This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015/jun/01/supreme-court-rules-favor-muslim-woman-hijab-abercrombie-fitch
The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Version 0 | Version 1 |
---|---|
Top US court rules for Muslim woman denied Abercrombie job over hijab | Top US court rules for Muslim woman denied Abercrombie job over hijab |
(35 minutes later) | |
The supreme court on Monday ruled in favour of a Muslim woman who was denied a job at an Abercrombie & Fitch clothing store in Oklahoma because she wore a head scarf for religious reasons. | |
On an 8-1 vote, the court handed a win to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), a federal agency that sued on behalf of Samantha Elauf. Elauf was denied a sales job in 2008 at an Abercrombie Kids store in Tulsa, when she was 17. | |
The legal question before the court was whether Elauf was required to ask for a religious accommodation in order for the company to be sued under the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which bans employment discrimination based on religious beliefs and practices. | |
Elauf was wearing a head scarf, or hijab, at the job interview but did not say that as a Muslim she wanted the company to give her a religious accommodation. The company denied Elauf the job on the grounds that wearing the scarf violated its “look policy” for members of the sales staff, a policy intended to promote the brand’s east coast collegiate image. | |
In a statement to the Guardian, an Abercrombie & Fitch spokesperson said: “While the supreme court reversed the Tenth Circuit decision, it did not determine that A&F discriminated against Ms Elauf. | |
“We will determine our next steps in the litigation, which the supreme court remanded for further consideration.” | |
Muslim groups said in a friend-of-the-court brief that employment discrimination against Muslims was widespread in the US. Often, the act of a woman wearing a head scarf is what triggers the discrimination, according to the brief. The EEOC has reported that Muslims file more employment claims about discrimination and the failure to provide religious accommodations than any other religious group. | |
Groups representing Christians, Jews and Sikhs also filed papers backing Elauf. | |
Related: Abercrombie & Fitch employees embrace death of sexualised dress code | |
Abercrombie & Fitch’s statement to the Guardian continued: “A&F remains focused on ensuring the company has an open-minded and tolerant workplace environment for all current and future store associates. | |
“We have made significant enhancements to our store associate policies, including the replacement of the ‘look policy’ with a new dress code that allows associates to be more individualistic; changed our hiring practices to not consider attractiveness; and changed store associates’ titles from ‘model’ to ‘brand representative’ to align with their new customer focus. | |
“This case relates to events occurring in 2008. A&F has a longstanding commitment to diversity and inclusion, and consistent with the law, has granted numerous religious accommodations when requested, including hijabs.” | |
Many of those changes have been implemented following the departure of Michael Jeffries, who has been the company’s chief executive since 1992. Jeffries left in December after shares fell by about 39% over 12 months. | |
In April, the company announced that “by the end of July, there will no longer be sexualized marketing used in marketing materials, including in-store photos, gift cards and shopping bags”. |