STOP THE TRAFFIK

Monday, November 20, 2006

Religion on show

The debates around religious sentiments expressed through clothing have really interested me. And the plot thickens... Nadia Eweida who is employed by British Airways has lost her appeal for the right to visibly wear her cross at the check-in counter. BA said its uniform policy stated that such items could be worn if concealed underneath the uniform. In the meeting, British Airways told her it respected her faith and accepted the cross was not jewellery, but would be standing by its original decision. Ms Eweida said people of other faiths were allowed to wear visible religious symbols such as headscarves and she wanted to be allowed to do the same. BA said in a statement: "British Airways has 34,000 uniformed staff, all of whom know they must abide by our uniform policy. "The policy does not ban staff from wearing a cross. It lays down that personal items of jewellery, including crosses may be worn - but underneath the uniform. Other airlines have the same policy.
The policy recognises that it is not practical for some religious symbols - such as turbans and hijabs - to be worn underneath the uniform. This is purely a question of practicality. There is no discrimination between faiths.

In Nadia Eweida's case, she is not suspended and we want her to come back to work. We have explained to her the need to comply with the uniform policy like all her colleagues whatever their faith."

Ms Eweida has been offered another non-uniformed post so that she can continue to wear her cross visibly but has turned it down.

What do you think? I think BA have been very clever here but I think they are bordering on discrimination especially as they admit that the cross isn't jewellery in this context.

5 Comments:

At November 20, 2006 7:35 pm, Blogger Laura said...

The cross IS jewellery though, it really isn't an essential faith item and I don't think any Christian could honestly argue that!

 
At November 20, 2006 9:17 pm, Blogger sparkles said...

totally. She doesn't need to wear it visably either.

Although I guess I hear a lot of people complaining about this anti-discrimination stuff being for all the other religions, but when it comes to Christianity it's another matter.

I can't say she's making a fuss about nothing, but as Laura says we don't need to wear a cross, in fact we don't need to wear anything to be a Christian. It seems a little petty to me

 
At November 20, 2006 10:55 pm, Blogger Helsalata said...

But other articles of faith aren't worn because they have to be worn. It would be different if people had to have short hair for a job or if they had to have a bacon butty every morning to be in a team but that doesn't happen.

 
At November 21, 2006 12:13 pm, Blogger Ben F. Foster Esq. (c) said...

Linky Link

My thoughts.

I think it's also refelctive of teh veil debate, the crux being the veil isn't mentioned in the Qu'an so claiming to *need* to wear it isn't religious, it's religious culture.

 
At November 21, 2006 5:46 pm, Blogger Laura said...

I heard Nadia Eweida on Radio 4 last night and she seems to have a pretty weak argument - she wants to be able to wear the cross so that people will know who to ask if they want to know about Christianity, apparantly as she would ask a woman in a headscarf if she wants to know about Islam.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home