Crucifix row

Snoopy · 10-15-2006, 04:46 PM

I know that this relates to the issue in the news about Muslims wearing veils but this story regarding wearing a visible crucifix at work may not be known about much outside the UK:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6051486.stm

British Airways seem to be consistent in that what they allow is only what cannot be hidden by the work uniform, but the effect of this consistent rule seems to me to be (perhaps inadvertently) discriminatory.

Wasn't sure where to start this thread, but as the item is a crucifix I decided this was the best option.

What do others think?

Snoopy.

moseslmpg · 10-15-2006, 06:17 PM

I don't see a problem with it really. If it was only geared toward one particular faith, then maybe, but it seems like it is a company policy and you just deal with it if you want to work there. I don't understand why it is necessary for someone to declare their religion through the use of jewellry or even declare their religion to the public at all.

Virtual_Cliff · 10-15-2006, 08:08 PM

I heard that BA allowed Sikhs and Muslims to where turbans and headscarves, but do not allow Christians to wear crucifixes. Surely the question is - What is it to them? Does it interfere with their employees' work? If not, then why make unnecessary demands?

At least in Britain, we are not amenable to being told what we can and can't wear unless there is a very good reason. Remember when an American computer company said they would not employ any man with a beard? Oh grow up, BA!
VC

YO-ELEVEN-11 · 10-15-2006, 10:27 PM

I do not see what difference it makes in a workers performance if they have a crucifix on or not. Then again I am not a workplace behavioralists specialists.

I had a co-worker who would wear a crucifix, The star of david, a cresent moon and star, an ankh, and several other types of religious symbols, because he "was not taking any chances with his soul".

IMHO. BA should really think about allowing its workers to wear the crucifix on the outside as long as it meets company dress standards on tasteful apperance.

moseslmpg · 10-15-2006, 10:42 PM

The way I see it, no one is forcing this woman to work for them, so if she doesn't follow dress code she shouldbe fired. If she really wants people to know she's a Christian, she can wear something too large to cover, like a very large cross or a sign that says "I am a Christian." As far as I know, Christians are not required to wear jewellry anyway and many people discourage it, as the cross then merely becomes a talisman of sorts.

BlaznFattyz · 10-16-2006, 01:50 AM

a company has a right to impose a dress code.
the crucifix doesnt mean anything on its own nor does it make one christian.
the people should stop complaining and get to work if they want a job.

taijasi · 10-16-2006, 02:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YO-ELEVEN-11

I had a co-worker who would wear a crucifix, The star of david, a cresent moon and star, an ankh, and several other types of religious symbols, because he "was not taking any chances with his soul".

rofl ... YO, this reminds me of a funny scene the in first Mummy movie from recent years, with Brendan Frasier. I think the guy's name is Benny, who has around his neck all the symbols you've mentioned, and more. When the mummy threatens his life, he fumbles through each symbol in turn, chanting frantically in various langugages, until he gets to the Seal of Solomon (`Star of David'), which the mummy recognizes as "the language of the slaves."

The movie scene is amusing ... but I find the British Airways policy somewhat disturbing.

I have mixed feelings though. Here in the American south, I find the flag of the U.S. Confederacy, the so-called Rebel Flag or Navy Jack, to be offensive. It is not a point of pride, as so many of its advocates claim, but rather, stick-in-the-mud obstinacy ... and even a subtle endorsement of the values from a darker day in Humanity's past.

Yes, the Confederate Flag does have a place, and should be displayed in these places (proudly, even) alongside other banners and icons that have been superseded. But that place is a museum, not the state Capitol building.

Similarly, the cross and crucifix (star & crescent, etc.) may one day be relegated to a day in Humanity's less enlightened past ... when religion was still pitted against religion, as if God Himself could be divided. Our dark days are not all behind us, and Armageddon is far from over.

I do wear an ankh to symbolize certain things, yet these are as much (or more) for my own benefit, as for others. It is talismanic, as is all other jewellery which I have worn on occasion. And this is certainly the case for those who wear the cross or crucifix! Thus there is more than simply sentimental value, and for many, this is definitely not a political issue ... but an intimately personal and a spiritual one.

Namaskar,

andrew

wil · 10-16-2006, 12:59 PM

If I am reading this correctly.

A. They are asking if it can be covered up by their convential uniform that it be so.

B. They are not being predjudicial against any religion who requires their believers to wear something which cannot be covered by their uniform.

C. They have a policy against jewelry.

I really don't see it as an issue. I see someone making it an issue. I'm thinking the handbook is probably available when one is contemplating accepting the job.

Dor · 10-17-2006, 02:22 PM

If they are trying to discriminate or not does not really matter. The apperance is there.
If you are going to let any group wear something you should let all groups wear something.
Lose the cross then lose the turbans and hijabs.

mee · 10-17-2006, 05:12 PM

ok here is my thoughts , i noticed on the news channel the christian said that the cross was her .....silent witness..... now i was under the impression that the witness should be heralded

And this good news of the kingdom will be preached

Or, "be heralded.

in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come. matthew 24;14

Snoopy · 10-17-2006, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dor

If they are trying to discriminate or not does not really matter. The apperance is there.
If you are going to let any group wear something you should let all groups wear something.
Lose the cross then lose the turbans and hijabs.

I think the difference offered by BA is that religious items that cannot be hidden whilst wearing the staff uniform are permitted (eg turbans and hijabs) but items that can be covered up should be (eg crosses). As to why...

Snoopy.

Dor · 10-17-2006, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snoopy

I think the difference offered by BA is that religious items that cannot be hidden whilst wearing the staff uniform are permitted (eg turbans and hijabs) but items that can be covered up should be (eg crosses). As to why...

Snoopy.

Ok sounds like a lame excuse what she should do is show up wearing a 5 ft cross.

Snoopy · 10-17-2006, 05:26 PM

that should do it!!

Snoopy.

17th Angel · 01-05-2007, 12:20 PM

I sometimes wear a cross on my chain, but with no connection to me being a christian... (besides the point the cross being a pagan symbol but anywho...) Just a bit of jewllery to me.... With no religious tie. But those who wear it for religious reasons, I aslo have no problem with... It is but a charm on a neclace... not a mask that covers your entire face.... hmm.

Saltmeister · 01-06-2007, 03:03 PM

I was wondering . . .

I would have thought the point of a dress code is to ensure that staff show they are being professional. That said, wearing a hijab or cross shouldn't be a problem if they are professional and do their job well. Furthermore, it's for hospitality and public relations. You meet people while doing the job. People want to meet you.

The passengers would want to meet real people, not robots that just follow the rules. For some people, wearing a veil or cross is mandatory. They can't get out of the practice. I think it would be a bit unfair for those people who really enjoy the job.