Originally Posted By AutoPost This topic is for Discussion of <a href="http://www.LaughingPlace.com/Latest.asp?I1=ID&I2=75294" target="_blank"><b>Latest: OCReg: Muslim Employee Rejects Disney's hat alternative</b></a> <p>The <em>Orange County Register</em> shares images of Storytellers Cafe Muslim employee in her personal hijab (head scarf) and in the hat Disneyland requested she wear in her onstage position.</p>
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Has anyone confirmed that this is indeed the hat/hijab combination Disney requested? The OC Register ran a union-supplied photo, but I've read nothing that confirms that this particular hat is really what Disney had in mind. I would be very surprised if this is the compromise solution Disney offered for a number of reasons. Primarily, because the hat in the photo looks entirely out of theme with Storytellers and the Grand Californian -- unless there is some huge costume change since the last time I was there (this past December). Anyone? Anyone?
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Man, while I do not endorse some of the action she has been taking, the comments on that story really do turn my stomach with the ignorance and prejudice on display. Really sickening.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt It is disgusting and shameful. I really hope the two sides find a workable solution to this soon.
Originally Posted By Malcon10t One thing that was noted about the picture was the hat/shirt covering was not intended to be worn over her hijab. But by wearing it this way, it made the outfit look much worse than it was. I don't think the hat is the answer, I had hoped to see a hijab made of the same/similar material as the vests. But I was informed she would refuse that also as it was not her hijab. She has been offered 4 different positions and refused all 4. She has refused this costume and has stated she will refuse all changes. And finally, the Union representing the food workers of DL adn DCA signed their agreement with a 3.5% raise. Unite Here still is refusing to negotiate.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones The union is incompetent. Doesn't change the fact that there is a valid question of law here.
Originally Posted By mickeymorris1234 The one thing that I can't get over about this whole thing is the timing... why is that she was totally fine with Disney's policy up till this whole New York issue. Personally I think Disney is in the right and tried everything they could to keep her employed while not lowering their standards, but still this timing is way to close. I think someone wanted to just get into the news and make some money on a settlement to get her to be quiet.
Originally Posted By avatarmickey115 She is on stage when she works. Think about this, if she were the actress who plays the little mermaid on broadway, she wouldn't be wearing one of her little head scarfs...Disneyland IS a production! She is part of the CAST. She should have read her freaking contract before signing up for her job that hundreds of others want more than she does.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones "Personally I think Disney is in the right and tried everything they could to keep her employed while not lowering their standards" How does a headscarf on a waitress at Storytellers Cafe lower standards?
Originally Posted By utahjosh Allowing the headscarf is lowering the standard of the show or the theme. If this weren't a themed restaurant, I'd completely agree with you, SpokkerJones. And even if the theme isn't particularly well done, even if you don't like the theme - the company running the show has set a standard of costuming and theming, and they feel the headscarf does not fit.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "How does a headscarf on a waitress at Storytellers Cafe lower standards?" Because the scarf is hers and not part of the established uniform look.
Originally Posted By Malcon10t The scarf is not part of the costume as provided to her. She has been offered positions other than the one she is in at the same pay rate, and she has refused.
Originally Posted By hbquikcomjamesl I don't doubt that the union wanted a confrontation. But just as clearly, somebody in either wardrobe or management (or both) wanted one as well. While she is unquestionably an "onstage" part of a "show," she is *not* playing Ariel, or Jasmine, or Belle, or Snow White. She is waiting tables. In a restaurant that, so far as I'm aware, does *not* have the wait-staff doing any sort of "schtick" (as in 50s Prime Time at WDW-Studios) She is what, in stage, film, or television terms would be called a "supernumary" or an "extra." In a production that is set "here and now," not "once upon a time," or "on a 23rd century starship." And guess what, folks: Muslims exist here and now. Get used to it. A reasonable, culturally-sensitive, dignified costume modification to accommodate somebody's religion is NOT the same thing as someone "witnessing" and proselytizing paying guests with no sensitivity to the possibility that they might be perfectly satisfied with their own religion (and during the 9 years I worked at an ice rink, we did indeed have an employee who did exactly that, until he was taken off public session duty entirely).
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Is there any proof that the hat/hijab combo shown in the photo was supplied by Disney? Note that the photo was supplied by the union, not the OC Register's own photographer. No one seems to be questioning if this photo is accurate in any way. I continue to doubt it is.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt Yep. Not only that, we've yet to see the other options that were provided to her and rejected.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "And guess what, folks: Muslims exist here and now. Get used to it." See, I really don't believe that Disney's rejection of her religious garb has anything to do with her religion at all, but rather the fact that her head wrap is not "regulation" attire. It's a sensitive issue to be be sure, and I get that her religious practices are legally protected, however there is evidence that Disney has made honest attempts to accommodate her while maintaining its trademark costuming standards. What is perplexing is why those attempts have been unacceptable to the employee.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< "How does a headscarf on a waitress at Storytellers Cafe lower standards?" Because the scarf is hers and not part of the established uniform look. >>> The problem is, if Disney were to allow the employee-supplied headscarf, where does it end? Do Orthodox Jewish men get to wear a yarmulke on-stage, and/or maintain beards and curly sideburns because that's what their religion requires of them? What about someone of Maori descent - should they be allowed to work on-stage with a face-covering tattoo just because it's part of their religious beliefs? <<< "And guess what, folks: Muslims exist here and now. Get used to it." >>> This isn't about Muslims - it's about any deviation from standard costuming guidelines for any religious purpose. In addition to the Jewish and Maori examples I gave, one of the articles also mentions that Christians are prohibited from wearing visible crosses while on-stage. As far as I can tell, Disney is applying their costuming rules fairly and equally to all - this isn't a "Muslim" issue. If anything, they provided her with more accommodation than has been provided for other groups.
Originally Posted By tashajilek If you let one person get away with not following the guidlines then others will try to push their limits. I dont think green mohawks or multiple facial peircings are allowed. She worked with out the head scarf in the first place so she cant just change her mind at any time.
Originally Posted By mele I can see that Disney most likely wants everyone to follow certain guidelines/costuming however...I'm not sure I would care if people wore their crosses, yarmulke, head wraps. It's not like the theming is so intense that I literally forget where I am. I kind of like seeing other cultures, etc, in a place like Disney. Also, I don't think a cross necklace is the same as some religious beliefs about covering their head/hair/bodies.
