One of the positives of Brexit and living in great Britain



Private companies can prohibit employees from wearing headscarves at work, the EU’s top court ruled on Thursday.

The judgment from the Court of Justice of the European Union declared that companies could restrict employees from wearing religious symbols as part of a broad ban on “any visible form of expression of political, philosophical or religious beliefs in the workplace.”

The justification, the court added, is “an employer’s need to present a neutral image towards customers or to prevent social disputes.



Shit like this would not be allowed here
 

Calaf

Veni Vidi Vici
VIP


Private companies can prohibit employees from wearing headscarves at work, the EU’s top court ruled on Thursday.

The judgment from the Court of Justice of the European Union declared that companies could restrict employees from wearing religious symbols as part of a broad ban on “any visible form of expression of political, philosophical or religious beliefs in the workplace.”

The justification, the court added, is “an employer’s need to present a neutral image towards customers or to prevent social disputes.



Shit like this would not be allowed here
In UK, shit like this wouldn't run as it won't only affect Muslims only, cause of the Jewish community as well. They thought ahead, if halal is banned, what's next, Koshar. If hijab is banned, the kip will be next. Then a dominio effect. Europe, its plain nacaab.
 
That's a bad-for-business policy in this day and age of social media that company will get doxxed and boycotted by many.
 
Fourthly, the Court holds that national provisions protecting the freedom of religion may be taken into account, as more favourable provisions, in examining the appropriateness of a difference of treatment indirectly based on religion or belief. In that regard, it notes, in the first place, that, when examining whether the restriction resulting from a measure intended to ensure the application of a policy of political, philosophical and religious neutrality is appropriate, within the meaning of Article 2(2)(b)(i) of Directive 2000/78, account must be taken of the various rights and freedoms in question and that it is for the national courts, having regard to all the material in the file in question, to take into account the interests involved in the case and to limit the restrictions on the freedoms concerned to what is strictly necessary. That ensures that, when several fundamental rights and principles enshrined in the Treaties are at issue, the assessment of observance of the principle of proportionality is carried out in accordance with the need to reconcile the requirements of the protection of the various rights and principles at issue, striking a fair balance between them. It notes, in the second place, that, by not itself carrying out, in Directive 2000/78, the necessary reconciliation between the freedom of thought, conscience and religion and the legitimate aims that may be invoked in order to justify unequal treatment, and by leaving it to the Member States and their courts to achieve that reconciliation, the EU legislature allowed account to be taken of the specific context of each Member State and allowed each Member State a margin of discretion in achieving that reconciliation.

Doesn't this last bit state that each nation can respectively deal with things according to their assessment of each case with all of the weird "principle of proportionality" measurements taken into account?

IMO, this "neutral workplace" fixation, which is not well defined, can be discriminatory, as you see here. Hopefully, this will be dealt with on national grounds, as the option stands, for them to evaluate what takes precedent because this, for the hijab topic, is garbage resolution.

One possible way to take this is to focus on terminological disputes, I doubt it can stand ground with all things considered because neutrality can be a bias toward the majority, and that itself carries a lot of possible discriminatory baggage that will not be consistently carried out if other types of discussions take place.

And there is this internal workplace rule that I'm sure would be focused on in court if ever other incidents occurred. For example, if the aim of the company does not contradict it in any meaningful way where they are almost forced to highlight at least some form of discrimination.
 
I remember how this one manager had such an issue with this Jewish kid at my work who had this Jewish cap on every time and eventually forcibly got it off of him.

these Europeans are mad racist.
 
Top