Do you think it's ridiculus that a woman got £1000 for "damage to feelings"?
By RieRie
@RieRie (820)
November 2, 2006 7:56pm CST
A Teacher was sacked from a school, apparently because she wouldn't take off her veil in school (she was Muslim, but it was a C of E school, so I don't understand why she was teaching there in the first place), anyway she sued for unfair dismissal, but lost except she did get £1000 compensation basically just for being upset, the actual term was damage to feelings, but really it just means she got money for being upset.
2 people like this
3 responses
@nannacroc (4049)
•
12 Nov 06
yes it is disgusting especially as she went to the interview without the veil which indicates she wore it just to sue and make money.
If I had sued every employer who had upset me at a thousand pounds a time I might have made some money by now.
2 people like this
@pumpkinjam (8540)
• United Kingdom
3 Nov 06
I think it's disgusting. Well, whatever the excuse is for wearing a veil, it is not a good thing to wear it while teaching children. If this happened the opposite way, like say a Catholic wore a cross in a Muslim school, they wouldn't get compensation for being upset for being asked to remove it. It's pathetic.
1 person likes this
@pumpkinjam (8540)
• United Kingdom
4 Nov 06
No, I didn't see that. It's just one of those things. We never had such problems with Sikhs or Hindus or Jews or anything have we? So why are Muslims making such a big deal of it?
1 person likes this
@dorypanda (1601)
•
23 Nov 06
Well first of all, why was a Muslim woman teaching in a C of E school? Secondly why did she wear the veil in the classroom when she didn't wear it at the interview? If she didn't wear it at the interview then she obviously doesn't feel the need to wear it all the time anyway. So it's not fair that that happened and yes, I did see on GMTV that a European (not English) woman was told to take her cross off completely at work, she offered to tuck it into her jumper, but they said no, you have to take it off completely, that I think is disgusting, she was working in a Christian country where the cross is a more predominent sign than anything else and she didn't sue for damages or anything. It's one rule for some and another for others.
