DLR employee sent home for wearing muslim head covering

[DisneyMom]

What if they are Wiccan? Can they wear Witch's Hats? :twisted:
Now you see where demanding to wear religious garb at work can take you.

[hobie16]

What if they are Wiccan? Can they wear Witch's Hats? :twisted:
Now you see where demanding to wear religious garb at work can take you.

Don't forget the Frisbeetarians and the Pastafarians from the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

[Kylara]

I am kind of on the fence about this one. On the one hand, I can understand an employer wanting to avoid having folks mistake an employees beliefs for the company supporting said beliefs, thus enacting a dress code restricting religious symbols and such. On the other hand, in this case, the employee's religion means that they have to wear this particular piece of clothing. On the one hand, I don't like the idea that a person has his employement options curtailed due to their personal belief, but on the other hand, it does seem like an employee with such a belief must accept that certain jobs will not be compatible with the following of that belief.

But people taking Cast Member positions know that they will not be able to wear personal items, including religious ones onstage. Disney considers its public roles "on-stage" and has costumes that match the theming they have chosen for that on-stage area.

I look at it the same as I would look at an actor trying to wear the religious wear either on camera or on state...it wouldn't be allowed.

Disney has successfully won these lawsuits in the past because even the courts and the EEOC has recognized Disney's right to have "on-stage" CMs conform to the theming. And Disney has covered themselves by offering the CM a backstage position so she can keep working.

I know they have done the same for pregnant CMs...moved them backstage when their costume no longer covers the fact that they are pregnant, so it is not just for religious garb.

[PatchOBlack]

What if they are Wiccan? Can they wear Witch's Hats? :twisted:
Now you see where demanding to wear religious garb at work can take you.

Don't forget the Frisbeetarians and the Pastafarians from the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

As far as I know, Wiccan, Frisbeetarians, and Pastafarians are not REQUIRED by their religions (and in the last two cases, they are mock-religions) to wear any particular symbols or piece of clothing. That is the problem point here: According to her religious beliefs, she has to wear that.

But people taking Cast Member positions know that they will not be able to wear personal items, including religious ones onstage. Disney considers its public roles "on-stage" and has costumes that match the theming they have chosen for that on-stage area.

I look at it the same as I would look at an actor trying to wear the religious wear either on camera or on state...it wouldn't be allowed.

Disney has successfully won these lawsuits in the past because even the courts and the EEOC has recognized Disney's right to have "on-stage" CMs conform to the theming. And Disney has covered themselves by offering the CM a backstage position so she can keep working.

I know they have done the same for pregnant CMs...moved them backstage when their costume no longer covers the fact that they are pregnant, so it is not just for religious garb.

I did mention in an earlier post that is why Disney calls their employees "cast members" rather than simply "employees". If they define the terms of their employment as being part of a performance, then it follows that the company that "casts" them in a role can dictate their costumes. The things is, and I realize that Disney has defended themselves successfully in similar cases, will they be able to support that position once again in this case, and should they be able to? Or should people who hold certain religious beliefs have to simply accept that holding those beliefs will make it impossible for them to hold certain jobs? I don't have an answer to that, myself.

[Goofyernmost]

I am kind of on the fence about this one. On the one hand, I can understand an employer wanting to avoid having folks mistake an employees beliefs for the company supporting said beliefs, thus enacting a dress code restricting religious symbols and such. On the other hand, in this case, the employee's religion means that they have to wear this particular piece of clothing. On the one hand, I don't like the idea that a person has his employement options curtailed due to their personal belief, but on the other hand, it does seem like an employee with such a belief must accept that certain jobs will not be compatible with the following of that belief.

No fence problem for me. Disney is non-denominational. Above that it is not in the business of supporting or denouncing anyone's religious or personal beliefs. It just doesn't fit in. It is not part of the show. You know that going in, it is not acceptable. If I don't have a drivers license I cannot ask to be a bus driver. It isn't discrimination against a non CDL person, it is a part of the requirement.

If Disney said...you cannot work here because you are Muslim, then you have a case. This is just a ridiculous waste of time and money completely pursued to bring attention to oneself.

[mapo]

I know they have done the same for pregnant CMs...moved them backstage when their costume no longer covers the fact that they are pregnant, so it is not just for religious garb.

Ummmmm. No. A pregnant CM is not moved backstage just cause they are preggers. Only exception is characters in entertainment. They are moved to non-character roles for safety and show. Show cause a preggers Cindy (for example) is a no-go. Safety cause fur Characters can and do take a lot of physical abuse.

Perhaps those you know that were moved had medical restrictions. That is a whole different ball of wax. Some lines of business cannot accomodate certain medical restrictions.

Say, hmm, Security cannot use a narcoleptic as a patrol unit or gate. Actually, I think a narcoleptic would have a tough time in Security, or busses, or monorails, or operations...

Or, let's see. Mobility impaired CMs would be unable to drive a train, or a ferry, or parking tram, or be a parking tram host....

In other words, pregnancy does not mean you are not a good fit for on stage role. However, other medical conditions may limit your ability to be a good fit either "at all" or "temporarily" in certain roles.

MAPO

[Mayonnaise]

Like when they made Zazu a foufer?

8^P

[CujoSR]

Morbid curiosity... What is the policy concerning cross necklaces? If I remember correctly it could be worn if not visible outside the costume?

[drcorey]

Ummmmm. No. A pregnant CM is not moved backstage just cause they are preggers. Only exception is characters in entertainment. They are moved to non-character roles for safety and show. Show cause a preggers Cindy (for example) is a no-go. Safety cause fur Characters can and do take a lot of physical abuse.

Perhaps those you know that were moved had medical restrictions. That is a whole different ball of wax. Some lines of business cannot accomodate certain medical restrictions.

Say, hmm, Security cannot use a narcoleptic as a patrol unit or gate. Actually, I think a narcoleptic would have a tough time in Security, or busses, or monorails, or operations...

Or, let's see. Mobility impaired CMs would be unable to drive a train, or a ferry, or parking tram, or be a parking tram host....

In other words, pregnancy does not mean you are not a good fit for on stage role. However, other medical conditions may limit your ability to be a good fit either "at all" or "temporarily" in certain roles.

MAPO

yeah a pregnant snow white would give Hi Ho a whole new meaning.

[TdcOgre]

yeah a pregnant snow white would give Hi Ho a whole new meaning.

There's an extremely naughty version of that song you know.

:twisted: