Published: 18 Oct 12 12:20 CET | Print version
Online: http://www.thelocal.de/society/20121018-45639.html
A German dental practice which refused to hire a young Muslim woman because she insisted on wearing a headscarf at work broke the law, it was reported on Thursday. The court ruling is the first of its kind for the country.
What do you think? Leave your comment below.
It's an intriguing premise: Are Germans ready to elect a Jewish politician chancellor? British journalist David Crossland has written a novel exploring themes of racism and neo-Nazi violence in Germany. The Local has excerpts. READ () »
A Bayern Munich supporter is so desperate to get his hands on a ticket for Saturday's Champions League final against Borussia Dortmund he is offering to trade 20 litres of beer and a rare free table at Oktoberfest. READ () »
Germany could in the future have a country-wide “tolerable limit” for cannabis possession, it was reported on Friday. Currently, this amount differs between states. READ () »
Job centres searching for photos of “ill” people at wild parties or statuses by “broke” people boasting about their new cars were warned on Friday it was illegal to use Facebook to spy on people suspected of abusing the benefits system. READ () »
Germany's oldest fraternity association could change its membership rules to include only ethnic Germans at their annual meeting this weekend, the country's media reported on Friday. READ () »
Get The Local flavour of Germany with our series offering an insider's take on their hometown. This week, Marcy Jarvis talks about her adopted town, Herrenberg. READ () »
Nearly half of all immigrants arriving in Germany are more highly skilled than their host country's residents, a study released on Friday revealed. READ () »
A leading German Catholic cardinal says the government should encourage women to stay at home and breed - rather than bring immigrants into the country to solve its demographic problems. READ () »
More news from France at thelocal.fr
More news from Norway at thelocal.no
More news from Sweden at thelocal.se
More news from Switzerland at thelocal.ch
See all ads | Join the Marketplace
970 jobs available
657 new jobs this week
0 new jobs today
Dating
Looking for your own blonde bombshell? Or is the strong, silent type more your
style? Find a German sweetheart here.
Weather
"After clouds comes clear weather," say the Germans. But what about after that? Find out in The Local's weather
section.
Blog
German stuff that's distracting us today.
Noticeboard
Whether you want to buy, sell, hire, announce or promote something, here's the place to do it - completely free of
charge.
Discuss
Debate the news, ask for advice, make friends - or just let off steam.
Register now for:
> Free use of noticeboard
> Special discounts
> Weekly news roundup
> Unlimited use of discuss
Your comments about this article:
Here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14135523
Bottom line: If I own a business I can't decide what is appropriated and what is not to my employees wear? Cool.
2. Refusing to employ because of her headscarf was in breach of the Equal Treatment Act, the judge said.
3. The court also rejected the suggestion that headscarves could pose a hygiene risk to patients. There was no more chance of transferring bacteria with a scarf than there was via human hair, the judge said.
All above observation by respected judge are valid and true. One must salute to this judge who upheld the freedom of expression and religion. Well done honourable judge keep it up. The good decision by German court has also been posted to www.themuslimtimes.org for wider circle of Muslim readers. Well done Germany keep it up.
Don't want to employ women, old people, foreigners, religious people? That's fine unless you tell them why. Then it's court time.
The article makes it quite clear that if there is a good reason for limiting a person's right to wear whatever they want then it's ok. However, as an employer, you don't have the right to make arbitrary rules that limit the freedoms of others.
"I am anti-theist and that means contempt of all religions." Fine. But, that isn't the issue. The issue is contempt for people with thoughts and ideas different to your own. Or, do you, like the religious extremists you (and I) detest, think that you are so right that you should force others to do things your way?
"If I own a business I can't decide what is appropriated and what is not to my employees wear? Cool." - Strange, right? I also heard that it is illegal to treat women and men differently. Why? It is my business, so I own my employees. Wait, it is not Middle Age and they are not my slaves. Damn, I keep forgetting that.
@ blueadun #13
"If they want to work and live here they should try to integrate and not force their values." - So, if I move to Münich, I need to become a catholic? And if I state that I am agnostic, it means I am forcing my values on the people of Münich? Then I guess it is a good thing I am living in Berlin.
This is a perfect example of how a German employer failed to integrate into multicultural German society.
So. If you own a bank and I work there, can I work with shorts, hawaii t-shirt and stuff. Right?
But if you disagree, then I'll sue you saying that I'm a follower of Cthulhu and demand my religion freedom.
As a business owner you should be able to say what is APPROPRIATED. Being a lawyer in clown cloths will probably bad for you. But hey, middle ages and stuff.
My reason for making my position clear was to pre-empt accusations of me being called anti-Muslm. I am perfectly aware what the issue is here and it is not "contempt for people with thoughts and ideas different to your own." It is about them forcing their religious beliefs on others which is why I referred you to the BA case. I am not telling anyone how to dress or what to believe, but they are promoting their religious beliefs. The crucifix case is here http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9520026/Christians-should-leave-their-beliefs-at-home-or-get-another-job.html: ¦quot;There is a difference between the professional sphere where your religious freedoms necessarily abut onto and confront other interests and the private sphere. The employees concerned could indeed pursue all the generally recognised manifestations of their religion outside the work sphere.¦quot;
@Dizz See above. And all Abrahamic religions are myths just as Greek and Roman gods are.
Jihad consists of a broader spectrum than just violent confrontation. Bit by bit, piece by piece western culture is being pushed to the back of the bus with the connivence of clueless useful idiots like this court.
So I own a bank and you work there. May I decide that starting Monday you should work wearing only underwear? I guess not.
Rules regarding clothes at work can be imposed only if they impact the actual work, not based on personal preferences of the business owner. Wearing a scarf does not prevent the woman to do her job as dental assistant at high standards. So the business owner does not have a right to discriminate her based on a religious piece of clothing. Just like one cannot be discriminated because he/she has red hair. You are there to do your job well, not to fulfill fantasies. And yes, workers having rights is one of the differences between today and Middle Age. Even if some of us are not mentally prepared for the present.
"but an expression of her beliefs and wearing it was part of her right to religious freedom. "
So how can it be a religious freedom ?, it is a cultural issue not a religious issue but I can see a problem arising in the future with people wanting to wear burkas at jobs where they are not suitable but will claim it is a religious right.
I am no expert in Quaran, but I think it contains the idea of limiting the display of female charms. According to what I found through Google, it seems that in a hadith, Mohammed clarifies that it is a female religious duty to cover her head. So apparently it is a religious thing.
But, just as you said, even if it was only a cultural thing, the idea is the same. If it does not prevent you to perform your job correctly, then it cannot be banned.
For the first 90 days they don't even have to state why they have to let you go, but employers still elaborate too much and get themselves in trouble.
If you like to continue to get yourself into trouble, keep talking.
Of course, some rules must be enforced in order for society to function - these are the laws we value. The problems start when a group decides that they are so right that they will force others into whatever they believe even when there is no reason as far as society goes.
You, and I, and millions of others, have our ideas about religions and we are entitled to them. However, millions of others have different ideas to which they are also entitled. This girl wants to wear a headscarf. The court determined that there was absolutely no societal reason why she shouldn't do so - it didn't interfere with the job, it wasn't unhygienic, no reason what-so-ever. She isn't doing anything do anybody else, leave her alone - the court says. And, I agree. Those wanting to stop this girl have lots in common with the Taliban they hate so much - they are just trying to force their ideas on others for ideological reasons. Though, I do agree that posters on this forum probably wouldn't resort to violence the way some of the Taliban do :-)
As far as the BA case, it is just the same. If crucifixes are worn but otherwise play no part in anything - who cares? However, there have been a number of other cases in the UK that are more worrying such as a notary and some nurses refusing homosexuals for religious reasons - these definitely come into the interfering with the ability-to-do-the-job category.
be permitted in forbidding the wearing of a headscarf of a civilian working within it's walls? If so, should this now be allowed according to the courts decision. Or are embassies immune from the laws of the countries they reside in?
Why does one have the right to work in a foreign culture and tell them they must accept your culture?
It's a headscarf. There are so very many other things to get ones knickers in a twist about.
If Germany wants to stay white and homogenous, then let them. But 2 articles up it says they are in desperate need of skilled workers since their aren't enough White, non-headscarf wearing Germans that meet standard.
Progress. Once you stop being so scared of every little change, you'll realize that the sky isn't falling and you may even see some up side to immigration *gasp*
Why does one have the right to say your culture is foreign but mine is *superior*?
Because I work for you, why does that mean you own me to the extent you can determine clothes I wear?
This is really much more than her personal choice. It involves her acceptance by her family, her group, her culture.
We can only imagine what would happen to her if she took off the scarf.
How likely is it that boyfriend, or husband or family or friends would take this casually?
How much pressure does each of us have to conform to our family and social group? More than we may be aware of.
We humans are groupies, it's just the way it is. Yet we can also open our minds and try to understand and accept people who think differently than we do.
Ultimately it is for our own benefit.
Correct. Because, that is what we know. The rest of your rant is racist conjecture.
"When you are being hosted at somebody else's home..."
Who's home? We have no idea! The girl wants to wear a headscarf - what gives you the right to determine that she isn't at home? My mother wears a headscarf! Does that mean she isn't 'at home'?
"When you are being hosted at somebody else's home, which rules do you follow? Yours or theirs? The visitors have to respect the culture and the standards of the people who are welcoming them."
That is a good point. It is exactly what the lady in case did - she followed the rule of non-discrimination, as it is stated in the Equal Treatment Act. The employer failed to integrate into the German society and, respectively, to follow German values and he was punished through the reported court decision. If he wants to push his non-professional values on his employees, he has to move to another country, definitely outside EU. If he wants to stay, he has to show respect to human rights.
Classic problem of interpretation , in some countries a burka is must (religion or culture) whereas in other places no headgear at all is acceptable (Western Turkey) .
I find this more of a fashion statement ,in the U.K. some years back many many young men were wearing the outfit of Rastafarianism but it died out .
Would they be forced to remove their Habit?
Seriously, who cares. If she is qualified and the best candidate for the job I really don't care what she wears.
Yes, you are right, in some places Muslims have to follow the religious rules to the letter, whereas in some other things are more lax. However, if they choose to strictly follow the religious rules (or at least this rule in this case), they should be allowed to, as long as it is not illegal.
@ChrisRea;
They have been passing laws banning headscarves in various parts of the EU, especially France and Belgium and like I said even in Southern Germany for years now, I'm not so sure he would have to leave the EU to have his way.
I was Christian and I am tickled pink when Christians show an inherent respect for other cultures and religions even when they don't believe in that religion.
God loves those who respect His creation and His religion.
First of all, the French and Belgian bans are against the full Islamic veil, not against headscarf. Secondly, they are currently challenged at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. With officials like the Council of Europe human rights commissioner supporting the challenge, I would say there are high chances that the bans will be lifted.
The ban in Germany refers only to teachers. Taking into consideration that a teacher's job has a lot to do with life values, I think it is fair to have religious neutrality here. Of course, I am also against teachers wearing Christian symbols (or from other religions).
My statement was actually about imposing non-professional values on employees. I would say the EU legal system is pretty good at fighting such offenses.