Page 4 of 8 [ 127 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

10 Feb 2011, 3:50 pm

ruveyn wrote:
The head scarf violated the employer's dress code. End of story.

ruveyn


I beg to differ. Gone are the days when an employer could simply say, "my way or the highway." At a minimum, the employer must demonstrate that the dress code is a bona fide requirement of the position, and that the dress code cannot accommodate the religious headgear or the beard of the employee.

Disney has, to some extent, protected itself by characterizing its employees as cast members and their uniforms as costumes. But even here, just attaching the label to an employee does not necessarily mean that their function is truly that of a performing artist.


_________________
--James


Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

10 Feb 2011, 5:41 pm

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.


_________________
"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]


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

10 Feb 2011, 5:52 pm

visagrunt wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
The head scarf violated the employer's dress code. End of story.

ruveyn


I beg to differ. Gone are the days when an employer could simply say, "my way or the highway." At a minimum, the employer must demonstrate that the dress code is a bona fide requirement of the position, and that the dress code cannot accommodate the religious headgear or the beard of the employee.

Disney has, to some extent, protected itself by characterizing its employees as cast members and their uniforms as costumes. But even here, just attaching the label to an employee does not necessarily mean that their function is truly that of a performing artist.


Quote the law backing up your assertion.

Reference to case law pertaining to what private employers may impose on their workers would be appreciated.

ruveyn



EnglishInvader
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 997
Location: Hertfordshire, UK

10 Feb 2011, 6:27 pm

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?



EnglishInvader
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 997
Location: Hertfordshire, UK

10 Feb 2011, 6:28 pm

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?



EnglishInvader
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 997
Location: Hertfordshire, UK

10 Feb 2011, 6:29 pm

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?



Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

10 Feb 2011, 7:10 pm

She wants special privileges. She should be told where to go.



ikorack
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,870

10 Feb 2011, 8:18 pm

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.


You misunderstand me my main point was that the Sikh minority's influence is not large enough to hinder the development of Indian society. aka it was not a comment on the practicality of their beliefs but of your overestimation of their impact as a group.

Unless she is part of some display with a near eastern theme her head covering might confuse if it is the context of a show.



murphycop
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,134

10 Feb 2011, 8:27 pm

AceOfSpades wrote:
Holy wtf if you're in another country you have to adapt to it to some extent. This is just ridiculous, I heard of some guy a long time ago who didn't want to wear a helmet cuz that means he would have to take off his turban. I know for a fact it's a multicultural nation but goddamn man it's not like you have to be such a tight ass.

What's next, the police department ends up getting sued cuz seat belts are sacrilegious? :roll:


You would think so. But we have to adapt nowdays to bend over backwards for Muslims and such. We musn't offend them in any shape or form.

Stuff like that is happening already.


_________________
'Ave we had a national f**king stroke!??


murphycop
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,134

10 Feb 2011, 8:39 pm

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?


_________________
'Ave we had a national f**king stroke!??


Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

11 Feb 2011, 6:22 am

ikorack wrote:
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.


You misunderstand me my main point was that the Sikh minority's influence is not large enough to hinder the development of Indian society. aka it was not a comment on the practicality of their beliefs but of your overestimation of their impact as a group.

Unless she is part of some display with a near eastern theme her head covering might confuse if it is the context of a show.


And I repeat: Sikhs operate quite well on a day to day basis in society wearing turbans, and always have. Indian society might not collapse without them, but that doesn't change the fact that they still exist within it without an undue amount of head injuries.

And that's not "negative image", its the possibility that someone might confuse her with another Disney employee dressed in costume, which is unlikely if the rest of her uniform is ..uniform. I wanted to know what exactly is negative about a variant of hat.


_________________
"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]


Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

11 Feb 2011, 6:54 am

I'll conflate most of the rest of the posts into one:

To those who think this is an attack by Islam, that she should "go home", that we are "bending over backwards for Muslims" and a variety of other dubious responses: it is a headscarf. She voluntarily joined the Disney Corporation. How hardline could she possibly be?

Anybody would think she had threatened to bomb the Pirate of the Caribbean Ride if they didn't immediately change the songs to the Muezzin, and build a Mosque over the top of the FairyTale Castle.

Some people need to calm down. They are so busy ranting about nothing that they fail to see where Religious fervour IS a problem (like documented Hate lessons in faith schools.)

Also in the OP video: about 1:03....the commentary mentions staff wearing uniforms, and shows footage of a staff member IN uniform..with her hair in a right mess. Then they cut to the rather well-turned out Muslim girl in a headscarf. I know which one looks better dressed. So, if I am to be served by a well-turned out young asian lady in a headscarf, or a blobby white woman who hasn't encountered a comb...I'm going with the former. (Also, what "role" is the fat woman "playing" exactly? I think she just wrecked my Disney experience...)

The ONLY thing anyone needs to worry about when talking of Islam is requiring people who are NOT of Islam to engage in Islamic practice. So when someone demands that ALL women at Disney must wear a headscarf, THEN you have a problem. When someone demands that ALL kneel to Mecca, there is a problem. When someone chooses to pray to Mecca themselves, its a non-issue.

Maybe the House of Mouse should make a crappy cartoon film with an eastern subject and broaden the understanding a bit?


_________________
"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]


EnglishInvader
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 997
Location: Hertfordshire, UK

11 Feb 2011, 7:26 am

It's not as though the Disney canon doesn't have its share of ethnic minorities. Why not put her in Aladdin World as a lady in waiting to Princess Jasmine?



ikorack
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,870

11 Feb 2011, 9:40 am

Macbeth wrote:
ikorack wrote:
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.


You misunderstand me my main point was that the Sikh minority's influence is not large enough to hinder the development of Indian society. aka it was not a comment on the practicality of their beliefs but of your overestimation of their impact as a group.

Unless she is part of some display with a near eastern theme her head covering might confuse if it is the context of a show.


And I repeat: Sikhs operate quite well on a day to day basis in society wearing turbans, and always have. Indian society might not collapse without them, but that doesn't change the fact that they still exist within it without an undue amount of head injuries.


Your statement implied that they somehow impact Indian society enough for the group to be generalized as the sum of Indian society this is not the case and that was all I was saying your statement about how they live at least partly in Indian society is irrelevant and unnecessary as no one ever said they didn't.

Quote:
And that's not "negative image", its the possibility that someone might confuse her with another Disney employee dressed in costume, which is unlikely if the rest of her uniform is ..uniform. I wanted to know what exactly is negative about a variant of hat.


It is negative image, you can't have random costumes in a play(its unprogessional) same thing with Disney land. Like boba fet in a Shakespeare play.



ikorack
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,870

11 Feb 2011, 9:43 am

EnglishInvader wrote:
It's not as though the Disney canon doesn't have its share of ethnic minorities. Why not put her in Aladdin World as a lady in waiting to Princess Jasmine?


This is why I want to hear the accommodations they offered her.



AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

11 Feb 2011, 10:38 am

Macbeth wrote:
AceOfSpades wrote:
Holy wtf if you're in another country you have to adapt to it to some extent. This is just ridiculous, I heard of some guy a long time ago who didn't want to wear a helmet cuz that means he would have to take off his turban. I know for a fact it's a multicultural nation but goddamn man it's not like you have to be such a tight ass.

What's next, the police department ends up getting sued cuz seat belts are sacrilegious? :roll:


You may be thinking of the problems with UK policing in special fields of work (Riot and Firearms) where a substantial amount of effort was put into finding a suitable way to protect Sikh officers heads, based on current health and safety requirements. Surprisingly however, 15ft of cloth and hair is remarkably durable in most circumstances, and as capable of preventing blunt trauma as a regular police hat. Perhaps not so good against shrapnel or bullets though.

However, they seem to have missed the two world wars where Sikh soldiers fought with bravery and distinction sans helmet.

The turban isn't JUST about the cloth...there is a LOT of hair under there which is contained by the cloth. Any headgear would have to take that into account as well.

The only situation I have found so far where the headgear really was an definite operational issue was in the police helicopter crew, where obviously the helmet is quite integral to the operation of the machine.
My bad, I should've elaborated on that. I meant the dude didn't wanna wear a helmet while riding a bike cuz he wanted to wear his turban. That's like going to Europe and bitching about people sun tanning at the beach naked.