American court supports Muslim V. Clothes shop

[Dystopia]

Apparently the court ruled that Abercrombie was supposed to read her mind.

The Supreme Court had to decide whether Elauf was required to ask for a religious accommodation to allow her to wear the scarf in order for the company to be sued under the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which among other things bans employment discrimination based on religious beliefs and practices.

Despite wearing the head scarf, she did not specifically say that, as a Muslim, she wanted the company to give her a religious accommodation.

I don't understand this - If she didn't specifically ask to wear it why did they refuse to hire her?

I think a secular country should accommodate a religious headscarf as long as it really doesn't interfere with the job. In most stores it wouldn't, but in a high fashion salon were the employees are expected to look like living manikins, it might. Obviously it would be a problem were she trying out for a part in a play or as a fashion model. 


A devil mask is a bit different. So is a scarf hiding the face. There are good reasons why an employer and customers would want to see the face of the person they are dealing with.

Anything that covers your face is a no-brainer, but a headscarf is far more complicated - I made an ex-Muslim friend in college a few weeks ago, she wears the scarf because she is used to it and contrary to popular belief she lives alone without a husband - She is just so used that she would feel like somebody else if she didn't wear it. I don't see a problem with this, and it isn't necessarily a religious symbol. In France, a girl was banned from classroom because she was wearing a too long skirt that resembled the Islamic religion



http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/ap...long-skirt



I find this ridiculous because long skirts aren't exclusive to any religion and you cannot identify someone's religion because of the  skirt's length.


I mostly agree with you (as a law student) that reasonable accommodation is the better idea.

I think it's bullshit that it's even a question. Work often requires uniforms or dress codes, and if you can't comply with those things, you shouldn't have the job.


Back in the time I owned my shop (a crafting workshop where we made, among other things, jewelry and clothing), I was adamant that my employees dress neatly and stylishly. Would I be facing discrimination charges if I didn't hire someone from the Quiverfull movement because she insisted on wearing old-fashioned clothes? Screw that: my business; my rules.

I don't entirely disagree with you (or anyone who has replied so far) but keep in mind that the mentality of "my workplace, my rules" promotes employer supremacy and the exploitation of workers and it's the same argument that is used to support super low (or lack of) minimum wages and excessive working hours. Yes, in your workplace (in a capitalist society) you have the power to implement certain rules and codes of behaviour, but there are limits. Many times, for any minority, dressing professionally and stylishly basically means "dress like white westerns do and fuck your culture".

The employer has some level of authority and power but workers have rights as well - Your right to set up dress codes and other rules does not erase the right people have to many things. In this case, I actually feel compelled to agree she should have to be required to take of the headscarf but I wonder what would happen if all employers found out an excuse to not hire people with headscarves?