U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-26-2015, 01:54 AM
 
421 posts, read 309,450 times
Reputation: 832

Advertisements

If a person wants to dress in a certain way, she should make that very clear when
applying for position. Businesses should have the right to a dress code. This makes me wanna barf!

What if a nudest went natural at Macy's?? Macys would probably get sued!

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-26-2015, 09:40 AM
 
2,062 posts, read 1,324,398 times
Reputation: 2612
Quote:
Originally Posted by portlandphi View Post
If a person wants to dress in a certain way, she should make that very clear when
applying for position. Businesses should have the right to a dress code. This makes me wanna barf!

What if a nudest went natural at Macy's?? Macys would probably get sued!
sometime its not as clear. Say if someone was working in a company for 5 or even 10 years. During that time they might evolve naturally. Say a Muslim women who didn't wear headscarf at the time of interview but years later she choose to take that up. How would this case get solved?

I have friend in similar situation. She is thinking about starting to wear hijab now that she is over 30. She has been working in same company for 8 years and her role has evolved from lab chemist to visiting customers all over the country. She attends lot of trade shows & one of her strength is customer interaction. She is wondering how taking up the hijab will effect her job & already started looking for less customer oriented job in her company. She is not sure which should come first, new job or new look. But then again her company might not care what she wears since she already established herself in the field.

Its tough, ofcoures the lady in the article hasn't been in her role long enough to have natural change
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2015, 11:51 AM
 
3,454 posts, read 1,694,791 times
Reputation: 2201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spaten_Drinker View Post
She will lose. There are no religious rights.
That is incorrect. Not only do you have the right to exercise religion, employers are prohibited from discriminating on the basis of religion, unless the employer cannot accommodate a religious practice "without undue hardship on the conduct of the employer's business."

Quote:
Originally Posted by keraT View Post
I couldn't read the entire article, they website asked me to register. So I didn't bother.

I don't know the full story but I agree with Jess, every so often we get this law suit about discrimination (race, color, dress) its silly. Some are valid reason but majority are just young people thinking they can play the system.

I remember few years ago when my friends & I were all out of college looking for jobs. one of my friend over dinner complained how she couldn't find a job & its harder because she wears headscarf & people discriminate. I had to stop her & say "look around, all of our friends wear headscarf & 90% of us have been able to obtain good professional job with our headscarf. What makes you think you are specially targeted?". It really was her skill set that didn't allow her to get a job but its easier to blame on external features.
Try this one: Supreme Court to hear religious freedom case - CNN.com

This employer (Abercrombie manager) thought the young woman was qualified, but asked a superior about the headscarf, specifically indicating that she assumed it was for religious observance. The superior said the scarf violeated Abercrombie's look policy.

Abercrombie concedes that the woman was not hired because of the headscarf.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minervah View Post
You can read the latest here without having to sign in.

This girl didn't follow suit with Abercrombie's "look" in a sales model as they call them. Hey, at the age of 69 and slightly overweight with grey hair, I wouldn't either.

Justices appear to favor Tulsa Muslim denied job over headscarf | Oklahoma City - OKC - KOCO.com
The manager of the store wasn't so sure that the girl didn't meet the "look." And Abercrombie has also conceded that they have accommodated Muslims in other circumstances. The fight, really, is about whether the applicant had to specifically request headscarf accommodation (she wore a headscarf to the interview), or whether the company, if deciding based on the headscarf, has to tell the applicant so that she can request religious accommodation and the company can evaluate it. Other than the headscarf, the young woman meets the company's look requirements.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cryptic View Post
I though this issue was already settled. If the business can show that a "look" is essential to their marketing, they dont have to hire people who dont have the "look". In short, while businesses cant discrimiante agaisnt Jews, Moslems or Christians, neither Ambercombrie nor Hooters need to hire:

- Moslem women who wear head scarves
- Christian Amish women wearing "Little House on the Prairie" garb
- Orthodox Jewish guys wearing Jewish religous clothes from 17th Century Ukraine.
But Abercrombie does accommodate other Muslims who wear head scarves. Read the link above. This is about whether their ad hoc approach to religious accommodation is acceptable or not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2015, 04:03 PM
 
Location: Upstate NY
30,385 posts, read 9,081,069 times
Reputation: 28915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cryptic View Post
I though this issue was already settled. If the business can show that a "look" is essential to their marketing, they dont have to hire people who dont have the "look". In short, while businesses cant discrimiante agaisnt Jews, Moslems or Christians, neither Ambercombrie nor Hooters need to hire:

- Moslem women who wear head scarves
- Christian Amish women wearing "Little House on the Prairie" garb
- Orthodox Jewish guys wearing Jewish religous clothes from 17th Century Ukraine.

You would think that would be true (about employers maintaining the right to project a certain look or brand), but there's more to this.

This suit centers on whether a prospective employee is required to disclose one's religion (for a future accommodation) at an interview. Complicating the entire issue is the fact that the interviewer blabbed that she wasn't hired because of the headdress. However, had she been hired and shown up wearing the headdress, she could say that a reasonable person [her employer] should have assumed she'd be wearing it at work, and other accommodations would be in order because she wore the headdress at the interview.

She's going to win this one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2015, 08:55 AM
 
1,506 posts, read 920,085 times
Reputation: 1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCityTheBridge View Post
But Abercrombie does accommodate other Muslims who wear head scarves. Read the link above. This is about whether their ad hoc approach to religious accommodation is acceptable or not.
I think their policy depends on the position:

- Sales people need to have a certain "look" that facilitates selling their clothes.

- Back office people dont need to have the "look". So, they can wear hijabs, orthodox jewish clothing, amish clothing etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2015, 04:45 AM
 
1,626 posts, read 1,588,260 times
Reputation: 1661
The rule should be that if you want to wear 15th century clothing to work, I don't have to employ you. Period.

Why should we accept that clothes have anything to do with the ACTUAL practice of a religion? It's an antiquated practice entirely based around the subjugation of women. I find the fact that Muslim men decided Muslim women need to cover themselves in public because they are essentially property, to be extraordinarily more offensive than an employer saying no to this practice.

It's unconscionable that we are still trying to find ways to accommodate this kind of misogynistic behavior in our laws.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top