Woman 'Shocked' Over Headscarf Firing

[Developereo]

This characterization of A&F is a bit extreme. To me, they are essentially "The Gap" for teenagers. Nothing more.

 

[Awesome]

Mmmm...So the Mossad did 9/11 is much more believable than opportunistic lawsuit in waiting.

Wow, offtopic much?

In your guilty until proven innocent world anything is possible.

 

[gambit]

Some of this argument remind me the argument about how uncle Tom should be rescued, that is 'a rescue must be done in a certain way. It must involve consuming saw dust. Else it is not a rescue.'

Some folks here can't fathom the thought that she can work in A&F and still dress modestly.

Pharmacist in U.S routinely refuse contraceptives because of their personal beliefs about religion.

This girl has not refused to sell anything. Has made her case before she was hired. We also need to see how biased this HR woman is.

Neither of the highlighted is the issue. A&F is not Hooters where the latter has a dress code geared towards getting men sexually aroused. Even Victoria's Secret does not have a dress code as visually enticing as Hooters. Heck...Whenever I shop at VS, I get more excited at the lingerie clad dummies......Or was it excitement at Frederick's of Hollywood...

Can an overtly religious person work at Victoria's Secret or A&F? Absolutely. Can the same woman work at Hooters? Certainly not. But for an overtly religious muslimah to work at any of them is like an evangelical Christian working at an abortion clinic. Regardless of the (or any) laws, there are some things in life that cannot help but trigger the silent 'WTF' in an observer's mind.

If you have never set foot inside an A&F store, I can understand your reluctance to cast a doubtful eye on the muslimah. But for those of us who have...Sorry...But...What give this muslimah the idea that A&F is a decent workplace for her when A&F is trying to make little girls sexy for pedophiles and are unapologetic for it?

 

[Awesome]

No one is 'complaining'. But there is a larger issue that YOU know what it is and is trying to distract attention from by throwing out the race card, that the difference between Victoria's Secret and A&F is only a matter of scant degrees not type and that type is overt sexuality. A&F just expose less flesh and have more males in their adverts. If 'complaining' is what is going on, the 'complaints' would have been: What are muslims doing in the ungodly West in the first place?

Sorry, buddy...But there are several issues of equal significance here: the overt sexuality of A&F, the moral degeneracy of the company itself when it sees nothing wrong with sexualizing children for pedophiles, an overtly religious person asking to work at such a company, the hiring of such a person by one, and finally the termination of the same person by another at a higher level of corporate authority because there is a clash of overt sexuality and religious beliefs.

One does not need to be a cynic to smell a set-up for a lawsuit.

When a Muslim girl assimilates to a degree she is comfortable you still have a problem? When she would roam around in a Burkha, you still have a problem. Moreover, VS and A&F sells a lot in Muslim countries too. Does the consumer now have to explain to you why they are buying it or is there something protected under civil liberties?

I seriously doubt VS requires their stockroom girls to wear lingerie, let alone even the sales girls. This is bigotry plain and simple. Both by the big Fashion and by the over-sympathetic I-hate-them-for-pedophilia-but-love-them-for-their-tirade-against-Muslims brigade.

 

[JayAtl]

I don't think we have to stoop to the levels of some posters here- who if this would happened in their country they would call it western media/ CIA /raw/ Mossad plot ( ain't that funny how they dismiss their failings).

This girl was wronged, it was no setup- because that would mean she would have to have known she would be hired in the first place and somehow have a crystal ball to then know- a HR head would fire her. The US laws prevailed, she was shown to be wronged- by the federal branch EEOE and thats that of it... this was a failing of an entity not of the country - where and why such laws are made to prevent. God bless america!

 

[Zeluvaa]

Are people here retarded, paranoid and blind or just come to spew venom?

What the hell does it matter as to where she chooses to work, its her life and her choice. Do people have to conduct a public opinion poll to see what places they can or cannot work now? If she chooses to work at Victoria's Secret, then let her! Why the hell does that need to clash with her religion.

It only shows that she is tolerant of other people's lifestyles and beliefs. Or do people here expect that all Muslims are fundamentalists and extremists and as such cannot work at places like these ?

Also the country's or states law comes first and above company policy. In this case the company clearly discriminated against this lady and now must face the consequences. And for those too blind to have read the news clearly, let me repost -

Khan filed a complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and in September 2010, the commission found that she had been wrongly terminated. Federal law requires that employers make reasonable accommodation for employees’ religious beliefs.

And the posts talking about conspiracy on her part are too dumb to answer. You lose I.Q. points just by looking at them!

 

[Vassnti]

A & F is a very risque and sexy brand.

Why is a Muslim girl working in such a store in the first place?

Its like a Muslim girl working in Victoria Secret

I guess from all the Saudi women buying up big in VS it would be a very appropriate place for a Muslim girl to work.

 

[Hulk]

I think she is wrong, here is the reason. There are certain business that also needs employees to be dressed in particular way. A place which sells sexy cloths will be a misfit for someone who is wearing a headscarf.

Some other examples.
1) Fat Air hostess.
2) Fat and unfit guy at gym.

Understand the person who is running the shop also has to do business and if something goes against it, he has the right to act. After all he is paying you not the other way round.

It is perfectly fine to have to religious belief that does not impact the business, no one will have a problem.

 

[Developereo]

I think she is wrong, here is the reason. There are certain business that also needs employees to be dressed in particular way. A place which sells sexy cloths will be a misfit for someone who is wearing a headscarf.

Some other examples.
1) Fat Air hostess.
2) Fat and unfit guy at gym.

Understand the person who is running the shop also has to do business and if something goes against it, he has the right to act. After all he is paying you not the other way round.

It is perfectly fine to have to religious belief that does not impact the business, no one will have a problem.

That's the whole point.

Some posters here are acting as if A&F is a lingerie store. It is not. It is a "hip and happening" place for teenagers. Including assimilated Muslim teenagers.

I know that to non-teenagers like us it may seem risque but, to the average American teenager, it is not scandalous.

The problem is with some people who see the headscarf as an alien invasion or a "political statement". Again, it is neither. Some people are reading way too much politics into a simple headscarf. And, of course, the judgemental pronoucements by all these men about how a Muslim girl should behave are fascinating to read!

 

[fallstuff]

Neither of the highlighted is the issue. A&F is not Hooters where the latter has a dress code geared towards getting men sexually aroused. Even Victoria's Secret does not have a dress code as visually enticing as Hooters. Heck...Whenever I shop at VS, I get more excited at the lingerie clad dummies......Or was it excitement at Frederick's of Hollywood...

Can an overtly religious person work at Victoria's Secret or A&F? Absolutely. Can the same woman work at Hooters? Certainly not. But for an overtly religious muslimah to work at any of them is like an evangelical Christian working at an abortion clinic. Regardless of the (or any) laws, there are some things in life that cannot help but trigger the silent 'WTF' in an observer's mind.

If you have never set foot inside an A&F store, I can understand your reluctance to cast a doubtful eye on the muslimah. But for those of us who have...Sorry...But...What give this muslimah the idea that A&F is a decent workplace for her when A&F is trying to make little girls sexy for pedophiles and are unapologetic for it?

I have walked by A&F stores, but never been to one. I knew two ex-A&F employee teenagers ( a boy and a girl, both white) who worked in a restaurant I owned. Those two kids used to talk about the employee look thing.

Very important point is that she was a stock Clark, she didn't even work the cash or sales.

I will give you the point that A&F is obsessed about their image, however they can't arbitrarily fire someone without a valid cause.

They have to establish a cause and effect relationship about their image, and how her appearance as a stock clark can hinder their business. If the store sales were slumping after the girl was hired or if the store sales were just about same it may be harder for them to win, but if the store sales were higher after she was hired, they are screwed big time.

I am aware that unless someone is white with that look, they are not going to hire that individual in a sales position generally speaking.
This kind of business model is hard to retain given other rules and statues. Company rules and policies are subject to Local, State, and Federal Statues.

It would be impossible to defend their case given they are under court ordered monitoring for a previous discrimination case they lost in 2004. If I were A&F, I would settle this case.

link:


http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/17/Abercrombie & Fitch to pay $40 million to several thousand minority and female plaintiff

 

[gambit]

When a Muslim girl assimilates to a degree she is comfortable you still have a problem? When she would roam around in a Burkha, you still have a problem.

I do not care if she is overtly religious about her faith. I only care if she is going to make an issue out of it in regards to others. I have the same problem with that behavior with any religion.

Moreover, VS and A&F sells a lot in Muslim countries too. Does the consumer now have to explain to you why they are buying it or is there something protected under civil liberties?

Here is the catch...The hiring and termination of employees are always local, or at least should be kept as local as possible. If either stores sells in muslim countries, then the decisions to terminate any employees are left to the local managers and faith is exercised that those decisions are made to the best of their abilities and understanding of the local environments. That mean this muslimah would not be terminated if the store is in Saudi Arabia. But then this would beg the question of why is Victoria's Secret selling in SA in the first place. That is a different subject.

I seriously doubt VS requires their stockroom girls to wear lingerie, let alone even the sales girls.

No...They are not. I know that for a fact.

This is bigotry plain and simple. Both by the big Fashion and by the over-sympathetic I-hate-them-for-pedophilia-but-love-them-for-their-tirade-against-Muslims brigade.

If it is bigotry, she would not have been hired in the first place. If it was bigotry, would it have been corporate policy? Hooters are bigoted against women of certain dimensions, can we acknowledge that? If a Hooters girl is pregnant, she would taken off the floor when her pregnancy is prominent to the point where her figure would no longer conform to certain physical standards. In this case with A&F, if there was bigotry, it would not be corporate policy but personal.

 

[jdme]

Unfortunately, A&F is wrong here and they will lose. Take it to the court!

 

[gambit]

I have walked by A&F stores, but never been to one. I knew two ex-A&F employee teenagers ( a boy and a girl, both white) who worked in a restaurant I owned. Those two kids used to talk about the employee look thing.

Very important point is that she was a stock Clark, she didn't even work the cash or sales.

I will give you the point that A&F is obsessed about their image, however they can't arbitrarily fire someone without a valid cause.

They have to establish a cause and effect relationship about their image, and how her appearance as a stock clark can hinder their business. If the store sales were slumping after the girl was hired or if the store sales were just about same it may be harder for them to win, but if the store sales were higher after she was hired, they are screwed big time.

I am aware that unless someone is white with that look, they are not going to hire that individual in a sales position generally speaking.
This kind of business model is hard to retain given other rules and statues. Company rules and policies are subject to Local, State, and Federal Statues.

It would be impossible to defend their case given they are under court ordered monitoring for a previous discrimination case they lost in 2004. If I were A&F, I would settle this case.

link:


http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/17/Abercrombie & Fitch to pay $40 million to several thousand minority and female plaintiff

Whether she was assigned to the stock room or not is not the issue. Or at best it is a peripheral one. A&F sells mediocre clothes but in order to make a profit, they have to create attraction or as they say in the advertising world 'controversy'. The 'controversy' here is soft core **** with lots of partially clothed beautiful people. Us 'regular' folks would walk by and see all these half nude beautiful people supposedly wearing A&F branded rags and wonder if we wear these rags we would be beautiful as well. Then we fork over our money and basically got suckered.

The sexualized images are not covert but blatant. The local environment is not overtly religious like Saudi Arabia but overtly secular and sexually charged, like in the US or Europe. If this was in SA, the muslimah WOULD NOT be out of place even if she was working in front. But since this is in overtly secular America, she is out of place (of sort) and vulnerable to certain actions that are based upon the local environment. If A&F had a corporate policy like Hooters that clearly outlined a certain dress code in order to attract suckers and conform to the local population, this muslimah would not have applied in the first place. All parties would know the rules.

But my question does not involve the laws or corporate rules. It is about common sense and common sense tell me that an overtly religious person like a nun would not work in A&F, even if she is post Vatican II where the habit is no longer required and the nun would outwardly appear just like any other modestly dressed woman.