If you could have proven that they scored you high, and then changed those scores afterwards once the supervisor heard about the ashes? Then you would have been protected. You still would have been at risk for discrimination that was harder to prove. Up to you whether you take that risk. |
Yes. |
She was not just not hired because of the scarf. No one would have ever known about that and they could have given ANY reason - had a better person for the job, whatever. She was essentially hired, and then fired before she started because of her scarf, which they presumably knew about from the start as she wore it to her interview. |
This beings up an interesting question. What does "dressing like a Muslim" mean? Dressing modestly, hijab or not. A&F hardly falls into the modest category, so really - why is she even wearing the hijab if she doesn't want to conform to the rest of the dress requirements? |
NP. You and I both know no one would step up to protect a Christian who did that. |
|
Argh. The press never explains this stuff well. The Court was just interpreting the language in a statute that binds them. The real holding is that she didn't need to point out why she wears the headscarf to trigger the legal claim. She still might lose but the burden is on them.
I also disagree with the outcome but the problem is the statute, not the Court. |
|