Right move or bowing to pressure?

ElRazur · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:02

British Airways is to change its uniform to allow workers to openly wear religious symbols, such as crosses.

Previously BA banned crosses on chains but allowed hijabs and turbans.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6280311.stm

trojan698 · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:04

Let's get everyone together and generate yet another justified torrent of racial hatred.

This is also a repost.

scorza · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:05

/slaps forehead. Not this **** again

A2Z · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:05

elrazur why dont you just become a politician?

Helium_Junkie · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:06

SEND THEM BACK :mad:

hehe

My serious opinion: bowing to pressure, shouldn't have caved in. Another example of people fearing to be labelled racist/discriminate. It's a huge problem, not just because race/religious hate occurs, but because it's just like the old witch hunts!
Someone points at you and yells "WITCH" and no matter what the truth is, you're screwed. Who gives a flying one whats real.

McDaniel · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:06

It's a bit of both really.

Definately the right thing in my eyes; but the moaning of public etc.. and staff may have swayed there decision more

Zip · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:06

/awaits for all the Religeoin haters to come in

Killa_ken · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:09

all you do is post news storys.... I thought thats what CNN was for? :confused:

Dolph · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:10

I have no problem with either the old or the new policy, as a private employer in my mind BA have the right to impose whatever rules they see fit when it comes to acceptable dress (including their own exceptions and exclusions). Commercial considerations can certainly come into that, as can public perception.

ElRazur · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:15

A2Z said:
elrazur why dont you just become a politician?

I dont have interest in politics. But i do have interest in Current affairs.

trojan698 said:
Let's get everyone together and generate yet another justified torrent of racial hatred.

This is also a repost.

How did you arrived at that?

If it is one let it be closed but iirc, the thread about it was the one when she got fired or suspended.

Killa_ken said:
all you do is post news storys.... I thought thats what CNN was for?

The formula seems to work lately...why change it? Perhaps i am the cnn of this place? If you dont like it dont post.

Helium_Junkie said:
My serious opinion: bowing to pressure, shouldn't have caved in. Another example of people fearing to be labelled racist/discriminate. It's a huge problem, not just because race/religious hate occurs, but because it's just like the old witch hunts!
Someone points at you and yells "WITCH" and no matter what the truth is, you're screwed. Who gives a flying one whats real.

I belived they bow to pressure too. If it is a private employer, it (BA) should be allowed to set whatever rules it wants. Having said that, why have one rule for hijab and turban but not allow crosses?

Digital Punk · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:20

Its the right move imo.

Banning crosses but allowing turbans and hijabs smacks of religeous discrimination.
Why should Christians not be able to show their faith when others are.

Finally BA have relented, albeit under pressure.

Dolph · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:24

Digital Punk said:
Its the right move imo.

Banning crosses but allowing turbans and hijabs smacks of religeous discrimination.
Why should Christians not be able to show their faith when others are.

Finally BA have relented, albeit under pressure.

Just a small point, they had not banned crosses. They said that you could wear religious symbols, but if possible, your religious symbol should be hidden. There is a small but significant difference between the two.

BenjiSayers · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:25

Killa_ken said:
all you do is post news storys.... I thought thats what CNN was for?

I enjoy the posting of news stories and their debates, some of the replies and the depth they go in to has killed many an afternoon at work and for that I salute you lot! :cool:

Yas786 · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:25

scorza said:
/slaps forehead. Not this **** again

Yup and done by none other than El knobzur

Dr Who · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:27

Quite simple...

Britain is a christian country...

British Airways employees should be allowed to be openly christian...

Egypt air read a passage from the Quran every flight and wont serve alcohol or pork so fair do's

Reverse discrimination is worse than racial discrimination...

Hedge · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:30

Can we have a White/British forum please?

Helium_Junkie · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:32

ElRazur said:
I belived they bow to pressure too. If it is a private employer, it (BA) should be allowed to set whatever rules it wants. Having said that, why have one rule for hijab and turban but not allow crosses?

There was no seperate rule for crosses. There was a rule for jewelry though.

ElRazur · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:38

Helium_Junkie said:
There was no seperate rule for crosses. There was a rule for jewelry though.

Yes you are right but how will the cross escape the rule if it comes as a piece of jewlery or something that looks like one?

Werewolf · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:51

I want someone who works for BA to wear an upside down crucifix or pentagram, tastefull and discrete of course, but visible.

I suspect the bishop who was calling on a boycott of BA for not allowing religious symbols to be openly worn will quite possibly have a different opinion if he got served by that person

Helium_Junkie · 19 Jan 2007 at 17:52

ElRazur said:
Yes you are right but how will the cross escape the rule if it comes as a piece of jewlery or something that looks like one?

Why should it have to?
I just don't understand the need for people to openly display a cross. It doesn't make them any 'more religious'... Doesn't make them a better christian...