Let me get this straight...so Ms. Eweida was offered a job in recruitment where she would be allowed to wear her cross in the open? What about all the potentially offendable applicants? What about their feelings? Doesn't British Airways realize it could be setting itself up for many, many thousands of dollars in fines if people like Aisha from the veil flap apply for a job and get their widdle feewings hurt?

"The airline said its uniform policy stated such items could be worn if concealed under the uniform?"

Oh really? So now Muslim women are going to have to wear their uniforms OVER their hefty bags? And what about Sikh men? Do they have to wear a British Airways cap over their turbans? And do Muslim men have to be clean shaven or can they wear those noxious looking scraggly beards to work?

Good for Ms. Eweida for not backing down. A chick with bigger you-know-whats than the enemy's is always a glad sight to see.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at October 26, 2006 12:20 AM

Christians uses crosses to ward off ghosts/evil spirits/vampires,

Muslims use back packs and high explosives to.....well ward of just about anything in a 500 metre radius.

Posted by: shiva at October 26, 2006 1:23 AM

This woman has more testicles than ALL male politicians and journalists.

Bring back Maggie!!! At least she had them when it counted.

Posted by: MisIslamist at October 26, 2006 2:37 AM

WAIT A MINUTE IS SHE TRYING TO EQUATE HERSELF AS AN EQUAL TO MUSLIMS? CAN THEY LOCK HER UP OR SOMETHING?

Posted by: KAOSKTRL at October 26, 2006 3:54 AM

Let me get this straight...so Ms. Eweida was offered a job in recruitment where she would be allowed to wear her cross in the open?

Yes let's get this straight. This is a lawyer's trick. She is offered a new position which is an employer's right to redeploy staff within his organisation. When she refuses his offer of an alternative position he has grounds for firing her, having made adequate alternative offers.

You see Isabell it is good she has a Barrister paid for by her Union because British Airways will drive up the costs to intimidate. I read of a case of someone who failed at an Industrial Trubunal and now has to pay his former employer's $500.000 costs by selling his home. With the T&GWU union backing her Miss Eweida has protection against BA.

When Miss Eweida, who is unmarried, refused to remove the necklace she was offered the choice of suspension with pay or unpaid leave, pending a disciplinary hearing.

Following a meeting with her managers on 22 September 2006, Customer Service Manager Caroline Girling told Miss Eweida in a letter: "You have been sent home because you have failed to comply with a reasonable request.

"You were asked to cover up or remove your cross and chain which you refused to do.

"British Airways uniform standards stipulate that adornments of any kind are not to be worn with the uniform."

Miss Eweida is suing BA under the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003.

Her case is being supported by her union, the TGWU, and she has hired Paul Diamond, a barrister specialising in religious affairs and an adviser for the Keep Sunday Special campaign, to represent her at her employment tribunal.

Posted by: Voyager at October 26, 2006 4:10 AM

Its about time. Her name sounds african if it is it makes sense why she is fighting back. If she were white she would have been labeled a nazi by now. Its about time. I hope she gets millions and someone gets fired over this. What a pathetic nation Britain has turned into. Not that Canada or the US is better, just sad to see. I hope someone in the US goes after anti christian organizations like the ACLU.

Posted by: pissedoffcanadian at October 26, 2006 4:39 AM

Well done to her!

Now, if we sued, filed complaints or charges, and protested every time some Muslim or dhimmi commits an injustice against us, then we might get somewhere.

Keep up the pressure and don't stop.

Posted by: Holy Wart at October 26, 2006 4:39 AM

You go girl!! Full support from us here!

Im thinking of buying a share so I can write in as a shareholder and blast BA. Probably cut up my frequent flyer card and email it back to them.

Posted by: Jerusalem at October 26, 2006 5:52 AM

Her name sounds african if it is it makes sense why she is fighting back. If she were white she would have been labeled a nazi

Well she is WHITE.

Her father was an Egyptian COPT = Christian

Her mother is English ie. WHITE

She is WHITE

She is British

Now can we return to the subject after bringing race into what is a religious issue

Posted by: Voyager at October 26, 2006 6:13 AM

Earlier this week, there was a televised segment regarding this case on Fox news. In that segment,IIRC, the controversy was focused on the issue of the necklace being identified as 'jewelry' which is prohibited in the employment contract. The mohammedan veil was exempted because it was deemed 'religious' garb - not an adornment such as 'jewelry'.

I do hope that Nadia Eweida has the energy and wear-with-all to pursue this case to it's fullest extent.

British Airways is clearly guilty of tap dancing it's way around a religious discrimination suit and should suffer appropriate penalties in the end.

Posted by: miira at October 26, 2006 7:21 AM

I am glad she is fighting back in this way. I don't see how the airline can win, given the freedom of dress granted to practitioners of other religions. Either the woman, and other Christians, will be permitted to wear a cross, or all religious apparel will be banned. Let's see how long it takes.

Posted by: Josephine at October 26, 2006 7:27 AM

being identified as 'jewelry' which is prohibited in the employment contract.

Only Directors get employment contracts everyone else gets a Service Agreement which is very basic but the Employer can then use Policy Documents referred to in the Service Agreement to amend the working conditions.

The term employment contract is not actually a piece of paper but a legal notion.

Posted by: Voyager at October 26, 2006 8:01 AM

Wearing a teeny tiny cross is offensive but wearing a shroud or a diaper on one's head is not?

Someone please tell me I AM dreaming.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at October 26, 2006 8:36 AM

Since BA issues hijabs and turbans to ethnic staff - why not issue a BA tunic with a Cross emblazoned on it discreetly ................like the Knights used to wear on their breastplates ?

I think the Cross of St George looks very elegant and the saltire in Scotland is similarly a Christian symbol

Posted by: Voyager at October 26, 2006 9:56 AM

"One good way of getting the point across, is, when the muslims want to fluff your pillow during flight, bring you a drink, or offer any help, say no. Say I want the others to fluff bring a drink or whatever. If standing in line to buy a ticket, don't go to the muslims standing behind the counter. Pass until the non muslim gets free. If everybody would do this, the people in charge would notice the muslims are not doing their jobs and something would (maybe) be done.

Let management or owners know that you're very uncomfortable in dealing with a person who's a member of the terrorists religious affiliation. We can do our own jihad with our money and feet."

FREWOMAN is RIGHT ON THE MONEY.

From now on, I will gladly skip british airways, and if I answer one of their surveys on why I don't fly BA, I will state in CAPITALS: because christians are discriminated by your nazi organization and terrorists are welcome.

Posted by: StillFedUp at October 26, 2006 11:12 AM

If I ever fly British Airways I'll be sure to wear a Khomeini mask. If nothing else, I'll get excellent service.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at October 26, 2006 11:47 AM

Fury as BA says it would allow Muslim veil but not cross

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=412609&in_page_id=1770&ico=Homepage&icl=TabModule&icc=NEWS&ct=5

Her MP, Liberal Democrat deputy leader Vince Cable said: 'To suggest she could return to work but be out of sight is grossly humiliating. She is proud of her position and she will stick to her guns.

'This makes BA look terrible. It is deeply insulting for BA to suggest that she should hide away because she is wearing her cross. This just adds insult to injury.'

Conservative former minister Ann Widdecombe, who has cut up her BA executive card in disgust at the airline, said: 'This is ludicrous. Either someone can wear their cross to work or they cannot. We need to know once and for all.'

Posted by: kasper1062 at October 26, 2006 1:11 PM

Don't fly BA. Tell them why. For if you don't tell them why you will not fly BA, it will do no good. No appeals to reason, fairness, justice. No nothing about Islam and the Defense of the West. Forget it. Just do them economic damage. That's all that counts.

Posted by: Hugh at October 26, 2006 1:45 PM

The airline said its uniform policy stated such items could be worn if concealed under the uniform

from above

I guess that means suicide belts can be worn as long as they are worn underneath the uniform because they are considered religious accessories by the muzzie world.

Posted by: TexasInfidel at October 26, 2006 4:13 PM

She needs to ditch the jewelry get a headband with a cross on it...job done.

Posted by: HawkWatcher at October 27, 2006 3:10 AM

I take it that few here are Catholics, so I am going to make a suggestion ;-). How many know the story of the scapular? How many know its original form? If you do not know then I would like to suggest that you do some digging about the origins of the scapular, especially the original form.

These days it is worn around the neck being two pieces of cloth on string. It can of course be worn unobtrusively.

Now, this woman needs her Catholic co-workers to take a similar stand, and to let BA that they will no longer tolerate what amounts to religious discrimination.

This would be the right time to come to work wearing the original format of the scapular

Posted by: Maggie4Life at October 27, 2006 3:27 AM