posted
Muslim woman refused job as a hairdresser because she wears a headscarf wins £4,000 payout
By Daily Mail Reporter Last updated at 8:23 AM on 17th June 2008
Bushra Noah has been awarded £4,000. Sarah Desrosiers said she needed stylists to showcase alternative hairstyles
A Muslim woman has been awarded £4,000 for "injury to feelings" after a hair salon owner refused to employ her because she wears a headscarf.
Bushra Noah accused Sarah Desrosiers, owner of a trendy central London hair salon, of religious discrimination after she failed to offer her a job in May last year.
A panel sitting at the central London employment tribunal dismissed her claim of direct discrimination but upheld her complaint of indirect discrimination.
Mrs Noah, of Acton, west London, applied for a job as a junior assistant at the Wedge salon in King's Cross.
Giving its judgment, the tribunal said it accepted that Ms Desrosiers said that Mrs Noah lived too far away but was persuaded to give her an interview.
But when the 19-year-old applicant arrived at the salon she claimed that the Canadian salon owner was clearly shocked by the fact she wore a headscarf.
Ms Desrosiers told the tribunal she was surprised that the younger woman had not mentioned it earlier.
She said she needed stylists to reflect the "funky, urban" image of her salon and showcase alternative hairstyles.
If an applicant had a conventional hairstyle she would insist that it was re-styled in a more "alternative" way, she said.
After a 15-minute meeting she and Mrs Noah parted and both parties told the tribunal it was obvious that the 19-year-old would not be offered the job.
The panel refused an application by Mrs Noah for aggravated damages and rejected her claims that the episode had put her off hairdressing, finding that she applied for further salon jobs before deciding to retrain in tourism.
But they did find that she had been badly upset by the 15-minute interview and awarded Mrs Noah £4,000 damages for "injury to feelings".
In their judgment, the panel stated: "We were satisfied by the respondent's evidence that the claimant was not treated less favourably than the respondent would have treated a woman who, whether Muslim or not, for a reason other than religious belief wears a hair covering at all times when at work."
But they also concluded: "There was no specific evidence before us as to what would (for sure) have been the actual impact of the claimant working in her salon with her head covered at all times.
"We concluded that, on a critical and balanced assessment, the degree of risk, while real, should not be assumed to be as great at the respondent believed."
Ms Desrosiers, 32, said: "I feel it is a bit steep for what actually happened. It's really scary for a small business.
"I never in a million years dreamt that somebody would be completely against the display of hair and be in this industry. I don't feel I deserve it."
She said she still had not appointed someone to the job and had decided to "leave it for a while".
Mrs Noah's legal representatives were not available for comment.
Posts: 1029 | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not surprised she won. You simply cannot legally hire/fire based on such things. If they bend for this one issue they will have to bend for other issues and legally that isn't going to happen. Like Islam or not, it's her right. Good for her. Posts: 13440 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the west when visiting the hairdresser it is nice to see how the staff have their hair. It may be outrageous at times but it gives an idea how the staff approach their work, with colour condition and the like..
Here in Egypt after one experience with a female hairdresser with scarf I will not have her any where near my hair again. I always have the male cut my hair they appear better trained ....meaning they can cope with long and SHORT hair....which mine is.
Thought for the day.... Do you think I could get compensation after my hair was cut by a women wearing a scarf....and left me upset..... Posts: 643 | From: Over there | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
That bloody woman actually tried to get way more money out of the hairsalon owner:
" As a result, Ms Noah, who is suing Ms Desrosiers for religious discrimination, has now raised her claim for damages from just over £15,000 to more than £35,000 ."
I remember also from earlier reports that she stated that her earrings were missing after she left the shop ...
I also recall that she was previously turned down at 25 other job interviews. Wonder why.....
Thankfully the jury didn't buy into all this crap.
Well at least Sarah Desrosiers's business wasn't fully destroyed by this freak - who's most likely still not working!!
Posts: 30135 | From: The owner of this website killed ES....... | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
What kind of person does that, really? The kind looking for a free ride. I have had way worse things happen to me and never sued.
-------------------- "Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts." (Sign hanging in Einstein's office at Princeton) Leap and the Net will Appear. Posts: 3891 | From: No good deed goes unpunished. | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to agree OG. I would never go to a hairdresser that I couldn't see her hair. I would be afraid. It has nothing to do with religion. It has everything to do with seeing what that person can do/does with their own hair. Simple as that.
Posts: 198 | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Then you shouldn't...but she still has the right to retain her job and practice her skills. Not everyone thinks the same, but most hairdressers get their business from word of mouth. If a trusted friend told me she did a great job, I would try her out...I wouldn't care if she wore a pan on her head. Err, Ok, I might care then. Posts: 13440 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
lmao smuckers brings to mind the "basin cut " of the early 70's Posts: 3945 | From: ' Res Contr ' Amor non es guirens, lai on sos poders s'atura | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote: but she still has the right to retain her job and practice her skills.
Of course she does. But if a hair salon makes it part of their practice to show their hair,(they are a hair salon) then she should not expect any different treatment than any other stylist. It's about the policy's which have nothing to do with Islam, but about hair. So when it's made into something about Islam that is not right.
I wonder how many hair stylist out there that are covered actually do a lot of business?
Posts: 198 | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
its is a sad story and it is very common story and iam sorry because even in my country it is more than in the UK
Posts: 326 | From: Prague | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry guys i am not in the least bit anti muslim but i understand the salon refusing her the post to this woman on the grounds that she is veiled... If i go to a salon i notice the hairstyles of the people who work their if that are not good i do not go there simple as that... Just as it is the woman's right to wear the hijab it is the salon owners right to emply staff with trendy hairstyles... This woman is using her religion to get a handout and that is more wrong than the salon owner refusing her the job. *Habeeby makes a mental note that next time she fails to get a job she can sue for distress*
Posts: 1797 | From: By my husband's side | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote: but she still has the right to retain her job and practice her skills.
Of course she does. But if a hair salon makes it part of their practice to show their hair,(they are a hair salon) then she should not expect any different treatment than any other stylist. It's about the policy's which have nothing to do with Islam, but about hair. So when it's made into something about Islam that is not right.
I wonder how many hair stylist out there that are covered actually do a lot of business?
Well, in all fairness, most of the covered stylists I saw back in the states worked in a private salon that catered to Muslim women. It was very private and you never saw men, some of the hairstylists were covered, too. I only went a couple of times (long hair, doesn't need to be cut so often) but it seemed very natural and normal.
On the other hand, I used to go to a salon before I converted and began to cover, and there were a couple of hairstylists that had the most OUTRAGEOUS hair and I learned that they practice on each other, either coloring or cuts, and it doesn't always work. So they're not always (if rarely) cutting their OWN hair. Posts: 13440 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
i would go to someone whos hair i could see then some woman covering her hair i would not trust she has skills!!!! i am very picky on who cuts my hair!! i dont care what her religion is or what color she is or what ever its all about apperances in the hair styleing business!!!
-------------------- your ass is so tight when you fart only a dog can hear it.when you queef only a cat can hear that one. Posts: 9776 | From: You like If only mosquitoes sucked fat instead of blood. | Registered: Jul 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
If showing your hair is an indication of a good/bad hairstylist, then the owner of this salon has problems! That being said, if her reputation was that of a good stylist, I would give her a chance.
I doubt if she ever had a policy stating that it was mandatory for all employees to cover their hair. More than likely, she never imagined that a muslimah wearing hijab,would walk into her salon and apply for a job.
She may have rights as the owner of the salon, but those rights do not include discrimination.
Posts: 143 | From: Alexandria, Egypt | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am not against any religion but this is just ridiculous.
I feel really bad for the salon owner who has responsibilities and has to WORK to pay this bludger money for nothing.
It was a job interview. She said she needed stylists to reflect the "funky, urban" image of her salon and showcase alternative hairstyles. For a hair salon, you need workers which will reflect the current styles and trends, which this lady obviously did not.
I am wondering why nobody else gave her a job and if she is trying to sue them as well.
This is very bad news for business owners, do they all have to employ the next veiled chick that walks through the door in the fear of being sued ?
What next, bikini models refusing to take off their galabeya ?
Posts: 83 | From: Egypt | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here's what Daily Mail readers have had to say so far:
Ridiculous! I'm overweight and although I don't think I should be discriminated against on that basis alone, I fully accept that I have no business applying for a job in a shop selling skimpy clothes, for example, when the sales assistants are obviously expected to model the garments on sale as a means of promoting them. This woman's failure to get the job obviously had nothing to do with religious discrimination (which I'm sure she knows full well herself) and in the fashion/beauty business at least, an employer should be perfectly entitled to choose their employees according to "the look" that's appropriate!
- Vera, Brussels, 17/6/2008 10:02
I am bald and ginger, maybe I should apply the sue - could make a living out of it!
- Scott, UK, 17/6/2008 10:04
I received 1050 pounds for being violently assaulted - if I claim my feelings were hurt, I take it I'm entitled to another 3000?
- Sanona, Spain, 17/6/2008 10:04
Risible. Now I suppose I'll have to avoid headscarf wearing checkout staff in case my purchases of either pork or alcohol products may cause injury to feelings and create a problem for the retail employer.
- M Collins, Leeds, England, 17/6/2008 10:04
Posts: 1029 | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry, Bikini models sell the bikinis by modeling them. Hair stylists don't sell their services by their hairstyles. Anybody here who only gets their hair styled based on what the person's hair looks like that styles YOUR hair isn't thinking it through. I used to have a stylist who was a man, and bald! I used to have another who was a woman with the rattiest hair I've ever seen.
Who says a veiled girl can't be funky and urban? They don't all look like they stepped out of a taliban prison. Many veiled girls still follow styles, are interested in fashion and looking nice. I've seen some veiled women who look MORE fashionable and stylish than some non-veiled women ever could. I will agree only to the extent that IF the hair salon was wanting their stylists to portray new and funky hairstyles themselves, as a means to sell cuts, that's one thing. She should have at least given the woman a chance, see what she could do and how many customers would come back to her if they liked her work. Instead she turned her down simply because she couldn't see her own hair.
Again, most hairstylists do NOT CUT OR STYLE THEIR OWN HAIR. Posts: 13440 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Smucks maybe many veiled women are stylish but looking at the picture of this one she wasn't... Therefore did not fit in with the message the salon wanted to portray... I feel sorry for the business owner who is a hard working woman and has had to pay compensation to this woman... This is an example of what makes some people racist... In the UK we have salons specifically for black hair and they do not employ caucasian people so is this discrimination also? Posts: 1797 | From: By my husband's side | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by With a name like Smuckers: Sorry, Bikini models sell the bikinis by modeling them. Hair stylists don't sell their services by their hairstyles. Anybody here who only gets their hair styled based on what the person's hair looks like that styles YOUR hair isn't thinking it through. I used to have a stylist who was a man, and bald! I used to have another who was a woman with the rattiest hair I've ever seen.
Who says a veiled girl can't be funky and urban? They don't all look like they stepped out of a taliban prison. Many veiled girls still follow styles, are interested in fashion and looking nice. I've seen some veiled women who look MORE fashionable and stylish than some non-veiled women ever could. I will agree only to the extent that IF the hair salon was wanting their stylists to portray new and funky hairstyles themselves, as a means to sell cuts, that's one thing. She should have at least given the woman a chance, see what she could do and how many customers would come back to her if they liked her work. Instead she turned her down simply because she couldn't see her own hair.
Again, most hairstylists do NOT CUT OR STYLE THEIR OWN HAIR.
...I agree Smucks, I mean have you seen the owner of the salon's hair, it's not a great look is it?!!
I get my hair done excellently by my gay male almost bald hairdresser and he does a fantastic job even if I say so myself!! Posts: 1917 | From: WALES | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Come on Youngie you are a beauty therapist and you know how important presentation is in this industry, you have to portray a certain image to look professional. I trained as a hairdresser/beauty therapist many years ago and i tell you something if your hair was not stylish they would send you home, we had to have our nails always manicured and where not allowed to enter the salon without make up on... How would a veiled Muslim deal with this? It was salon rules and to change the rules for a muslim would discriminate against the non-muslims!!!
Posts: 1797 | From: By my husband's side | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
It doesn't matter if they cut their own hair or not. It is the requirement for the position to look trendy. If you don't fit the requirements, look for another job.
To bad W didn't heed this advice.
Gold off to interview as an exotic dancer....and I will be terribly upset if they ask me to take my clothes off...hmmmm, How many lawsuits do you think I can rack up in one day?
-------------------- "Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts." (Sign hanging in Einstein's office at Princeton) Leap and the Net will Appear. Posts: 3891 | From: No good deed goes unpunished. | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Habeeby: Smucks maybe many veiled women are stylish but looking at the picture of this one she wasn't... Therefore did not fit in with the message the salon wanted to portray... I feel sorry for the business owner who is a hard working woman and has had to pay compensation to this woman... This is an example of what makes some people racist... In the UK we have salons specifically for black hair and they do not employ caucasian people so is this discrimination also?
Racism makes people racist, not having to obey laws. If a person is racist it's going to show, if they are going to give someone a fair chance, that's going to show, too. We have no idea how much of this woman's story is made up nor do we know how much of the salon owner's story is made up. As for her photo, how do you know that is her at work? What if that is simply a photo of her at home hanging out or on her way to pray? Do you see how people are SOOO judgmental?
But I am happy that the courts saw what was best in this case, and you cannot choose to NOT hire someone based on how they look. It might seem trivial to most here now, but today is it this, and tomorrow it is something else. Justice was served.
Posts: 13440 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anybody that has been to ANY trendy hair salons in the West have seen the people looking like they stepped out of a dumpster...that are stylists. We've seen the people who look like someone has taken hedge clippers to their hair...that are stylists. I've also seen some who are Muslim and covered and they look very stylist...that are stylists.
Most women who cover aren't going to try to get a job as an exotic dancer, that's a bit extreme. It would be against their beliefs, whereas a hairstylist is not. You are assuming that because she doesn't show her hair to everyone that she doesn't know how to do her own.
But, I know everyone will have differing opinions about this. I know most who are not Muslims (or who are Muslims but do not cover) will see this as a non-issue and think the salon owner was right. I'm looking at it from a legal point of view. Legally the woman is correct. She has the right to practice her religion in the way she thinks is correct. For her, that right way means using hijab. She also has a right to a livelihood and has the right to be employed and not be turned down based on how she looks.
Imagine if any of you were turned down for being too fat, if you tried to apply for a secretarial position and the owner tried to say he wanted only beautiful women because he wanted to get more business by attracting people through this pretty girl. Think about pharmaceutical reps, they also MUST look stunning to get the attention of the doctors they are sucking up to sample or buy their medications? This world has become so superficial and self-involved. The salon owner has a right to a successful business, too. If I were the Muslim woman's attorney I would have gone to get a look at EVERY employee the stylist had ever had to see if she always hired based on fashion/style/funk. If she deviated even once and even ONE looked 'not right for standards' I would have won this case, too. Chances are that they found something similiar and concluded this woman was full of it and just didn't want to admit she didn't want to hire a woman who covered. Bas.
But she must follow the law, and the law says you can't descriminate based on LOOKS. She is just going to have to make due with GOOD stylists and not FASHIONABLE stylists...imagine that. Posts: 13440 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The business owner wasn't very smart on that day when that young Muslim girl showed up for the job interview. She should have just told her she doesn't have enough qualifications - which infact she doesn't - for the vacant job.
Posts: 30135 | From: The owner of this website killed ES....... | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe, the owner of the salon wanted for people to see the hair of other people and how they did it. I can see her reason, and she probably would have hired her if she did not cover her hair because she probably had nothing against a Non-veiled muslim woman working for her. It may not have been about religion, still, she should have hired her veiled or not, muslim or not. Since she did not, the muslim woman should not have made an issue out of it, and the owner of the salon should not have made an issue about her being covered. They were both wrong. Posts: 384 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Habeeby, it was one of those ponderables, you know stuck on a dessert island bla bla!. Anyway yes there are strict rules and regulations in salons, for me it was hair tied back, short nails, no varnish, light makeup, etc. Take a scenario of me (aged 44) as a beauty therapist, being refused for a job in an ultra modern salon, even though I have the required qualifications.Does that mean I could sue for age discrimination? It's just ridiculous, I would accept that I was not what they wanted end of story.
Posts: 4476 | From: Scotland | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
How I nearly lost my business after refusing to hire a Muslim hair stylist who wouldn't show her hair
By Natasha Courtenay-Smith Last updated at 9:48 AM on 18th June 2008
It seems too lunatic to be true. But here a hair salon boss reveals how she was driven to the brink of ruin - and forced to pay £4,000 for 'hurt feelings' - after refusing to hire a Muslim stylist who wouldn't show her hair at work
For Sarah Desrosiers, meeting Bushra Noah was not a moment in her life that she would describe as especially memorable.
Not only was it brief - lasting little more than ten minutes - but it was rapidly obvious to Sarah that Bushra was not the person for the junior stylist position she was trying to fill at her hairdressing salon.
Sarah's reasoning? Quite simply that Bushra, a Muslim who wears a headscarf for religions reasons, had made it clear she would not be removing the garment even while at work.
Sarah Desrosiers says she did nothing wrong by not employing Bushra Noah and would have done the same if an employee refused to remove a baseball cap
Sarah felt that a job requirement of any hairdresser was that the stylist's hair would provide clients with a showcase of different looks. Especially one working in a salon such as hers, which specialises in alternative cuts and colours.
Yet the ten minutes during which Sarah's world collided with Bushra's has resulted in an extraordinary employment battle, in which she was accused of 'direct' and 'indirect' discrimination.
For a year, Sarah has been facing financial ruin, due to a compensation claim for £34,000 brought by Bushra, 19, who has maintained she is due that figure after being turned down for a job at the Wedge salon in London's King's Cross.
In the event, the tribunal ruled this week that while Bushra's claim of direct discrimination failed, her claim for indirect discrimination had succeeded.
Sarah has therefore been ordered to pay £4,000 compensation by way of 'injury to feelings'.
Although this is a smaller sum than she'd feared she might have to hand over, Sarah, 32, is still outraged.
'I am a small business and the bottom line is that this is not a woman who worked for me,' says Sarah.
'She is simply someone I met for a job interview, who, for a host of reasons, was not right for the job. I cannot see how she deserves £4,000.
'As for the notion that I've injured her feelings - well, people's feelings get injured every day. I dread to think the sorts of things that people will try to claim injured feelings for now that this precedent has been set.'
In its ruling, the tribunal said it was 'satisfied that Bushra was not treated less favourably than Sarah would have treated any woman who, whether Muslim or not, wears a hair covering at all times when at work'.
Accordingly, the claim of direct discrimination failed.
But with regard to the issue of indirect discrimination, they found that Sarah had pursued a 'legitimate aim - that aim being to promote the image of the business'.
However, the burden of proof was on Sarah to prove that her means of achieving that legitimate aim was proportionate.
She was not able to prove her contention that employing someone with a headscarf would have the negative impact on her business's stylistic integrity that she feared.
Since the judgment, Bushra, who is of Syrian descent and has worn a headscarf since she was 13, has, so far at least, chosen not to comment.
But, speaking last year, she admitted she had attended 25 interviews for hairdressing jobs without success.
But Sarah, she told the tribunal, had upset her the most.
She said: 'I felt so down and got so depressed. I thought: "If I am not going to defend myself, who is?" Hairdressing has been what I've wanted to do ever since I was at high school.
Bushra Noah (left) and Sarah Derosiers (right) arriving at court during the employment tribunal battle
'This has ruined my ambitions. Wearing a headscarf is essential to my beliefs.'
Bushra had a job in a salon in London, where her tasks included cutting hair, highlighting, tinting and perming, before she left to get married in Syria in 2006.
But on her return to Britain, she was unable to find work.
She has given up her ambitions to become a hairdresser and is studying travel and tourism at Hammersmith and West London College while working part-time in a shop.
At the tribunal, Bushra was asked if Sarah had made derogatory remarks about her headscarf.
She replied: 'She did not. She just asked me if I wore it all the time, or whether I'd take it off.'
Although Bushra is believed to have been acting alone, in the past similar cases have been championed by Muslim traditionalist groups.
In 2006, the Law Lords overturned a court ruling that teenager Shabina Begum's human rights were violated when she was banned from wearing full Islamic dress at school.
The extremist Muslim group Hizb ut-Tahrir later admitted that it had 'advised her'.
Meanwhile, Sarah Desrosiers is wondering how to raise the £4,000 she has been ordered to pay Bushra. She has spent her savings on her legal battle and simply has no money left.
'I am a one-woman band, and am already in debt due to the set-up costs of opening my own salon,' says Sarah. 'I dread to think how many haircuts I'm going to have to do to earn the £4,000 I have to pay Bushra. This has, without doubt, been the worst year of my life.'
Such a messy set of circumstances, let alone the strain of having the case bought against her, was certainly not what Sarah expected when she started out on her career aged 17.
From the outset, she had grand ambitions, telling her mother that she would one day have her own salon.
'Even back then, I realised how important your own hair is to the job,' says Sarah. 'I went into hairdressing a rather plain brunette, but within a few weeks I had a bright red crop.
'I wanted to provide clients with inspiration through my own hair. Whether they're in a conventional High Street salon, or something slightly different like my salon, customers expect to see the stylists with hair that is on trend, striking and can give them ideas for their own look.'
In 1997, Sarah got a job at a salon on London's Portobello Road, where she remained for almost a decade.
In March 2006, feeling ready to spread her wings, she wrote a business plan, secured a loan and invested £5,000 of her savings into the lease on a small salon on Caledonian Road.
She named it Wedge, and planned to specialise in 'urban and edgy' cuts, rather like the cerise colour she often dyes her own hair.
'I'd never felt as proud as I did on the day I picked up the keys to my salon,' says Sarah. 'I was prepared to put my heart and soul into my business in order to make ends meet, and for the first few months, I worked 12 hours a day, six days a week, all by myself.
'I barely saw daylight, but I didn't mind because I was fulfilling my ambition.
'Of course, there were a few nerve-racking moments, such as when another salon opened a few doors away. But that is part of owning your own business, and I felt proud of all I was achieving.'
By March 2007, the business was doing so well that Sarah needed to take on another stylist. To minimise her overheads, she decided the best way to do this would be by renting out a chair in her salon to an experienced stylist - who would take a share of her profits - and employ a junior to work for both of them.
Sarah received dozens of applications for the junior position, one of which was from Bushra Noah.
'Her CV didn't stand out because I was looking for someone who lived locally - something I'd specified in the advert so that I could call them in as and when required - and she lived several miles away in Acton,' says Sarah.
'One day she rang up to see if I'd got her CV and begged me for an interview. I told her I had concerns about where she lived, but she sounded so desperate that I agreed she could come in for a chat.'
A few days later, Bushra duly arrived at the salon.
'I have to say I didn't take to her,' says Sarah. 'She waltzed into the salon and hung up her coat as though she already had the job.
'Naturally, I noticed her headscarf. But I presumed that, as she's a hairdresser, she'd take if off when she was working. In 16 years, I've never known any stylist cover their hair with a headscarf. And this particular headscarf came all the way down to her eyebrows and covered her entire hairline.'
Sarah broached the subject with Bushra, who said she would not be removing the garment.
After ten minutes, with the interview complete, Sarah said she would come back to Bushra about the vacancy.
'As she left, Bushra turned to me and said that she'd been turned down for jobs before,' says Sarah. 'And I admit I thought: "Well, what do you expect?"
'It was not a religious matter. If she'd come in wearing a baseball cap and saying she wouldn't take it off for work, then she wouldn't have got the job either.'
One morning in the second week of June 2007, an innocuous white envelope landed on Sarah's doormat. It contained a letter saying that she was being sued for £15,000 for indirect and direct discrimination by Bushra Noah.
This, the letter stated, related to compensation for injury to her feelings and lost earnings. Later, that figure was increased to £34,000.
'I read it and re-read it and stood there dumbfounded,' says Sarah. 'I remembered Bushra, and I guessed straight away that the claim related to the headscarf. In my mind I was saying "But I wasn't discriminating, it's just a part of the job", over and over again.
'I dialled the number at the top of the letter and was told I needed to get a solicitor, but that because I worked, I wasn't entitled to Legal Aid. I thought: "This is it - my business is over." I was devastated.'
Using her savings of £2,000, Sarah employed a lawyer who helped her draft a statement about her meeting with Bushra.
But with his fees at £280 an hour, she knew she couldn't afford to fight a satisfactory legal battle. Her parents - her mother is a nurse, and her father is retired - weren't in a position to help her out financially either.
'I was at my wits' end, and I had no idea how I was going to pay for my legal fees,' says Sarah.
'I was virtually being accused of racism, which is ridiculous. I've cut the hair of people from all walks of life, including transsexuals, and you can hardly run an alternative salon if you are prejudiced.'
Help came when a friend tipped off a reporter about what was happening, and Sarah's case gained publicity, first locally, then nationally. Since then, she has received support from hundreds of people in the hairdressing industry, including black celebrity stylist Errol Douglas.
Still, the wave of support did little to ease the stress as she fought to clear her name.
'For months, I couldn't sleep, I couldn't eat, I felt as though my whole life was on hold. All I could see was that I'd be forced into bankruptcy and lose my business.'
In the course of preparing for her trial, Sarah estimates she has lost £40,000 of her salon's annual income.
She also faced a further blow when it emerged that Bushra had increased the figure to £34,000 to compensate for hate mail she had received following Press coverage of the trial.
In March, Sarah faced a three- day employment tribunal, and endured four hours of cross-examination.
'I managed to defend myself and not cry, but it was incredibly difficult,' she says. 'I'd even had to ask my accountant, who is a Muslim, and another Muslim friend to write letters confirming that I am not racist. The whole experience was so humiliating and, most importantly, unnecessary.'
'I kept thinking: "I've worked hard all my life - how can it be possible that someone can come into my shop, talk to me for ten minutes and then sue me for £34,000? How is that possibly fair?".'
As she reels from the verdict, Sarah is contemplating her next move. While part of her is tempted to pay, simply to close the door on this unpleasant episode, she also feels she should fight to clear her name.
Her lawyers are advising her on whether or not she can appeal.
'Because of this there will be a black mark against my name for the rest of my life,' she says. 'I feel I have not done anything wrong, and this is a terrible price to pay for a meeting that lasted ten minutes.'
Posts: 1029 | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
"But they also concluded: "There was no specific evidence before us as to what would (for sure) have been the actual impact of the claimant working in her salon with her head covered at all times."
It's important to note that what was found to be unsound was the explanation behind why wearing a scarf was unacceptable for a hair stylist. The tribunal found that the owner didn't discriminate on the basis of religion, but that some of the reasons given didn't quite add up, as I understand it.
Employers are entitled to ask employees to dress in a certain way but they are not entitled to force employees into having a 'funky haircut'. If hairdressers are to be walking, paid models for their styles - that should be made clear in the job description and advert. Personally, I couldn't care less if a stylist wore a scarf - it's the skill I'm interested in. It's a well known joke that hairdressers often have unkempt hair themselves. The owner's dried out, poorly coloured frizz is hardly the best advert for her service, in this case.
Posts: 1157 | From: Censor - Edit - Delete, but you will never take away my FREEDOM! | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
" Bushra had a job in a salon in London, where her tasks included cutting hair, highlighting, tinting and perming, before she left to get married in Syria in 2006 ."
Here we go: That woman is right now 19 so she got married around 17 years of age.
Seriously how much experience as a hairdresser can she have? This girl just finished school!!
Here in Germany hairdressers have to go through a 3 year long training and still have problems to find employment!!
Also quite strange that this woman let's herself get married off by such a young age but shows balls when it's time to put Westerners in place!
Her clear attention was to get money out of this business owner by all means - and she accomplished to do so just not the outrageous amount she initially aimed for.
Also is it common to send off CVs without passport pic? I remember in all the places I worked this was a strict requirement. If no passport pic was forwarded then the CV was automatically dismissed.
Posts: 30135 | From: The owner of this website killed ES....... | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
It's a hip place where the strict Muslim woman wouldn't have fitted in at all.
Would she have sued the shop owner too if she would have had to endure a possible gay hairdresser - because such people are against her religion??? Posts: 30135 | From: The owner of this website killed ES....... | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
You can see both sides of the story in the case of the Muslim woman awarded £4,000 for “injury to feelings” after a hair-salon owner refused to employ her because she wears a headscarf. Blatant discrimination, some might say.
In its decision the employment tribunal accepted that Bushra Noah (above) had not been treated differently because of her headscarf. Looking at wedgehair.co.uk — the website for Wedge, the punkish salon in King’s Cross, Central London, where Noah applied for a job — you can kind of see where the owner is coming from — although that clearly did not satisfy the tribunal. Click on the gallery and you’ll realise that this case could just have easily have been headlined “Owner of trendy salon discriminates against job applicant who hasn’t got pink hair”.
In hairdressing, image is obviously important. The glaring irony in this story is that most of us nonhairdressers probably think that the odd headscarf or two wouldn’t go amiss in our local salon — it’s as though stylists feel a need to prove their extensive spectrum of hairdressing skills on their own heads. At the same time. Mine, for one, boasts several different colours, as well as what I call the Skunk: a choppy cut that looks like the result of an argument with a lawnmower, with the kind of shine seen on the forecourt at Ferrari. The headscarf might have been a welcome relief.
But maybe we quite like the crazy hair expression. On one level it’s reassuring; you wouldn’t get your teeth whitened by a dentist wearing a mouthguard. That said, one school of thought advocates going to hairdressers with the worst cuts in the salon. Why? Because they’re so busy using their skills on everyone else that they haven’t got time for a personal short back and sides.
posted
In UK it passport photos are only JUST being asked for in a job application.....
I get the feeling now that people will get frightened of employing muslims Employers are being held over a barrel if just the simplest thing goes wrong.....they shout 'discrimination to my religion' before looking to see if they are qualified in the first place for the job....
Posts: 643 | From: Over there | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Seriously how much experience as a hairdresser can she have? This girl just finished school!!
Here in Germany hairdressers have to go through a 3 year long training and still have problems to find employment!!
Also quite strange that this woman let's herself get married off by such a young age but shows balls when it's time to put Westerners in place!" - Tigerlily.
"Mrs Noah, of Acton, west London, applied for a job as a junior assistant at the Wedge salon in King's Cross."
Mrs Noah is British and is a 'westerner', is she not? The law is there to be accessed by all citizens, as they see fit. If those laws need to be reformed, cases like this may highlight weaknesses.
Posts: 1157 | From: Censor - Edit - Delete, but you will never take away my FREEDOM! | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
It's a hip place where the strict Muslim woman wouldn't have fitted in at all.
I agree. Just looked at the pictures and it does not look like the kind of place where a covered Muslima would want to work. I don't really understand why she applied there in the first place. Posts: 3587 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe she just wanted - a job!
Posts: 1157 | From: Censor - Edit - Delete, but you will never take away my FREEDOM! | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
TL - in the UK it is NOT normal to include photos with CVs for precisely the reason that discrimination based on photos may occur eg sex, race, religion, age, health, disability etc are illegal in the UK.
When I was a manager recruiting staff (not hairdressers!) I ALWAYS used to include a detailed practical test including many of the skills needed to perform the work. I learnt that after I was in hospital once and in my absence my boss recruited a complete moron to an analyst post I had vacant - just because he had a good suit, was 'liked' by other people in the organization and was a good b*s*r at interview.
Posts: 5593 | From: Egypt | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The business owner wasn't very smart on that day when that young Muslim girl showed up for the job interview. She should have just told her she doesn't have enough qualifications - which infact she doesn't - for the vacant job.
If we are judging the salon owner's intelligence on that day, then I agree, she isn't very smart. The fact that she chose NOT to hire someone based on looks, shows her ignorance as a businessperson. How could the owner tell the woman that she didn't have enough qualifications for the job? She would know this how.....by the scarf on her head??? She had no way of knowing anything about this woman's qualifications, because she herself, was not professional enough to offer the woman an opportunity to show her skills. Only then, could the owner have known if she was qualified for the job. Hopefully, this experience has taught her a lesson discrimination. You don't judge people based on looks!
quote:In the UK we have salons specifically for black hair and they do not employ caucasian people so is this discrimination also?
If a caucasian is qualified, and applies for the job and is denied due to skin color, then of course, it is discrmination!
Posts: 143 | From: Alexandria, Egypt | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Passports are only required upon appointment so that CRB checks can be carried out and for identity veriification to comply with the Assylum and Immigration act of 1996.
As part of my role of School Business Manager I have to ensure that equality apllies across the board.
This incident should never have happened, all the owner had to do was say you are not qualified enough to work here or that another applicant was more suitable to the role becasue she had more experience. The cost of a flippant remark eh.
Posts: 11097 | From: Cairo | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lumos: Maybe she just wanted - a job!
Well then she should have tried Burger King - I am sure they wouldn't have mind!! Posts: 30135 | From: The owner of this website killed ES....... | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
It's a hip place where the strict Muslim woman wouldn't have fitted in at all.
I agree. Just looked at the pictures and it does not look like the kind of place where a covered Muslima would want to work. I don't really understand why she applied there in the first place.
Ditto.
I wouldn't want to work there myself. I don't want pink hair. ...Blue, maybe. I think when I am a little old lady with white hair, I may get that blue tint put on my hair.
There are different types of salaons, why in the world would a covered Muslim choose this one? Posts: 3891 | From: No good deed goes unpunished. | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Who would emply her now that she is milking it? She has advertised herself nationally as a sponger.
I am in total agreeance she should have some compensation but not thousands of £££s, that is just greedy!
Posts: 11097 | From: Cairo | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cheekyferret: This incident should never have happened, all the owner had to do was say you are not qualified enough to work here or that another applicant was more suitable to the role becasue she had more experience. The cost of a flippant remark eh.
Yeah or she should have said that she has more applicants come in the next few days and she's gonna call her if she gets the job or whatever!!
I never got a job offered right on the spot (unless it was temporary).
Posts: 30135 | From: The owner of this website killed ES....... | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lumos: Maybe she just wanted - a job!
Well then she should have tried Burger King - I am sure they wouldn't have mind!!
But she wanted to be a hairstylist. Posts: 1157 | From: Censor - Edit - Delete, but you will never take away my FREEDOM! | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote: I am in total agreeance she should have some compensation but not thousands of £££s, that is just greedy!
Sends a message though doesn't it? Now she can get that coveted job at Burger King TL is suggesting, since that is obviously all she is good for with her hijab. Posts: 13440 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Exactly, Smuckers! Like Burger King employees in London aren't exposed to a wide variety of customers, wearing a range of clothing and hairstyles - some wildly funky.
Posts: 1157 | From: Censor - Edit - Delete, but you will never take away my FREEDOM! | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Re: Bushra Noah's Nice Little Earner « Reply #4 on: June 17, 2008, 08:06:58 pm »
posted by ships-cat
The tribunal made this disgraceful decision based on the ramifications of "indirect discrimination".
To quote the tribunal;
"it accepted Noah had not been treated differently because of her Muslim headscarf, but that it doubted there was as severe a risk to the business by employing someone wearing a head covering as the owner believed."
So a discrimination tribunal has a greater understanding of the business of hair fashion in London than an actual Salon owner ?
This is a perverse judgement and should be struck down. The tribunal was acting beyond its competency.
Apparantly Bushra had applied for 25 other positions as a hairdresser... all unsucesfully. Why, one wonders, did she decide to sue THIS salon in particular ? Perhaps because she did her research (the other 25), and found this particular one more vulnerable to a spurious legal attack ?
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
...Blue, maybe. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic