A multiculturalism overkill seeking a uniform secular pattern or insensitive corporate standards? The sacking of Heathrow Airport worker Amrit Lalji for wearing a nose stud seems to be more of the latter.
40-year-old Lalji, who worked for caterers Eurest, said she wore the tiny piercing as a mark of her Hindu faith. But Eurest says, "Jewellery can harbour bacteria, create a hazard when working with machinery and find its way into the food people eat."
Even if jewellery worn on the hands is banned, considering it's in close proximity to the food, clamping down on a nose ring up above is laying it a bit too thick. A wedding ring could have bacteria, and that's really close to the food. Bacteria could also float down from a long, flowing beard just like a nose ring.
It's small consolation, but it's not merely immigrants who are caught on the wrong foot by this vicious combination of secular fundamentalism and corporate standards. Last year, another Heathrow worker Nadia Eweida was suspended by British Airways for wearing a cross, only to be reinstated following condemnation by clerics and politicians.
How weird is "Merry Christmas" being replaced by "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings? Exactly what's increasingly happening in the name of multiculturalism in countries like the US, Canada and the UK. Are other communities so hypersensitive a judge should order the removal of a Christmas tree from the lobby of a court?
And we haven't even come to banning Muslims from wearing headscarves or asking Sikhs to take off their turbans.
Shouldn't multiculturalism be about celebrating diversity and not being afraid of it? And corporate practices also about being sensitive to the local while being global.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
It is purely what you called "secular fundamentalism" i.e. when so-called secularism is often more dogmatic than religion. It is absurd that wishing "Merry Christmas" should be considered offensive. I think one should be able to do whatever -- wear headscarves or a cross or a nose-ring -- as long as one doesn't directly infringe on another. Basically, everyone should be allowed freedom of speech and expression as long as that doesn't entail a limit on another's right to life or freedom of expression. We are in an absurd and ridiculous age.
Post a Comment