I've Never Been So Stuck in All My Life...

[TheBlondOne]

So I'm doing a debate for a polisci class and here's the situation:

A Muslim stewardess wants to wear her hijab during her work as a flight attendant (she has offered to let it match her uniform and even put the company's logo on it). However, the company says the hijab is causing a safety hazard and has offered to give her another position (albeit with lower pay).

We are arguing that the company is offering "reasonable accommodation" and that their rule is not violating her ethical and constitutional right (we didn't have a choice in choosing which side we were to argue, so no flames, PLEASE).

I've spent 2 1/2 hours searching for court cases that support our argument and have only found two. I would like at least three more.

Please help me!!!

--Sarah

 

[PsychoAndy]

sarah, have you tried findlaw.com

 

[Frosty3799]

umm you could look up the airline companies policy on uniform?? that is if there is a specified airline

 

[TheBlondOne]

I already tried findlaw.com

There is no specified airline. This is just generally speaking.

--Sarah

 

[thawolfman]

<< sarah, have you tried findlaw.com >>



Dammit you beat me to it. I was going to pull a few links out of my Law book....

Supreme Court Cases 1990-Present

So much for a few, almost all of them are findlaw sites except this one ^^^

 

[PsychoAndy]

hmmm......i'm racking my brain trying to help you

can you try arguing that the wearing of said headpiece can be construed as right under the 1st amendment?

 

[Zenmervolt]

Have you tried Oyez? It's a huge database, plus you can search cases by subject.

ZV

 

[DaiShan]

I would try to first prove that it was a safety hazzard (in a crash, fire etc) then worry about precedence.

 

[Jzero]

Interesting concept.

Well one point I suppose you could play upon is that any type of hood like Hijab would restrict peripheral vision. Makes it hard to be fully aware of things going on to the side of you and above. The overhead compartment could suddenly swing open right where she's standing and she wouldn't notice b/c the Hijab blocks her vision.
Lame as it is, you could attempt to play the card that the average white american will likely equate Hijab with Islam and Islam with flying planes into skyscrapers, hence this will lead to discomforted passengers and loss of revenue.

You could also argue the following:
Her wearing Hijab would present a safety hazard (given).
If she is so committed to wearing her veil, then being a flexible and humanitarian employer, your company will gladly permit her to wear it in a position that does not make a safety hazard.
However, she cannot be offered a lower-paying position at a higher-paying salary. The other employees (especially considering they are likely unionized) will NOT be pleased about someone being permitted to do their jobs and get paid more for it, and it is an unreasonable demand to ask them to do so.
I know as a worker, I'd be pretty peeved if some dude walked in and started doing MY job but getting paid more for the sole reason that he wanted to wear some sort of garment. Does that mean that anyone in that position who chooses to wear a Hijab should be permitted a raise?

 

[rubix]

you don't have to do much like finds laws. simply point out that the airlines have a uniform policy and everyone must follow it. if you work at mcdonalds you can't wear your favorite dress or a nun suit or a werewolf mask and you must wear their lame outfit they give you. other places are the same, like the airlines. she has to wear what they tell her to, not what she wants. when she signed a contract to work there she agreed to wear her uniform.

 

[yoda291]

I would argue that it's the airline's safety policy to which all other employees must adhere to. There may be several possibilities to it in that, by creating a safety issue, she is no longer as effective at her job. Furthermore, her position does not grant her power to alter the company's policy. This is the reason why, if you work in a large corporation and want to run linux on your workstation, you have to get it ok'd by the Techs and if they say it's against the policy, no matter how much more you can do on linux than windows, you're stuck.

Then to counter any constitutional arguments that arise...use those court cases to establish that a precedent has already been set in a court of law.

just my approach

 

[Cyberian]

Isn't wearing the specified uniform a condition of employment?
Was the hypothetical flight attendant not made aware of this when she was hired?

 

[TheBlondOne]

<< Isn't wearing the specified uniform a condition of employment?
Was the hypothetical flight attendant not made aware of this when she was hired? >>



It's a new policy and she was already hired.

Thanks for the oyez site, that just might be what I was looking for.

You guys are great.
Thanks.


--Sarah