Another Lawsuit....

[Anthony007]

Muslim employee sues US Disneyland over headscarf ban

Thu Aug 19, 2:07 AM
LOS ANGELES (AFP) - A Muslim woman is suing Disneyland, accusing the company's California theme park of discrimination for telling her she could not serve customers if she chose to wear a headscarf.

Imane Boudal, 26, asked her employers at Disneyland's Grand Californian Hotel several months ago whether they would permit her to wear a headcovering while working as a hostess, a spokeswoman for a worker's union said.

But when no reply was forthcoming, she decided to don the headscarf anyway, timing her decision with the beginning of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, Leigh Shelton, a spokesman for the UNITE HERE Local 11 union said.

"Disney told Boudlal that if she wanted to work as a hostess she had to remove her hijab because it did not comply with the 'Disney Look,'" Shelton said in a statement.

"Disney further advised Boudlal that if she refused to remove her hijab, she could either work a back-of-the-house position where any customers would not see her, or else go home."

Boudlal refused the compromise and is now bringing Disney before the US Equal Opportunity Commission, a federal agency that handles claims of workplace discrimination.

"Their offer to put me in the back is humiliating," she said in a statement. "They're saying because I'm Arab, because I'm Moroccan, because I'm Muslim, they don't want to see me in the front."

The local branch of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, an advocacy group, said it had sent a letter to Disney demanding that the firm accommodate Boudlal.

"There is no justification for Disney's refusal to allow Ms Boudlal to wear her headscarf at work," said Ameena Mirza Qazi, deputy executive director and staff attorney at the group.

"To say that her headscarf would somehow impact guests is not only insulting to her, but is deeply offensive to the thousands of Muslims who open up their pocket-books at Disney parks and resorts every year," Qazi added in a statement.

Copyright © 2010 Agence France Presse

It doesn't really mention Disney's response, which I think would be worth hearing. I can't see them doing this just for the "look".

[TheRustyScupper]

1) She has a loser on this one.
2) This has been tried before, and Disney won
3) About six years ago, this same thing came up at Downtown Disney.
. . . employees are Cast Members in a story
. . . they forbid the scarf because it isn't part of the costume
. . . they did offer her alternate work locations in order to wear the scarf
. . . thus, no religious discrimination

[Stu29573]

Actually, I CAN see them doing this because if the "look." That "look" is very important to Disney and has been in place with very few changes for many decades. Actually, I can't see this going far, since it is a decades old dress code and she was offered an off stage position if she decided to wear it. Since it was a well known code (she knew it before she took the position), and there was no mention of reduced hours or wages but simply a reassigning to backstage, I don't think she has a case. It would be the same as if a Amish gentleman didn't want to shave his beard. You can agree or disagree, but Disney, as a private company, has the right to enforce their dress code.

[Disney4us2]

When I went to work for Disneyland, during the application process. One of the first things they do is to tell about their dress codes/standards for men and women. No visible tattoos, piercings, etc. (the only exception being one of the guard characters in the Aladdin show.). If you don't agree with their standards you will probably not get hired.

One person in my hire group in the travel dept had a tattoo on his neck. We worked in downtown Anaheim away from DL and way way off stage. He still had to have it covered up. I was wearing a fancy pearl lanyard with my ID. I was told I couldn't wear it, not in the dress code. Again... way off stage. Disney is very strict with their dress codes.

I think Disney is great for offering her an off stage position so she could wear her religious scarf. That way she can still have her religious freedom and employment. If it were me and I wanted to work for Disney. I would just take the off stage position.

[NewDVCowner]

From the article it also sounds like she had been working there without wearing the scarf prior to starting to wear it, so, at least to me, it seems like it wasn't something that she felt was necesary for her religion.

[VWL Mom]

1) She has a loser on this one.
2) This has been tried before, and Disney won
3) About six years ago, this same thing came up at Downtown Disney.
. . . employees are Cast Members in a story
. . . they forbid the scarf because it isn't part of the costume
. . . they did offer her alternate work locations in order to wear the scarf
. . . thus, no religious discrimination

I heard that on FOX news last night with emphasis being on the costume. They also mentioned they would have the costume department work with her to create a head covering that would be agreeable to her religion and their requirements. They asked for her to take reassignment in the meantime and she refused.

Is it just me or is all this nonsense starting to wear thin?

[DizneyRox]

People amaze me in the way they like to lose their jobs. Suing your employer is a good way to end up in the unemployment line, and also great way to show future employers how unemployable you really are.

She'll end up never working in that town again, I'm sure.

[Ian]

Honestly, I'm always baffled that there are attorneys out there who will waste people's time with these frivolous, pointless lawsuits that have no hope of being won.

This issue has been tried, ruled upon, tried again, and ruled up again 1,000 times over. The law is painfully clear cut in terms of employers being required to make reasonable accomodations. Offering a comparable position (such as a backstage position) is the very definition of reasonable accomodation.

Case closed. Move on. Nothing to see here.

[DizneyRox]

Honestly, I'm always baffled that there are attorneys out there who will waste people's time with these frivolous, pointless lawsuits that have no hope of being won.

Time is money, and money pays the mortgage, car payment, country club dues, etc.

[Ian]

Time is money, and money pays the mortgage, car payment, country club dues, etc.

Nah .... no way this plaintiff is getting paid by Disney and no litigator gets paid unless his/her client gets paid.

[LibertyTreeGal]

I'm sorry, but how much farther can "reasonable accommodations" go? And discrimination? Would that be a pay cut? A loss of job? Were they rude poking fun of her in the dining room? I mean really. Those who have been the victims of real discrimination can tell you that it is NOT a one time, isolated, "they aren't letting me do what I want" incident. The bar has dropped so low in what counts as harassment that no one is safe from accusations.

I saw all I needed to see from her when she said, in a different story about it "I really WANTED to wear it for Ramadan." Nothing about having to wear it, or being required to wear it, or something about the religion's tenents requiring that she wear it in the dining room. She wants to do this -- Disney's policy is clear cut and clearly applies to everyone regardless of the "addition to costume." She should be grateful they are willing to commit time to making her another scarf rather than whining that she can't have her way in this one instance.

[Ed]

One thing that strikes me as odd about the entire situation is the following, extracted from a story in the LA Times :

Imane Boudlal said she has worked as a hostess at Storyteller's Café in Disney's Grand Californian Hotel & Spa for two years and began wearing her hijab Sunday but was told she would have to remove it or take a job working out of public view.

Boudlal, who is from Morocco and recently became a U.S. citizen, said she approached her employer in June about wanting to wear the hijab on the job. She was told the request would have to be approved by the corporate office. When she followed up, she said, she was told the request was still under review.

The timing of her request for an exemption seems awfully odd. If this is such an important part of her religious beliefs, why has she worked there for two years, apparently abiding by Disney's rules without complaint, and all of a sudden it's an issue ? Does her recent change of citizenship play some part in her decision to suddenly bring this up ?

Disney has a long-standing image to protect, and goes to great pains to spell out their dress code when new hires are brought onboard. If they cave on this issue, they are opening Pandora's Box, and before long you'd be seeing CMs wearing denim short-shorts, halter tops, multiple body piercings, etc., etc., etc.

Disney also does not permit Christian CMs to openly display crosses or other religious icons, and Jewish employees are not permitted to display the Star of David. Their rules are also quite strict about non-religious jewelry such as rings, bracelets, anklets, wristwatches, etc.

In my book, if you don't want to abide by any employer's rules and policies, you should seek employment elsewhere.

[Melanie]

The timing of her request for an exemption seems awfully odd. If this is such an important part of her religious beliefs, why has she worked there for two years, apparently abiding by Disney's rules without complaint, and all of a sudden it's an issue ? Does her recent change of citizenship play some part in her decision to suddenly bring this up ?

I believe I read somewhere that when studying for her citizenship, something she came across led her to believe that she could wear her headdress while at work, while in the past she'd believed she wasn't allowed.

[brad192]

What all of the previous posters said!

Disney will win this.

She's had her 15 minutes on Fox.

Let's move on. There are more important things to deal with.

[Hammer]

I believe I read somewhere that when studying for her citizenship, something she came across led her to believe that she could wear her headdress while at work, while in the past she'd believed she wasn't allowed.

Mel, that makes sense. I sure she was exposed to the laws and rights of the US while she studied that would have never been told to her beforehand. It would depend on her family environment.

Disney also does not permit Christian CMs to openly display crosses or other religious icons, and Jewish employees are not permitted to display the Star of David. Their rules are also quite strict about non-religious jewelry such as rings, bracelets, anklets, wristwatches, etc.

That is how Disney will probably win this lawsuit. Their rules state that regardless of religious practice, ceremonial wear is not allowed. The key is if the comparable off stage job is the same pay scale as her previous job.

[starryeyes21]

I believe that she wished to wear it for Ramadan. I think that in the process of becoming a citizen she discovered that she cannot be discriminated against in the workplace. I think that what she didn't realize was that Disney was not discriminating against her. They offered her a comparable position off stage. The long and the short of it is.... she's going to lose. They accommodated her and that's all the law requires them to do. The hijab is not part of her costume and Disney has very strict rules about the way the cast members look. She can either take it off and stay in view of the public, wear the hijab and take the position off stage, or find other employment where she is permitted to wear it.

[Jll3Sonex]

Is it just me or is all this nonsense starting to wear thin?

It's getting pretty thin, at least for me. Disney has rules, she was following the rules, and then she decided she didn't want to follow the rules.

So Disney apparently has to change everything to accomodate HER, instead of her actually abiding by the rules.

I'm really getting tired of the 'tolerance' club being used where it's not needed. Pretty soon that thing's gonna break from overuse, and then where will the folks who actually need it be?

[big blue and hairy]

Pretty soon that thing's gonna break from overuse, and then where will the folks who actually need it be?

I agree. Just like anything, a few idiots who try to abuse rules ruin it for those who need the rules.

[Dixie Springs]

What a waste of resources. Very stupid suit. Even CNN asked (almost rhetorically), how has Disney not accomodated you? Lawyers are expensive - I don't want this stunt to elevate my Park-Hopper outlay (along with all of the others).

[BrerGnat]

Just an an FYI, she is being represented by the Union. The SAME union (United Here Local 11) that has been in a negotiations lock for 2 years regarding benefits for DLR employees. This is the same union that has had several demonstrations, protests, etc. on property to draw attention to their cause.

Apparently, the UNION told her to "go public" with this because "Disney is sensitive to the issue of their public image."

This is all another stunt to draw attention to this Union's agenda. That's all. This woman is being used as a pawn. It's unfortunate, really.