Disneyland hostess files complaint over Muslim head scarf

[Disneybird]

I work in a doctors office and we have uniforms to wear. When someone is hired they have 2 choices: Dress in a particular uniform or go somewhere else. If you don't want to abide by a companies rules, and you know the rules beforehand, then go look elsewhere.

 

[SoupBone]

I totally agree. People seem to forget, though, that the law comes first. I think the issue in this case is that they really only gave her two options: 1) work in the back (which is, I assume, the equivalent to a demotion) or 2) go home (and not get paid). Neither is a reasonable accomodation. Disney designing a head scarf for her IS a more than reasonable accomodation. But as I said in my comment above, they should have just let her wear her personal one until the "themed" one is ready.



Tough. As I said above, the law comes first. Just because Disney wants perfect themeing doesn't mean they can violate the law. The question really is did Disney make a reasonable accomodation until the costume was finished? In my opinion, they didn't (again, that assumes that being re-positioned to the back is the equivalent of being demoted).

This is simply your opinion. My opinion is that having her work in the back is a reasonable accommodation until the custom hijab can be made. It was brought up in a previous post but where does this end? Are Christians going to start demanding they be allowed to wear large crucifixes with a realistic portrayal of the scene (blood and all)? Are Muslims going to want to start wearing full garb (like in the above picture)? This can go on and on, but at some point it must be dealt with.

Sadly what will end up happening is that Disney will either cave and theming will be lost, or they start closet discriminating for hiring purposes. Both of these would a crappy solution. :hammer:

 

[trr1]

i thought it was against most company's policy for employees to make comments to the press ? other wise you would get fired
and after 2 1/2 years of NOTwearing her jihad all of a sudden she want to wear her jihad

 

[wm49rs]

I too was impressed that they are making one that conforms to the costumes, but I disagree that telling her to work in the back or go home is a reasonable accomodation. If it were a christian who was told not to wear a cross under the costume, everyone would be up in arms. Discrimination is discrimination. Disney should have simply allowed he to wear the head scarf. Under the law, a business MUST make a reasonable accomodation. While her headscarf would probably clash with the costume, the fact that they were making one for her should have been enough for them to allow her to wear her own personal one. And if Disney does decide to be less motivated, she add a retaliatory claim as well.

If you insisted on wearing a cross, you would be required to keep it under your costume and out of sight. Same for a tattoo, or the removal of a visible body piercing. Disney sets forth at the onset with their CMs the level of expectation as to what is and what is not acceptable. The CMs are expected to wear only Disney-appropriate attire, regardless of religious convictions. For two years this woman did not have an issue with the requirements of her position, as set forth at the onset of her employment, with Disney. Disney offered her a compromise and she refused.

 

[unkadug]

If you were hired to be a stripper wouldn't you have a reasonable expectation to be working naked? That would be your uniform.

This woman went to work for Disney, she should have had a reasonable expectation to have to wear a uniform. A uniform does not include user accessories...religion notwithstanding.

 

[Wilt Dasney]

If you were hired to be a stripper wouldn't you have a reasonable expectation to be working naked?

*snort*

That was pretty funny...even if all you people are clearly wrong. :lookaroun

 

[SoupBone]

*snort*

that was pretty funny...even if I'm clearly wrong. :lookaroun

ftfy

 

[Mammymouse]

Our Constitution says we have the freedom of religion. That means we have the priviledge to practice or not the type of religion we choose to, and our government can not impose a "state" religion. How we practice our religious "beliefs" should be through our moral actions. The clothing and accessories are a "cultural" thing in my opinion, not a religious mandate. Our individual relationships with God have been "culturalized" over thousands of years, and when it all gets said and done we all will meet the same maker no matter what clothes we wear. You will never convince any organized religious culture to change anything they do now because of its' heritage and tradition. So the dilemma now is how to get everyone to get along even though we have different traditions. My opinion on the head scarf is I am backing Disney's right to enforce their costume rules. This girl would not like to have a server wear a Hooters uniform to serve her in a Mid-Eastern restaurant - Am I right?

 

[osjm76]

Welcome to CA!!lol she is crazy!!!!!!!!!! Good topic for Bill O Reilly show. :hammer:

 

[puntagordabob]

Three word to the young lady: "you are Fired"

I agree this woman is simply trying to push her ideas upon the rest of us and probably after some money drom Disney to boot... there is something twisted in our Democracy when the minority is allowed to push its will upon the majority.

 

[TP2000]

As of late Monday afternoon there is an update to this story. Disney designed a scarve and hat combo for Imane Boudlal to wear in an Onstage role at Storytellers Cafe, but she has refused. They also offered her a choice of four different Backstage roles where she could wear her scarve, but she refused that as well.

Her union has released a photo of the hat option, but blurred out Imane's face because she was so embarassed to be seen wearing the hat. Considering she's been working the past two years without anything covering her head this union has a flair for the dramatic, you have to give them that.

http://ocresort.ocregister.com/2010/08/23/muslim-employee-rejects-disneys-hat-alternative/53795/

 

[unkadug]

It's becoming painfully obvious that she is an attention hound.

Makes me wonder what her ulterior motives may be...time to call in the NSA to investigate her and her allies.

 

[Wilt Dasney]

It was also pointed out in another thread that she has now filed a religious discrimination lawsuit against the company, which wasn't the case when this thread started.

This should be interesting to follow. The last time this happened, Disney settled the case out of court...but it was with an ex-employee. I have a feeling Disney might be more willing to fight this, since it deals with a current CM and could therefore have bigger repercussions on how Disney is required to deal with claims like this in the future.

One thing I will say is it seems Disney has made a good faith effort to accommodate her on this one.

 

[Wilt Dasney]

After a few minutes of thinking this over, I have to say I'm taking Disney's side at this point.

These snippets from the OCRegister story tell the tale to me:

“They don’t want me to look Muslim,” Boudlal said in the prepared statement. “They just don’t want the head covering to look like a hijab.”

UPDATE: Council on American-Islamic Relations is supporting Boudlal’s actions.

“Disney’s treating the hijab as a mere piece of clothing that must be downplayed or hidden from guests’ view is unreasonable and discriminatory,” said Affad Shaikh, the council’s civil rights manager, in a prepared statement. “Disney should be able to accommodate Ms. Boudlal’s request to wear a hijab (even if it’s a substitute hijab that Disney insists she wear) in a manner that preserves her Muslim identity as well as her human dignity. The onus is on Disney to say that her wearing a scarf in her current position would be burdensome for them.”

<snip>

Disney is known for its strict dress code, called the Disney Look. In other cases for religious reasons, Disney has offered accommodations, such as longer skirt hems, skirts instead of pants, and hats as substitutes for religious head wear.

Based on the offers made to Ms. Boudlal and the other examples pointed out in the above paragraph, it seems clear Disney is willing to "bend" the rules to allow employees to wear articles they deem religiously necessary in view of guests.

It seems the demand here isn't just that Ms. Boudlal be allowed to wear her hijab in front of guests, but that she be able to do it in a way that unequivocally identifies her as a Muslim to anyone who sees her. She is demanding that the scarf be unobstructed by anything that would make it seem more appropriate thematically. Essentially, she doesn't just want to wear it, she wants to be seen wearing it.

I don't see parading your identity as a religious prerogative. Even if I don't buy into the logic that every Disney employee is a literal actor, I do like the idea that every CM fits — at least superficially — into a pre-defined "role."

When the argument seemed to be over whether or not Disney could accommodate the hijab in a way that was thematically appropriate, I took the employee's side. The argument now seems to have moved to whether Disney should be forced to accommodate the scarf in a way that explicitly sacrifices theming so the employee can present a unique identity to guests. That's a bridge too far for me, and I hope Disney prevails here.

 

[TP2000]

I don't see parading your identity as a religious prerogative. Even if I don't buy into the logic that every Disney employee is a literal actor, I do like the idea that every CM fits — at least superficially — into a pre-defined "role."

I agree with you.

Not sure if you are here in SoCal Wilt, and have the full back-story here, but this is not just about the head scarve. This is yet another publicity stunt by the hotel union that represents Miss Boudlal. This union has been protesting and trying to shame Disney for two and a half years, with little impact or effect. They still don't have a contract, and their union members haven't had a raise in years because of it.

Judging by all the union folks seen in the "Si se puede!" protests last week on the front lawn of the Grand Californian, they are the ones pulling the strings here on this. I'm sure the union was the one who contacted the American-Islam group to come in and carry the battle flag for Miss Boudlal, but the union is at the bottom of this mess.

Meanwhile, the 30 other unions at Disneyland work happily, with several dozen of them renegotiating succesful contracts over the past two years while this one hotel union grandstands and causes trouble. That's the real story here, not just the headscarve. The union is simply using this young lady and her issues to try and embarass Disney and cause them grief.

It's a very unusual way to negotiate a contract for housekeepers and bellmen, that's for sure.

 

[Wilt Dasney]

I agree with you.

Not sure if you are here in SoCal Wilt, and have the full back-story here, but this is not just about the head scarve. This is yet another publicity stunt by the hotel union that represents Miss Boudlal. This union has been protesting and trying to shame Disney for two and a half years, with little impact or effect. They still don't have a contract, and their union members haven't had a raise in years because of it.

No, I'm not local. I live outside Atlanta and just became ridiculously obsessed with DL after a trip last year. (You might remember reading the TR I wrote for the newspaper I work for around then; I remember you commenting when I posted it.)

At any rate, I have read tidbits about the union fights with Disney. From my position, I can't judge how much that might have to do with this, but it does look less and less likely that this lady is acting on her own motivations the more this goes on.

At any rate, I said from the beginning that I think Disney needed to make a reasonable attempt to accommodate her, and shunting her to the back just sat wrong with me. After reading about how they altered their own costume to let her wear the hijab on stage, I must say it sounds like they've done their due diligence here.

(And as a former WDW CM myself, I have to say the argument that the hat/scarf combo is "too embarrassing" for her really hits me in the wrong place. Silly-looking costumes are practically a prerequisite to work at Disney!) :lol:

 

[wm49rs]

No, I'm not local. I live outside Atlanta and just became ridiculously obsessed with DL after a trip last year. (You might remember reading the TR I wrote for the newspaper I work for around then; I remember you commenting when I posted it.)

At any rate, I have read tidbits about the union fights with Disney. From my position, I can't judge how much that might have to do with this, but it does look less and less likely that this lady is acting on her own motivations the more this goes on.

At any rate, I said from the beginning that I think Disney needed to make a reasonable attempt to accommodate her, and shunting her to the back just sat wrong with me. After reading about how they altered their own costume to let her wear the hijab on stage, I must say it sounds like they've done their due diligence here.

(And as a former WDW CM myself, I have to say the argument that the hat/scarf combo is "too embarrassing" for her really hits me in the wrong place. Silly-looking costumes are practically a prerequisite to work at Disney!) :lol:

Personally, I'm not sure how this woman will win her case because Disney did spell out its employee requirements (dress code if you will) at the onset of her employment, and for two years it was not an issue for her. And they they did make reasonable accomodations after her request to wear the head-scarf was made. I just hope that she understood all of this before filing this claim. Employees who file EEOC claims (right or wrong) against their companies are not often well though of afterwards, union or no union.

 

[parkgoer]

i honestly hope disney prevails in this case and she gets tossed out of the company. I can't believe she even thinks she has a case. Disney is a private company, she should be lucky to be there. Nobody is forcing her. If it's such a big deal, look into other employment options.

 

[chwilson88]

I agree with Disney's side of things in this case, as I think things have gone way too far in this country, for trying to accomodate everyone that comes to this country.

However, the sticky issue is...even though the uniform/costume policies are clearly stated by a private company (i.e., Disney) during the interview/hiring process, and even though the girl may have legally acknowledged such policies (i.e., by signature), the question becomes...does the company have a legal right to enforce such a policy...i.e., is the "contract" (paper that she signed acknowlegding the policies) a "good" contract, and an enforceable contract, from a legal standpoint. If this goes to trial, this will likely be one of the primary legal themes/arguments. The constitutional right to practice religion/freedom of speech etc, versus a private company's right to enforce a contract or policy that involves uniforms and/or display of relgious artifacts, etc.

It's an interesting legal debate, aside from my own personal feelings of how PC everything is now.

 

[sublimesting]

I agree with Disney's side of things in this case, as I think things have gone way too far in this country, for trying to accomodate everyone that comes to this country.

However, the sticky issue is...even though the uniform/costume policies are clearly stated by a private company (i.e., Disney) during the interview/hiring process, and even though the girl may have legally acknowledged such policies (i.e., by signature), the question becomes...does the company have a legal right to enforce such a policy...i.e., is the "contract" (paper that she signed acknowlegding the policies) a "good" contract, and an enforceable contract, from a legal standpoint. If this goes to trial, this will likely be one of the primary legal themes/arguments. The constitutional right to practice religion/freedom of speech etc, versus a private company's right to enforce a contract or policy that involves uniforms and/or display of relgious artifacts, etc.

It's an interesting legal debate, aside from my own personal feelings of how PC everything is now.

Disney has a right to enforce a dress code especially as it is part of a costume I would think. If this girl wins I am setting up a shrine at work to Darth Bane. I have written Jedi (specifically Order of the Sith) in my most recent Census.