A Qualified Lady decided one day that She’d Start wearing a hijab to work, daring her employer to challenge her decision.
When she was fired for violating the organization’s strict policy, she threatened to sue them in a supreme court.
Samira Achbita wasn’t always an elitist who believes that most should appeal to her every religious whim. In reality, for over three years in her job as a receptionist at G4S British security company located in Belgium, she never once had a problem with the company’s dress code and policy for a neutral environment.
The moment she converted to Islam, however, she demanded that her employer grant her special chance by exempting just her from their small business code.
Though she knew about the company’s open stance against any worker displaying posts concerning political or religious affiliation, she decided that she was a victim of racist discrimination, and she was decided to sue for tens of thousands in damages.
Following her case was dismissed in court, she decided to carry it all of the way to Belgium’s Court of Cassation, a supreme court of last resort. With the rise in catering to both Islam and political correctness throughout the last decade, Achbita believed she not only had a good chance of winning her discrimination case but she’d get a hefty amount of money for the alleged persecution she faced. Unfortunately for her, she could not have been more incorrect.
Following 10 years of battling for entitlement to wear the Islamic hijab against company rules, Achbita was advised by the judge that not only was the court ruling against her discrimination case, but that all businesses from the EU can prohibit Muslim employees from wearing headscarves as long as they have a rule which states that employees must refrain from political and religious symbolism, as stated by the EU Observer.
Kokott stated G4S was appropriate to have a no-symbol coverage “because of the special nature of the work which G4S workers do” and since Muslim scarves or other spiritual paraphernalia would have “a defining impact … on the image of the firm.”
Kokott added that companies must first set “a overall business rule” that bans religious symbols of any kind, including that it has to be “proportional” to each of ideologies to be honest. Since Christians and Jews wouldn’t be allowed special rights at work, Muslims should adhere to the rule exactly like everyone else.
Obviously, Achbita is outraged at the court’s decision to make her comply with the rules. Comparing not covering her hair to exposing her genitals, she radically complained that she would rather be murdered than go outside without her head covering, a punishment several Muslim countries would oblige.
“That to me is just like going to work without pants or sweater. I would rather die,” Achbita whined.
In a Sharia governed state, Achbita would get her way. In reality, a company would be closed down for even asking a Muslim girl to remove her mandatory hijab. With her case’s dismissal, Achbita acquired a taste of authentic democracy.
While many would argue that she must be permitted to wear her hijab in keeping with her religious beliefs, that would necessitate cessation of true equality. When Muslims are allowed to adhere to their faith which deny the rights of others, they are erected far over the rest of us and are not in any way equal.
Still, there may never be absolute equality, provided that there is diversity. The superb thing about diversity is it’s varied — no two belief systems will be the same.