Hairdresser sues for religious discrimination over hejab

[purplelizzy]

A comment on the previous post reminded me of this case of a hairdresser who was turned down for a job in a salon specialising in "urban" cuts because she wanted to wear her hejab.  I think it provides an interesting comparision with the judo case because there's no safety issue here, only image.

Read more... )

Comments

[dyfferent]

My sympathies lie with the business owner. Geez.

[dancing_moon]

But I agree with the business owner that, like in a tattoo shop, the hairstyle of the person working there is walking advertizement.

Especially if it's a place that offers more than a regular cut - I know for instance several friends who have had bad experiences with blue hairdyes at salons, so to see that, aha, the people in this shop have cool blue hair! is to me a sign of their competence.

[dancing_moon]

Perhaps not fair, but I don't think it is discrimination in the legal sense either.

I think it's different from for instance the judo case because judo isn't about hair, but hairdressing is. She is a worse employee than a candidate who shows their hair because, they can advertize their service at work.

Btw a bald person could wear a stylish wig while at work and thus provide the same funtction. In an alternative place, it could even be a draw, because they could show off cool falls and different types of fake hair

[purplelizzy]

But if her beliefs don't allow her to go out with her hair uncovered, what must she be thinking of the clients in a salon like that?

[purplelizzy]

I think it is a fair assumption that if she herself must dress that modestly because of what her religion teaches her about women who don't, that she probably does have some negative thoughts about such women. Perhaps not on an individual level but as an overall philosphy.

[purplelizzy]

True, all good points. But I bet the salon owner's lawyer will have a few questions along these lines. It just seems the job is not consistent with her apparent religious beliefs and that casts some doubt over her true motivation here. It has been suggested in some circles that she is just in this for the money and the whole thing is a stitch up. I don't know if that's true but I think this would need to be explored by the tribunal or court. It's a bit like if I went for a job at somewhere like Hooters in the US and them asking me if I'd be happy to wear the uniform and me saying, um, no I am a feminist and I do not wish to be objectified in that way and then suing them for not hiring me.