British Airways Caves In On Cross Ban

British Airways has changed its uniform policy to allow staff to wear a “symbol of faith” in the wake of a row over its decision to ban a Christian worker from displaying a cross.

The U-turn, which will permit staff to wear a religious symbol on a chain or lapel pin, came after Nadia Eweida, a Christian check-in worker, was told she could not wear a necklace bearing a small cross over her uniform.

Miss Eweida, 55, had refused to go to work at Heathrow Airport and was offered a non-uniformed job where she could wear the cross. She rejected this and launched an appeal against BA’s decision, which she lost last November.

Miss Eweida said today she had not received any formal notification from BA about the change to its policy, but said she was “elated” that the airline had changed its position.

Speaking from her home in Twickenham she said: “I am very grateful that BA have finally seen sense.If I belonged to any other religion I don’t believe I would have been treated so dismissively.”

Miss Eweida said she wanted to thank the British public and Christian groups who had voiced their support for her stand and said if it had not been for the publicity she received her case would have been “discarded”.

“At my last meeting with BA they said the policy review wasn’t down to me but was down to public pressure.”

She said she had been forced to take unpaid leave from her £9,000 a year part-time job with BA since September , and may still pursue a claim for compensation and damages for religious discrimination at an employment tribunal set to begin later this year.

When the row over Miss Eweida’s cross erupted in October last year BA said it had not banned religious jewellery, but that it had to be hidden from view. Miss Eweida claimed she had worn the small cross throughout her seven years with BA and accused the firm of religious discrimination.

The airline said it had consulted staff and customers on the issue as well as seeking the views of representatives from the Church of England, the Catholic Church and the Muslim Council of Britain.

Willie Walsh, BA’s chief executive, said today that the airline had “unintentionally” found itself at “the centre of one of the hottest social issues in current public debate” as a result of its decision.

He said: “Most of those consulted felt that a lapel pin was an acceptable and reasonable option. For the majority of our staff, this was the preferred option. However, some respondents believed that limiting the change to a pin would not satisfy all Christians.

“Comparisons were made between the wearing of a cross around the neck and the wearing of hijabs, turbans and Sikh bracelets.

“For this reason, we have decided to allow some flexibility for individuals to wear a symbol of faith on a chain.”

He added: “Our uniform is one of the most powerful symbols of our company and heritage. Our staff wear it with pride and our customers recognise and value it. This modification will enable staff to wear symbols of faith openly without detracting from the uniform.”

The Archbishop of York, Dr. John Sentamu, who had supported Miss Eweida said: “Praise the Lord! I am grateful that BA has finally shown grace and magnanimity in this change of policy so as to enable their Christian employees to display their commitment to their faith. I welcome the efforts made by BA to allow the wearing of the Cross by those Christian employees who wish to do so.

"Nadia Eweida’s courage and commitment to her Lord is a challenge to us all that love and loyalty to Christ conquers in the end.”

Civil rights group Liberty, which was one of the organisations that took part in the consultation, said BA’s decision was “good news”.

Director Shami Chakrabarti said: “We’ve yet to read the new policy in detail but our initial view is positive. “

The Transport & General Workers Union, which represented Miss Eweida at a hearing last year, welcomed BA’s statement.

A spokesman said: “It appears to deal with all the issues raised in recent months. We will now study the details and consult further with our representatives at BA.”

Miss Eweida, who said she hopes to return to her job once all proceedings are over, said she had prayed and fasted in the hope of a postive outcome.

She said: “This is a shining beacon to Christians everywhere to know the Lord is good and gracious and he answers prayers."

“I am very grateful that BA have finally seen sense.If I belonged to any other religion I don’t believe I would have been treated so dismissively.”

So true. Will the muzzies be able to wear the pitchfork and moon symbols of their religion? The pitchfork is there...Trust me.

Just curious, I don't follow this issue that much, but does Britain still have an "Anglican" Church? Something about King Henry VIII creating it sticks in my memory. Something called the "Church of England" or derisively the "C of E"?

A fair number of Northern European countries are still Officially Christian, if memory serves. Is Britain one of them, or not? Please enlighten me. Do they have an Established church, or not?

If so, it's hard to comprehend the persecution of one who wore the cross.

If not, let's be clear about it. Which countries in Europe have an Established religion, and which do not. Nothing wrong either way. The USA most emphatically does not.

(And yet, we manage to tolerate both people who do wear crosses in the form of jewelery (necklaces), and those who do not wear such symbols. We even manage to tolerate people who wear Stars of David, Crescents and Swords, and any number of other religious, pseudo-religious, non-religious, decorative, ornamental, non-ornamental, tacky, tasteless, fashion-deprived, and just plain strange-looking jewelery. What the American Experiment has proven is this: Strange as this may seem to the hardcore, It Just Doesn't Matter, it's all Just Decoration.)

European countries which do have Established Religions, generally leaven their Establishment religiosity with Toleration of those of other faiths.

Which model is Britain following these days?

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.