HOW MANY out there will refuse to fly British Airways - for its UNPAID suspension of staff wearing a Cross...?

Question

I MOST CERTAINLY WILL NOT FLY THIS CARRIER AGAIN...

British Airways has been accused of appalling double standards after admitting Muslim staff may be allowed to wear veils - just weeks after it sent a female Christian worker home - (WITHOUT PAY...!) - for wearing a cross. Check-in worker Nadia Eweida has been on UNPAID leave for a month after the airline banned her from wearing her tiny cross on a chain necklace over her uniform. BA has since added further insult to injury by saying she may return to work wearing her cross - but only "IF she accepts a back room job where she will have no contact with the public."

Furthermore, a BA spokesman has confirmed that "any request from stewardesses or other uniformed staff to wear a full-face NIQAB - (the Muslim veil) - will be given serious consideration."

MEANWHILE...! - a Muslim teacher - suspended from her job for refusing to remove a full-face niqab - has been retained by her school - while ABSENT - SINCE FEBRUARY - on FULL-PAY...!

Answer 1

Cross should not be probihited if not against morals, public order or law.

Answer 2

I think that this incident has snowballed because it is an `of the moment` subject. I am not sure whether this lady wore a uniform at work, if she did then there would be no case. Most companies insist that no jewellery must be worn with uniform. If this was not the case, then she could very easily have tucked the chain inside her top. She would still have been `supporting` her God as she would have been still wearing it, and B.A. would have been appeased. Instead it became another `flavour of the month` incident. Are there not enough real things in life at work that need to be solved or changed, instead of wasting time on these petty things? If this had happened 10 years ago, nothing would have been said at all. It is only since the Muslims came and paraded their religion that Christians decided to do the same. How many people were seen to be wearing crosses 10 years ago? It`s like two hooligan football supporters brandishing their teams colours.

Answer 3

Well, I'm not a Christian, and don't hink it's anti Christian either, just more political correctness gone mad. I don't care whether people wear crosses, the Star of David, veils or anything, doesn't bother me in the slightest. Everyone should feel free to express themselves in whatever way they wish, the only reason for suspending someone from their job should be the fact that they're not doing it properly, or causing situations where others are incapable of doing their job properly. Maybe it might be an idea to not allow religious people to have a job in the first place then, eh Britsih Airways? Or can't you get away with that? And no, I won't use them, I never give my money to anyone who is down on human rights (even for petty things like this) or who exploits people or animals. If more people chose carefully which companies they gave their money to, (avoiding companies like Nestle, Nike McDonalds etc, and now of course BA as well) then they would be forced to change their practices or go out of business. Consumer power!

Answer 4

This is certainly aggravating, but to my knowledge almost all airlines (not just BA) have strict jewelry standards, which have nothing to do with religion. I was a flight attendant and we were allowed to only wear a single neck chain, gold or silver only, with no charm - be it a cross, a diamond a pearl or whatever. If we wanted to wear a charm on our necklace, it had to be hidden beneath our shirt. There were also regulations concerning hairstyles, earrings, bracelets, watches etc. Airlines have had strict appearance standards since the inception, its nothing new. If the lady in question felt so strongly attached to her cross, she should have just tucked it in! Wearing a visible cross has never been a mandate of the Christian religion, however a veil is a mandate for many Muslim sects. So there is really no comparison. Furthermore, all employees are made aware of the uniform policies before hire - so if she felt she couldn't comply, she shouldn't have taken the position.

Answer 5

I think the whole thing has been blown out of proportion. The lady in question was fully aware of the guidelines re uniform at British Airways at time she was employed. These are not new rules.
If she had such strong beliefs she should not have taken the job,
She is able to wear her cross at any time as long as it is not visible. I think this women is playing a very clever game to get attention and possibly compensation from her employer.

However i think that British Airways should take a close look at the staff uniform rules for the future as they do seem a little unfair.

Answer 6

My godmother gave me a cross on a gold chain when I was christened - I wore it under my clothes until I was 19 and the chain wore out.

The visible wearing of a crucifix and the all black garb from head to toe with a slit for the eyes are both unnecessary statements in the 21st Century which anybody living in our multi-culti society knows full well - including the statement makers.

The truth is that a large proportion of the the indigenous population of the UK believe [and there is evidence] that they are now the victims of positive discrimination, and because of this some will inevitably create situations and test the attitudes to illustrate this publicly.

BA told their employee she could wear her cross, but under her shirt. Frankly, BA should have kept their mouths shut, because the employee obviously hadn't been visibly wearing her cross previously or she would have been spoken to long before 'the veil of anonymity' issue arose.

One wonders how long the Muslim teacher has been a citizen and resident in the UK, and how long she has found it necessary to make herself prominent. I suspect it's a plot to create angst on both sides of the community and probably to get a minimum of 8 months holiday on full pay. I believe she normally wears jeans, high heals and facial makeup.

Answer 7

I will not fly BA again, In future I fly Virgin Atlantic. BA needs to remember they are BRITISH airways, not Arab airlines, not Muslim airlines, not Air Allah. There should not be any consideration to face-concealing among uniformed staff, that is a security risk. They may be cheap, but I will not save money at the expense of my conscience by funding them any further.

Answer 8

It's all a load of old b@llocks stirred up by a non committed govt and a press that rules the way the public thinks.

Does the wearing of a cross or a veil really have that much effect on what is becoming a largely secular population?

Rather than banning (restricting) the images, dress codes and artefacts related to the religion, let's start at the nub and see where exactly each religions doctrine's preach intolerance towards other faiths.

Answer 9

I can't see the problem with wearing a cross. If you look in shops some sell crosses as a fashion item all decorated with ribbon etc.

The customers on the plane most likely don't notice anyway - think it has all got out of hand!!

Answer 10

I don't tend to fly BA anyway but feel that a months suspension is harsh - i have worked in places that have strict jewellery regulations but the most anyone has ever received by way of punishment is sending home for their shift without pay.

Answer 11

The Management style at BA is certainly controversial to say the least. They have had several "run ins" with their staff over the years. This latest incident is an appalling case of double standards, but when the lead comes from our own Government, what do you expect.