Sorry, but I worked for a state government agency, and there were no accommodations for any personal or religious sensibilities, especially when it came to dressing for work. You wore the uniform as directed, or you didn't have a job. And you're naive if you think that making exceptions for certain groups of people doesn't lead to more accommodations down the road. First it's the skirts, then it's the head dress, then it's the foot baths, then it's the prayer rooms and rugs, then it's special religious observances, then it's special food, etc. That crap is already happening here and overseas. And we're allowing them to get away with it.
People are all the same when it comes to getting what they want. They'll push as long as you allow them to. Once you've shown any sign of weakness and give in, you've lost the upper hand for good. It's all down hill from there. The Dems have been successful using this technique time and time again against the Republicans. And it's why most of us don't believe that the Republicans in Congress have any backbones.
What position did you work in? If you were required to wear a uniform because the position necessitated it for safety, authority, etc., then that's one thing. But it's not what we're talking about here. Especially not with a private corporation.
And you're naive if you think that making exceptions for certain groups of people doesn't lead to more accommodations down the road. First it's the skirts, then it's the head dress, then it's the foot baths, then it's the prayer rooms and rugs, then it's special religious observances, then it's special food, etc. That crap is already happening here and overseas. And we're allowing them to get away with it.
Then I'm naive (amusing, since I probably know more about Islam than 95% of the people on FR), since I find this talk about allowing skirts leading to foot baths leading to everybody having to say the shahada or have their head chopped off to be a tad....paranoid. Whatever happened to people simply acting like adults and agreeing to tolerate each others differences on non-essentials (like wearing skirts instead of pants), while drawing the line at the over-the-top requests like footbaths or five 30-minute prayer times, on the clock?
Let me ask you a question. Let's say you have a Christian lady whose conviction is that she should not wear pants, as she believes them to be men's clothing and thus has a religious conviction against it. She has been a hard-working, integral part of her office environment doing clerical work for 10 years. One day, the new management hands down a dress standard requiring all female office employees to wear pantsuits. This is not for any essential concern (safety, utility towards doing the job, etc.), but simply because of the preference of the management. Do you think she should be forced to start wearing pantsuits, or else find another job, for not wearing an article of clothing that is not essential to the performance or safety of her job?
I don't. And I think the employer ought to be penalised financially and open to a hefty civil suit if they fire her for holding to her conviction on this issue. If her clothing is not causing a safety issue for herself or others, and if it has no effect on the actual performance of her job, then the employer has no business mandating what she wear, period.