Muslim sues over head scarf

[Ezra]

ATTENTION! READ COMPLETELY BEFORE POSTING
This thread is open for posting, but all posts are to remain completely on-topic. You may discuss the details of the lawsuit itself. There should be absolutely no name-calling, and no side-remarks about religion or politics in general. If any post is reported as offensive for any reason, that post will be deleted in its entirety and the thread closed permanently. Please read thoroughly, and reply thoughtfully. I hope that Visions Fantastic members can express themselves, but still be polite and respectful. ~Ezra

But if verbal abuse really happened as alleged, then someone needs to answer for it, if they have not already.

I agree completely. If she complained about the verbal abuse to her supervisors, and they did nothing to handle the offenders, then they're clearly in the wrong. That may not be what happened, though: Disciplinary actions are often confidential between the employee and manager. The offenders may have been disciplined, and Boudlal may not know about it.

The costuming issue got plenty of press two years ago; and I find it interesting that there was no mention of the verbal abuse at that time. Of course, that could be the fault of the Orange County Register.

[FantasmicFan89]

I would like to assume that the behavior of other CMs who allegedy verbally abused the plaintiff were handled in a just manner, if her claims are true. I think that kind of behavior is intolerable as a business as well as a society. Having employees like that are what give companies a bad rep and even worse if the management allow it to continue. Again, only saying this if she is telling the truth in that regard.

[Aurorasmiles]

I agree the verbal abuse is definitely not acceptable if the allegations are true.

This lawsuit with many others have me confused as to why people apply. I like to think that when you apply at Disney you know that you are a cast member. The title alone states that you are part of a cast. A cast usually dresses for a certain part or role in entertainment. I know, for myself, if I ever apply to Disney it's because I want to be a part of that cast. With that I know comes certain attire/costuming that help to make the magic. I may be stating the obvious and it might be simple thinking but I just don't get it. Don't most of us do some research before we apply. Especially at Disney you know there is a certain look and with that means certain costuming. I'm not saying she doesn't have the right to express her beliefs, but she had to have known that Disney's dress code may at some point be a hurdle. I don't know if the hurdle is Disney's or the young woman's.

Because I am not all knowing in business practice, I'm just happy go lucky, and I'm not sure, but is Disney a private business? If so, don't they have the right to adhere to their own dress code? I understand that doesn't mean they can discriminate or ban certain things, but they have to have some rights?

[Ezra]

As to why people apply, knowing that they'll have to wear a costume... At the time she applied, she didn't wear a headscarf. She got the job in 2008, but didn't adopt the tradition of wearing a hijab until 2010. (Perhaps to express a deepening of religious feelings?) At first, she took the scarf off for work, and put it on again to go home. She discussed wearing it while working with supervisors, but didn't get the approval she needed. She began wearing it at work in observance of Ramadan, and that's when the trouble began. Rather than wear an approved hat with her hijab, or working backstage, she chose to go home without pay. When wardrobe came up with two more headwear options for her, she refused those too.

[Wedbliss]

The full complaint against Disney can be read here.

The verbal harassment section of the complaint is fairly straightforward.

The portion of the complaint dealing with wearing a hijab is much more delicate. Muslim scholars are not in agreement as to whether or not the hijab is a religious duty or whether it is optional. That means that the court might have to get involved with a theological debate that has no clear resolution. By the way, this debate is going on in many countries around the world, including Morocco.

[kairamoon]

Here's my problem with this whole thing. She signed a contract with Disney when she got hired saying she would adhere to the dress code put out by Disney. That she read and understood what is acceptable and what is not to wear to work. Disney did more than enough to try to accommodate her. If you don't like how a company is run then you don't have to get a job there, especially when it's a company like Disney where you're making minimum wage doing something that you could do at thousands upon thousands of other companies. Now if Disney decided not to try to help her that's one thing but they offered other costume options and other areas to work in. If the other Muslims that work there have accepted the new looks Disney designed then I don't think she has much of a case. Bottom line is she signed a contract saying she would adhere to the Disney look when she started working there.

[1998castmember]

I also read the case on the ACLU website, and noticed that one of the "points" they made about the costume not being valid was that if it really was going to evoke the 18th century, then all of the female CMs at the restaurant would be required to wear skirts. I was a CM from 1998 to 2000, and worked in the stores (Merchandise Hostess), notably on Main Street and NO Square. We were required to wear skirts, but they could be not longer than mid calf, for safety reasons. If anyone knew their salt about mid 19th and early 20th Century women's fashions, they would be aware that showing ankles would have been scandalous. My point is that Disney will sacrifice a very little bit of the Magic, in order to preserve their CM's safety. The women most likely do no wear the skirts because of a proven safety hazard in the restaurant (I can't be totally sure on this particular point.) Basically, this precept invalidates the lawyer's argument about the Magic not being preserved at this establishment. I do feel very bad for this CM if she was indeed harassed because of her beliefs/ appearance, and I do feel as if the perpetrators should be prosecuted, but I can't help but feeling as if this CM was not a little inflexible when the company offered her alternatives. My last point is that the only two alternatives I've seen on the web was the giant hat (Granted, a little silly), and the bonnet, which was not that bad. Okay. I'm done with my rant. Have a Disney Day!