Muslim woman sues salon owner for not employing her.
By pumpkinjam
@pumpkinjam (8876)
United Kingdom
June 26, 2008 4:09am CST
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7458071.stm
This is the story about a Muslim woman who applied for a job as a stylist at a London hairdressing salon. She had an interview and was not given the job. PART of the reason was that she would not take off her headscarf to work. The salon owner has been ordered to pay compensation for indirect discrimination.
Do you agree with the compensation or do you think that the owner had every right to refuse to employ a hair stylist who refused to show her own hair?
2 people like this
3 responses
@p1kef1sh (45681)
•
26 Jun 08
I wonder how this woman has her own hair done. Does she keep her headscarf on then? I wasn't that impressed by the salon owner who didn't give a very coherent explanation of her objection and was using clippers and not scissors on her client's hair! (As you know, I am very old fashioned!) As I understand it the head scarf is worn as both a religious symbol and to show a woman's modesty. But whilst symbolic, it stops short of being a religious requirement. If that is the case, then I believe that in order not to alienate existing customers (assuming that they are not all muslim women) then the salon owner was within her rights. Her refusal to employ the woman may have been indirectly discriminate. Such are the times that we live in. Personally, I would have made no award of damages and made each side pay their own costs.
2 people like this
@pumpkinjam (8876)
• United Kingdom
27 Jun 08
The headscarf thingy has nothing to do with religion. There are, apparently, some Muslim coutries where they are not allowed.
Some hairdressers do use clippers these days for certain styles. You are very old fashioned! The salon owner may not have given a coherent explanation but why should she have had to? There would have been other people applying for the job and she wouldn't have had to give a public explanation for not employing another person who was not appropriately qualified or whatever.
1 person likes this
@nannacroc (4049)
•
26 Jun 08
I wouldn't visit a hairdresser who would not show her own hair. It would make me mistrust them from the start.
The woman was not the best person for the job and the decision wasn't based solely on the fact that she wouldn't show her hair. I don't think the owner should have been fined because she didn't chose a person who was obviously ot suitable for the job.
2 people like this
