Former employee suing Costco for religious discrimination
http://7online.com/religion/former-employee-suing-costco-for-religious-discrimination-/532866/He tells Eyewitness News exclusively that when he refused to work with pork, the major retailer sent him outside to gather carts.
...
The devout Muslim says he was working as a cashier's assistant at the Costco in Sunset Park Brooklyn in September of 2012 when pork came across the conveyor belt.
It's against his religious beliefs to touch either pork or alcohol.
OK help me out here, his complaint is that "everyone should be treated equally." He refused to do the task that he was assigned, so they gave him another one. Didn't fire him, didn't cut his pay. He evidently wanted to work in electronics but wasn't given that opportunity. Seems like there's a lot more to the story here. Given Costco's excellent record with its workers I am inclined to believe they did everything they could, and this guy is just looking for money. Sadly they'll probably settle and he'll get his money.
= new reply since forum marked as read
The US supreme court has agreed to hear a case accusing the American clothing retailer Abercrombie & Fitch of refusing to hire a Muslim woman who wore a headscarf.
The suit, brought by the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, alleges that Samantha Elauf was not hired because she wore a headscarf that would have required a religious exemption from the company’s “look policy”.
Elauf interviewed at the company’s Abercrombie Kids store in Tulsa, Oklahoma, in 2008 for a position as a “model”, the equivalent of a part-time sales worker, when she was 17. The hiring manager, Heather Cooke, 23, interviewed Elauf and initially gave her a score that recommended hiring her.
<snip>
However, after consulting with a district manager, Cooke gave Elauf a low score in the “appearance and sense of style” category, after specifically asking about Elauf’s headscarf. The manager told Cooke that employees were not allowed to wear “hats” at work, and so declined to hire her, even though Cooke told the manager she assumed Elauf wore the scarf for religious reasons. Cooke told the district manager she did not ask about religion during the interview, in accordance with EEOC guidelines.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/oct/02/supreme-court-abercrombie-fitch-hijab-religious-bias-muslim-headscarf
This lawsuit is a tougher call, imo. I see no problem with a woman working at an Ambercrombie and Fitch while wearing a hijab, but then again I'm a middle-aged man with little fashion sense. If A&F were forced to hire a woman wearing a hijab on religious grounds, would they then be forced to hire women wearing burkas? I could see where a burka could send the wrong message to customers.
Well, in Egypt anyway. No "crop top and skinny distressed jeans" here, but the way these girls are dressed REALLY pisses off Islamic Fundamentalists. (These 3 characters lived in my neighborhood, so they saw me roaming around with my camera all the time.)
The fun-loving Fundamentalists argue that if a woman is going to wear the hijab, the rest of her clothing should be "modest" as well.
Things these girls are doing wrong:
1. All 3 are wearing clothes that are MUCH too tight and revealing.
2. The hijabs are brightly colored. not basic black.
3. Ditto for the clothes. Especially that orange. Looks way too cheerful.
And the woman bringing the lawsuit can be glad she didn't work in the Egyptian Culture Ministry a few years ago. The Minister of Culture, Farouk Hosni, banned the hijab for all female employees appearing on TV. (Which sounds nice and liberal. Until you know that Hosni also threatened to burn down any library where he found books written by Jews.)
<a href="http://imgur.com/bIOAFqX"><img src="
" title="source: imgur.com" /></a>
against pork and alcohol!
1.
to make a distinction in favor of or against a person or thing on the basis of the group, class, or category to which the person or thing belongs rather than according to actual merit; show partiality:
