could have worn it under her hat and no one would have known what she had under there.
Honestly I don't understand religion and why people feel they must follow it.
Honestly I don't understand religion and why people feel they must follow it.
I agree with it.
25 Feb 2011, 5:11 am
ikorack wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
ikorack wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
ikorack wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
ikorack wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
ikorack wrote:
Well I don't see any reason why you would have access to complaints about a specific employee. Define general appearance, more especially in relation to Uniforms, which is too say how can you make a statement about her general appearance according to a uniform without observing the environment where she works as a whole?
EDIT: And even then how does your opinion reflect on what other demographics or even other people might view as out of place?
She is in costume even if she is not a character she is meant to blend into the background, so people know what is part of the show and what is not.
Why would you think a cancer patient wouldn't be distracting in a Disney setting? They would likely either transfer her somewhere out of the eyes of the customers or fire her if she found that lacking, although they might also consider temporarily retiring her to avoid the bad publicity which comes from firing someone so vulnerable.
And its likely true about the whole them not hiring disabled people, and they do have a valid point it might put a downer on some peoples enjoyment. Disney world is not meant to be a facsimile(that the right word?) of reality.
EDIT: And even then how does your opinion reflect on what other demographics or even other people might view as out of place?
She is in costume even if she is not a character she is meant to blend into the background, so people know what is part of the show and what is not.
Why would you think a cancer patient wouldn't be distracting in a Disney setting? They would likely either transfer her somewhere out of the eyes of the customers or fire her if she found that lacking, although they might also consider temporarily retiring her to avoid the bad publicity which comes from firing someone so vulnerable.
And its likely true about the whole them not hiring disabled people, and they do have a valid point it might put a downer on some peoples enjoyment. Disney world is not meant to be a facsimile(that the right word?) of reality.
Why do you think I meant I could access specific complaints? I'm saying that there has been no comment in the media to the effect that she cannot perform her job properly, and that no complaints about her performance have been mentioned or brought to light.
Lack of presence of the media doesn't really mean there are no complaints.
Quote:
I'm using the video posted in the OP as the basis for determining the kind of uniforms Disney employees wear. She does not look out of place in comparison to other Disney staff in similar roles. Her wearing an otherwise unremarkable headscarf does not make her "stand out" or create a confusing image where you might think she was "part of a show" or animatronic or a member of the public. Watch the video. Google some staff. She REALLY doesn't look much different to anyone else. And anyone who is busy staring at the housekeeping and menial staff is probably missing the point of Disney all-together. "Oh look honey, that girl is wearing a plain white scarf on her head. How freakishly out of place next to the Giant DUCK with no pants on and the dog who can't talk being walked by a dog who can, and all those robot pirates."
I don't think the video is inside Disney land, even if it is I don't think it supplies that much of a view anyways. It basically only shows the woman out of context. Even if it does not stand out as confusing it could still be argued as unprofessional to show religious tendencies in a work environment.
Quote:
It speaks volumes about society that the appearance of a "disabled person" somewhere like Disney would be a downer. Best to keep them out back eh? Where they won't be seen by the wholesome folks...But what about disabled visitors? Those poor little kids in the wheel-chairs? Won't they bring everyone down as well? Maybe they should be kept safely to one side, perhaps behind some sort of barrier.... or just not let in at all. Repellent.
*shrug* not something I came to argue against or for.
Quote:
And just because it needs repeating.. its only a scarf.
No if it was just a scarf she would be told to take it off and thats that. It is however a religious symbol so there is actually justified conflict. If it was just a scarf you would have no argument whatsoever.
And I don't remember anyone proposing to deport this woman, that would be a bit disappointing to see from an American.
If there were any vexatious complaints about her abilities I'm sure that they would have been dug up and thrown into the argument by now.
Your certainty doesn't really mean anything.
Quote:
And yes, people in this thread have been saying if she doesn't conform she should "go home."
Well then they should have thought about why their country was founded before they spoke.
ON the first comment: Would you like me to rephrase it so that semantics are not an issue? If there were vexatious complaints about this woman's work, then they would definitely have surfaced. I'm personally sure of this fact, and endless previous arguments about almost everything on every subject of any similarity support me in believing this. If her work were being affected by her head-wear in any meaningful manner then Disney themselves would have stated as much. "Her headdress keeps falling in the soup/gets caught in the Pirates cogs/whatever." If they had received any direct complaints from customers about her head-dress, they would have mentioned the fact to support their case.
Definitely why? Her case isn't exactly getting that much media attention, and even then you assume that media outlets would be able to obtain such complaints without Disney's cooperation which likely would not happen. Disney has to keep such things in the dark, if any complaints enter the field it will likely be in a court shut to the media. At this point Disney does not have to defend itself through the media.
If Disney aired any complaints it would be a sign of tolerance for performance issues, how is that something positive?
Quote:
But I do agree on your second point.
How about "She was removed from a front-line post because her behaviour was unacceptable, not because she wears a headscarf." If anything like that were the case, they would have used it rather than say "Yes, its her religious hat we hate." because its an easier and less controversial.
But the headscarf is part of her behavior and so that is why she is having issues with them.(And I doubt they are trying to move her because they hate her religion) And I already gave good reasoning for why Disney wouldn't air out its dirty laundry in a public arena.
Quote:
But we start to digress. The headscarf clearly does not affect her ability to work. So why exctly is it so very wrong that she wear it? I've yet to hear a reason other than "negative image" yet it seems a bit fuzzy as to what that might actually BE.
I explained exactly what negative image might mean in this context. Go reread some earlier posts if you have already forgotten.
Sorry to be a knob but this was worth quoting to see a mega-quote continue
As you were gents
26 Feb 2011, 7:42 pm
I don't think this is really a matter about religious discrimination. It is about work-attire.
I can't go to work wearing my hat. Why is it that she is able to go to work wearing her head scarf? If it makes her feel that uncomfortable to take it off, she shouldn't have accepted the job. Disney told her before hand that the type of position would require her to take it off.
It's not discrimination if Disney requires EVERYONE to follow the same rules whether they are white, black, religious, atheist, human, extraterrestrial, etc.
26 Feb 2011, 9:49 pm
techn0teen wrote:
I don't think this is really a matter about religious discrimination. It is about work-attire.
I can't go to work wearing my hat. Why is it that she is able to go to work wearing her head scarf? If it makes her feel that uncomfortable to take it off, she shouldn't have accepted the job. Disney told her before hand that the type of position would require her to take it off.
It's not discrimination if Disney requires EVERYONE to follow the same rules whether they are white, black, religious, atheist, human, extraterrestrial, etc.
I can't go to work wearing my hat. Why is it that she is able to go to work wearing her head scarf? If it makes her feel that uncomfortable to take it off, she shouldn't have accepted the job. Disney told her before hand that the type of position would require her to take it off.
It's not discrimination if Disney requires EVERYONE to follow the same rules whether they are white, black, religious, atheist, human, extraterrestrial, etc.
EXACTLY!! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !
_________________
'Ave we had a national f**king stroke!??
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Gina Carano Vs Disney Part 2 |
07 Feb 2024, 4:13 pm |
| Florida judge tosses out Disney's lawsuit against DeSantis |
31 Jan 2024, 6:13 pm |
