Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

Collapse

Get Away Today

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • MickeyMaxx
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    Closed at the request of the OP.

    Leave a comment:


  • steamboatpete
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    Originally posted by sdjeff4sc View Post
    Shakespeare actually DID say THAT, whatever context you might want to draw out of it.
    That's like quoting the wisdom of Malfoy and saying "Like JK Rowling always said ..." But have fun with it. Just don't get so pissy when someone has fun back.

    Originally posted by StrikeYerColors View Post
    I forgot that photo with the cowboy hat. Yes, that's undignified. Totally unsuitable.

    Leave a comment:


  • Genopeid
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    Originally posted by calsig31 View Post
    Why?
    If a cast member was being harassed and called a terrorist, they would call security.
    what I didn't understand is where the terrorist comment she made referenced in my previous post.

    Leave a comment:


  • flynnibus
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    Originally posted by sdjeff4sc View Post
    OK.... so if the woman demanded to wear the Niqab (which covers the entire head with only a slit for a woman's eyes to see through) instead of the Hijab (which is merely a head covering) for religious reasons, would Disney have to accommodate her religious convictions?
    Yup - but how far 'accomodate' goes is where there is interpretation.

    Originally posted by sdjeff4sc View Post
    Or perhaps a server in a restaurant would be required to serve alcohol, or handle pork or shellfish - which a clearly prohibited by the Koran, would Disney have to accommodate that demand?
    Yup - but there it would be easier for Disney to demonstrate that switching roles would be the only way out. You should lookup the stories about the TwinCities Airport cabbies.. and how they started to refuse to transport people carrying alcohol... or others who refused to transport dogs on religious grounds.

    Leave a comment:


  • StrikeYerColors
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    I would like to say that I MOST OFTEN SIDE WITH DISNEY when it comes to sensational lawsuits. However:

    I remember when this case originally was reported.

    Photos of the CM wearing the head covering alternatives were put with the articles. They were horrendous. They looked nothing like what I expect Disney costuming to look like, they stuck out like a sore thumb and it was clear the the intent was to cover or distract from the headscarf. One was indeed an oversized fedora style hat plopped right on top of it. I found it very disrespectful. I don't see what is wrong with a plain white or black hiijab, or one is a solid color matching the costume. I have seen multiple people working in the ticket booths wearing a blue one that exactly matched the costume and still looked exactly like a hijab, not a silly hat or costume piece. This is what costuming SHOULD have provided her with right away, or allowed her to wear an approved one in an approved solid color.

    Offering a change of job responsibilities when one is not desired, especially taking someone out of the public eye, is not reasonable or fair. This girl could have loved everything about her job besides the fact that she couldn't wear the scarf. She probably loved working with the guests, she probably had hopes of moving up from hostess to server like many starting out in restaurants. These things that were offered to her by Disney, coupled with her report that she faced some name-calling but that her managers did not take action, really looks like her specific department management had a problem with her religion. While Disney is a big company, with lots of legal and HR resources who are very invested in obeying the law, she probably didn't even know what phone number to call to go beyond her management when looking for accommodation or when reporting harassment.

    In terms of Disney Look, there'is a line between body modifications such as piercings, tattoos, hair, makeup, fingernails, deodorant, shaving, and costume/clothing items (whether they are provided by Disney or provided by the cast). A hijab is basically a religious hat. Garments, clothing items, accessories, certain pieces of jewelry should be able to be accommodated on religious or health grounds so long as the look is not distracting. Keep an eye out for cast members with colored eye glasses frames or medical alert bracelets; they are being accommodated for health reasons.

    ETA-------

    Here are the links to the photos I am referring to:
    http://ocresort.ocregister.com/tag/imane-boudlal/
    http://ocresort.ocregister.com/2010/...rnative/53795/

    The previous picture linked with the blue head scarf is also what I was referring to. I think that blue head covering looks far more like an actual hijab than the options that were provided to Ms. Boudlad! I don't understand why they didn't provide her one of these exact ones in white to match her shirt, or green to match her pants. I will say that the very first time I saw this blue headscarf was a couple of weeks AFTER this story broke in 2010. Not sure if it was in use before then. I know I noticed it BECAUSE of the story and I wondered if Disney suddenly created it to make a point.
    I agree that Storyteller's Cafe does not have a very specified theme or era to follow. The hotel uses craftsman architecture, but the Cast Members inside the hotel are not dressed like they are in 1918. They look like regular hotel employees, with bellhops, restaurant workers, and maids.

    Regarding cast provided costume items, they actually do exist.
    Cast, for the most part, provide their own shoes within the shoe guidelines. If you look at their shoes, you will notice different trends between each land, and each department. They do sometimes look like personal additions, without detracting from the show (sometimes even adding to it). I have noticed many cast in stores (female) prefer classic black flats. Cast (female) on the rides in Paradise Pier seem to always be wearing Mary Janes! They look especially nice with the new skirt-pants they all wear. Male cast in rugged places like Critter Country, Frontierland, Adventureland, favor equally rugged boots.
    Cast also provide undershirts, which are white, and you can often see the long sleeves sticking out. If a costume doesn't have a long sleeve option, and the CM wants to wear them, they wear a white undershirt underneath. The style is dictated by the costuming department, but it is not provided. The cast member has to add it, and they seem to be able to do it consistently and not distractingly. They might wear it to cover tattoos on their arms, or maybe for modesty religious reasons, or maybe they are just cold. But check out Tomorrowland; at Autopia or Astro Orbitor or Captain EO in the fall and winter on a cool day, and I'm sure you'll start to notice like me a LOT of white sleeves sticking out of blue shirts. Where costuming does not provide a long sleeve option, the CM can provide it themselves. I don't see how the hijab is any different. If one was not provided that matched, she should be allowed to wear the plain white one. The big fedora and the weird patterned floppy hat are not adequate.

    If they can "substitute skirts for pants and lengthen hemlines to cover the ankles" without calling attention to the modification, I don't seen why they need to disguise the headscarf, which is clearly what they are trying to do. It doesn't make sense if no one else in the restaurant wears a hat.
    Last edited by StrikeYerColors; 08-15-2012, 12:54 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • calsig31
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    Originally posted by Genopeid View Post
    And the terrorist comment I don't understand. If someone called her that security would be called immediately.
    Why?

    Leave a comment:


  • Genopeid
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    Originally posted by chesirecat View Post
    But what about somebody calling her a "terrorist"? True? Untrue? I find that allegation disturbing, wonder if it was a superior, a fellow castmember, or guests?

    I think that the psychological aspect has also not been discussed, i.e. this woman selected her own headscarf each day since she was young (probably I would) guess, and it is a very personal part of her personal wardrobe. Beyond a guy's favorite t-shirt or a woman's favorite blouse, this was an expression of her personality and her faith, and she probably enjoyed wearing different head scarfs on different days, to let Disney decide what head scarf she wear is pretty personal, more than putting on Jungle Cruise costume is for the average castmember.
    I feel personally that if you are employed you follow the rules of said employer. If part of your contract states you must be in specific dress/or cannot wear certain items (jewelry/hat/head scarf) that you should take responsibility for what you agreed to. So many people are out for lawsuits today its sad. Disney gave her 4 options if she felt that those did not work for her, and she did not want to do the other job options that is her own decision. And the terrorist comment I don't understand. If someone called her that security would be called immediately. Head scarf or not. if someone is that un-kind they would be delt with. But I don't see how that comment connected to my original post.

    Leave a comment:


  • calsig31
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    Originally posted by sdjeff4sc View Post
    I know Calsig is a lawyer too....... the comment was meant in jest
    Dont worry, it was taken as such.

    Leave a comment:


  • Malina
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    Originally posted by chesirecat View Post
    Maybe she wore the head scarf as a child in some foreign country, moved to the US, had to abandon the head scarf after 9/11 as perhaps she was victimized, either verbally or physically, then decided to get back in touch with her roots and her employer stood in the way.
    She's from Morocco. As far as Middle Eastern/North African countries run, Morocco's fairly liberal, it has a fairly diverse population. A large percentage of Moroccans do not wear hijab.

    Also, in many Muslim communities girls don't wear hijab at all until they hit adolescence. So as to the head covering being part of her childhood, it's possible, but not particularly likely. If it meant something to her from childhood she would have mentioned it, perhaps.

    Leave a comment:


  • sdjeff4sc
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    Originally posted by steamboatpete View Post
    Totally irrelevant under the law. If the belief is sincerely held, it does not, as a matter of law, make any difference if the belief is held by only a minority of people in a particular faith.
    I suppose there is an issue of orthodoxy within a particular religion, whether or not it is sincerely held, whether or not it can be tied to doctrine versus culture. The issue revolves around whether you can make a cultural belief a religious belief and whether there is doctrine or dogma or scripture to back one's claims. It weighs on the issue of "sincerity" of belief...... If something is not required by scripture or doctrine, it is open to interpretation, which is then open to the courts.......

    Would an Amish with a beard be allowed to work in the DLR? In this case, a request for an accommodation was raised, the company tried to make an accommodation that was somehow unacceptable to the plaintiff while yet others of a similar faith had no problems with their accommodations..... I cannot comment on whatever workplace discrimination the plaintiff endured with co-workers, it's a "he said, she said" scenario the courts have difficulty differentiating.......

    But again, I would imagine Disney's army of lawyers have thought about this for some time...

    ---------- Post added 08-14-2012 at 10:47 PM ----------

    Originally posted by steamboatpete View Post
    Shakespeare didn't say that. His character, Dick the Butcher, said that in King Henry VI. The reason Dick said that is because Dick was Cade's henchman, and he knew that the clearest path to chaos and tyranny was to remove the guardians of independent thinking. Lawyers smile to themselves when they hear some modern Dick utter that line, because these Dicks do not realize what a compliment these Dicks are unknowingly paying to the people they are trying to insult.
    "Dick"?.......... You're so sly..... insulting me w/out actually insulting me...... You must be a lawyer........

    I know the story Pete........"Dick" actually IS Shakespeare's character, AND, in writing his dialogue, Shakespeare actually DID say THAT, whatever context you might want to draw out of it...... are you trying to insult me?....... But to the modern public, the Shakespeare quote rings true to their mistrust of the legal profession...... But thanks again for bringing us all back up to date on junior-year English class.....

    I know Calsig is a lawyer too....... the comment was meant in jest...... hopefully in the same vein as your comment to me...... but probably not......

    BTW......... done w/ this thread........ would be shocked if it lasts 'til dawn.........
    Last edited by sdjeff4sc; 08-14-2012, 09:50 PM. Reason: Done with this thread......

    Leave a comment:


  • steamboatpete
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    Originally posted by sdjeff4sc View Post
    Calsig.........

    You shouldn't take offense........ You know what Shakespeare said...............
    Shakespeare didn't say that. His character, Dick the Butcher, said that in King Henry VI. The reason Dick said that is because Dick was Cade's henchman, and he knew that the clearest path to chaos and tyranny was to remove the guardians of independent thinking. Lawyers smile to themselves when they hear some modern Dick utter that line, because these Dicks do not realize what a compliment these Dicks are unknowingly paying to the people they are trying to insult.

    Leave a comment:


  • sdjeff4sc
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    Calsig.........

    You shouldn't take offense........ You know what Shakespeare said...............
    Last edited by sdjeff4sc; 08-14-2012, 09:27 PM. Reason: I'll have to remember "reply w/ quote"

    Leave a comment:


  • steamboatpete
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    Originally posted by Malina View Post
    Not always. Reasonable accommodation has to be made, but an employee does not have free rein to wear whatever they want at work on religious grounds. The employer still has the right to decide what can and cannot be worn at work, and employers have won lawsuits from employees who have challenged their dress codes on religious grounds. Some cases are mentioned here, including one of a Sikh man who sued Chevron in California because they required him to be clean-shaven. He lost the case.
    He lost the case because Chevron was able to show undue hardship because the beard presented a substantial safety hazard for a machinist at a facility that used toxic chemicals.

    734 F2d 1382 Bhatia v. Chevron Usa Inc | OpenJurist

    Originally posted by OliviaVonDrake View Post
    But here the hat is already part of the uniform. It is not there to cover up or disguise the hijab in order to placate bigots and midwestern tourists who may find the sight of a Muslim headscarf "spooky".
    Exactly.

    Originally posted by sdjeff4sc View Post
    OK.... so if the woman demanded to wear the Niqab (which covers the entire head with only a slit for a woman's eyes to see through) instead of the Hijab (which is merely a head covering) for religious reasons, would Disney have to accommodate her religious convictions?

    Or perhaps a server in a restaurant would be required to serve alcohol, or handle pork or shellfish - which a clearly prohibited by the Koran, would Disney have to accommodate that demand?
    Perhaps, but Disney's showing under these circumstances would be stronger than they are in the current dispute.

    Originally posted by sdjeff4sc View Post
    Besides, there is significant argument whether the Hijab is even required under the Koran, or if it was merely a cultural emulation of the wives of the Prophet Muhammed.

    Per Wikipedia: "Hijab"...... sorry, couldn't paste the link, just "Wikipedia" it.....

    So the plaintiff is making a subjective interpretation of Islamic teaching by demanding Disney "accommodate" a religious concept that is not universally accepted within Islam itself?
    Totally irrelevant under the law. If the belief is sincerely held, it does not, as a matter of law, make any difference if the belief is held by only a minority of people in a particular faith.

    Leave a comment:


  • sdjeff4sc
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    Yes Olivia,

    Guilty as charged...... I addressed your comments about why the plaintiff could not be "reasonably accommodated" for her religious beliefs..... Your prior posts seemed to suggest or otherwise infer that it was not a big problem for Disney to allow her to wear the Hijab she desired to wear..... (and I beg to differ on that point - at "which" point) is an accommodation reasonable, versus unreasonable........

    Again, I said nothing untrue, accused you and no one else of anything. You may wish to believe it was a rant, but I said nothing untrue but merely addressed to your inferred suggestion that a reasonable accommodation on Disney's part was NOT unreasonable, I disagree......
    Last edited by sdjeff4sc; 08-14-2012, 09:25 PM. Reason: Had to address Olivia.....

    Leave a comment:


  • calsig31
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    Originally posted by CMHusband View Post
    I hate Lawyers except if they are working for me.
    I'll try not to take that as a personal attack.

    Leave a comment:


  • OliviaVonDrake
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    Originally posted by sdjeff4sc View Post
    Mods..... I hope my commentary was within guidelines...... I posted nothing that was untrue, derogatory or belittling to anyone. Granted, it was "off-topic" so far as entertainment and amusement goes, but it was newsworthy, related to the thread topic, and, in my opinion, informative and questioning without being political or demeaning, merely questioning.
    It was a rant that was for some reason addressed towards me.

    Leave a comment:


  • sdjeff4sc
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    Originally posted by penguinsoda View Post
    Mod Note:

    This is a very tricky subject matter to have on our boards. This is not the first time its come up, and while its a timely topic and and is important to discuss the fact remains that by the nature of the subject... it automatically violates rules of the site.



    Since there is no way to talk about this subject without bringing in the religious aspects, and since the discussion of topics with religious content violate the general rules of the site because they have a tendency to become heated on various sides, we have no choice but to move this thread.

    We'll start by moving it to the litterbox for the time being so that members can continue the discussion. However if it continues out of control and wanders to far off topic and to far into the religious aspects by brining up intense details that have no bearing to the subject at hand it will be moved to the debate lounge.

    Also of note:

    Mods..... I hope my commentary was within guidelines...... I posted nothing that was untrue, derogatory or belittling to anyone. Granted, it was "off-topic" so far as entertainment and amusement goes, but it was newsworthy, related to the thread topic, and, in my opinion, informative and questioning without being political or demeaning, merely questioning.

    But you are right, this is going nowhere, better to litter-box it......

    Leave a comment:


  • chesirecat
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    Originally posted by Malcon10t View Post
    You may be interested to find nothing had ever been reported about this until a year after she quit.

    You did read where she had not worn a head scarf prior to 2009?
    Maybe she wore the head scarf as a child in some foreign country, moved to the US, had to abandon the head scarf after 9/11 as perhaps she was victimized, either verbally or physically, then decided to get back in touch with her roots and her employer stood in the way.

    Or she is making a political point, and/or trying to make some money.

    I'm not sure which possibility is most likely, but believe she should be given fair consideration from the judge/jury. It is well known that young people sometimes "lose" their religion, only to find it again when they get older.

    ---------- Post added 08-15-2012 at 05:00 AM ----------

    Originally posted by penguinsoda View Post
    Mod Note:

    This is a very tricky subject matter to have on our boards.
    It sure is, I find myself automatically defended Disney, despite not really knowing what happened. I must say that I'm glad I participated in the thread, learned more about Judaism and the issue of the hijab/burka in muslim life, and some interesting work place issues regarding expression of religion/religious requirements.

    Leave a comment:


  • penguinsoda
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    Mod Note:

    This is a very tricky subject matter to have on our boards. This is not the first time its come up, and while its a timely topic and and is important to discuss the fact remains that by the nature of the subject... it automatically violates rules of the site.

    MiceChat is an entertainment centered board. While most subjects may be discussed in our various community lounges, we discourage the discussion or posting of images with a political and/or religious theme. Threads/posts/images which are focused on these topics or become in other ways heated will be moved to the "Litter Box" or MiceChat Gold's "Debate Lounge" (and are also subject to being closed).


    Since there is no way to talk about this subject without bringing in the religious aspects, and since the discussion of topics with religious content violate the general rules of the site because they have a tendency to become heated on various sides, we have no choice but to move this thread.

    We'll start by moving it to the litterbox for the time being so that members can continue the discussion. However if it continues out of control and wanders to far off topic and to far into the religious aspects by bringing up intense details that have no bearing to the subject at hand it will be moved to the debate lounge.

    Also of note:

    If a thread becomes disruptive, sexually graphic, contains objectionable themes, or goes too far off topic, it may be closed, moved, edited, or removed by the Moderators. Members who become abusive as a result of Moderators protecting the members and business interests of the site will be warned, suspended, or banned. Please do everything in your power to keep MiceChat a safe fun place for everyone and refrain from posting content which hurts the community.
    Last edited by penguinsoda; 08-14-2012, 09:02 PM. Reason: Spelling.... doh!

    Leave a comment:


  • CMHusband
    replied
    Re: Former Disneyland Worker sues Disney

    My 2 cents worth.
    The lawsuit is totally bogus. I hope Disney fights it out and doesn't settle. I hate Lawyers except if they are working for me.

    I did notice something about the ACLU in the article I read about this law suit. if ACLU is handling the case, that explains a lot.

    Leave a comment:

Get Away Today Footer

Collapse
Working...
X