Originally Posted by Chris Honeywell
Originally Posted by wayne thomas
Originally Posted by skeg
(know this is always a topic but) The one who is going to court to contest the decission against her at her school workplace. That John was proper ripping into her, just loved it when he asked, "is it true you didn't wear it in the interview" She refused to answer.
And also the other case of the white catholic woman at the airport was sent home for refusing to put her cross away, they say Turbans etc are allowed as they can't be hidden. Like they would put it away anyway if they could but surely the point is that these muslims can openly display their faith yet we can't. Typical.
You just know she will go to court and win though, just like that school pupil did who refused to wear standard school uniform that all other kids had to.
The company policy for BA ref the catholic woman is no jewellery! Its irrelevant that her choosen form of jewellery is religious symbolism, she is deliberately clouding the issue by bringing religion in to it.
Sorry but who classes jewellery?
the cross is a symbol of the crucifixion and she is right that she does not have to consider what she wears jewellery-she is absoluty correct on that point
And the muslim girl is also clouding the issue as she does not have to wear the veil for her religion and yet she is forcing the issue...
I agree completely about the muslim girl.
I would guess BAs HR department classes a necklace as jewellery, its the woman who's attached the religious sybolism to it though