Thursday, February 26, 2015

Abercrombie and Fitch... Against Hijabs?

Samantha Elauf applied to a job at Abercrombie and Fitch and her application was accepted. But, when her employers found out that she wore a hijab, they decided that she didn't meet their "preppy style" well enough with it on. When Abercrombie and Fitch were getting sued, they used the argument that Elauf had never told them it was for religious purposes and that the only thing they were saying originally was that the hijab as a "fashion statement" was unacceptable. On one hand, companies have the right to hire who they want. But on the other hand, it shows that religious intolerance is still present. Do you think that employers should be obligated to tell a company that they have a certain religion, or wear certain things to express that religion when applying for a job?

13 comments:

  1. This is a very controversial topic. Obviously I feel that Abercrombie wrongly discriminated by not hiring Elauf. To say that they didn't know if it was for a religious purpose is ridiculous. If it wasn't for a religious purpose then it could've been removed without an issue. But since they wrongly judged her, she didn't get the job because she was following her religion. Also, I don't know of many people who walk around with a hijab on unless they are a Muslim follower. I think the only solution to this is to have the employer describe the dress and then allow the employee to raise any questions on the dress code that way all assumptions are removed and accommodations can be made in to fit the dress code.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Though I think it is obvious that someone would only wear a hijab for religious reasons, I still think that the idea proposed in the article would be beneficial in ending all confusion. If the employer really does not know why someone is wearing a turban or hijab, he or she should ask about it in order to avoid confusion. In the example posed in the article, I think that the employer is at fault because Elauf said that she did not even know that her hijab clashed with the dress code of the store.

    ReplyDelete
  3. What Abercrombie did is completely ridiculous. Like Raman said, if the employer really did not know why a potential employee is wearing a hijab or turban, they should ask. If they had asked, I think that they could have avoided this whole situation. I also think that Abercrombie needs to get rid of their whole dress code and the look that they are looking for. Abercrombie should know better than to just hire people for their looks. It is discrimination and it should not be tolerated.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think that Abercrombie and Fitch saying they didn't know it was for religious reasons is a dumb excuse. Although I disagee with the ideas behind women having to be covered, if a women chooses to do so I think that employers shouldn't interfere. Religion should not be a factor when hiring employees. After all, aren't all men supposed to be treated equal

    ReplyDelete
  5. I believe that it is companies and people like this that lead the perceptions of society astray. If companies want to make more money it would make sense to expand their market. The fact that a person can not be hired to work if they wear a hijab is absurd and I think that many things should not be considered in hiring and religion is definitely one of those.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I have a hard time believing that Abercrombie's store managers did not know that Elauf's hijab was a religious garment. Their defense in this particular case seems weak and disingenuous. The policy of articulating the dress code and ensuring that the prospective employee meets its criteria prior to hiring should be implemented to avoid future confusion. All that said, the business has a right to require that its employees adhere to its dress code. If a private employer wants to set a ridiculous dress code and discriminate for trivial reasons, it will suffer the natural consequences - namely, losing business. Because Abercrombie would have asserted the terms of its dress code to anyone who didn't meet it, not just a Muslim, it's wrong to accuse the company of religious intolerance. It's even more wrong to leverage the government against the company and force it to make a certain business decision.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Abercrombie and Fitch has a history of discrimination and stereotyping, so this doesn't surprise me. Their argument that they didn't know Elauf's head scarf was for religious purposes is weak, especially because the article says that the store would have hired her except that her appearance posed a problem. If it wasn't for religious purposes, the store could have talked to her about wearing something else while at work, so they must have known it was for religious reasons. In the future, Abercrombie should hire people no matter their religious attire; I'm sure Elauf would could have worn her head scarf while also wearing whatever ugly clothes Abercrombie forces their workers to wear.

    ReplyDelete
  8. While the store has a right to choose to who to hire, they should not be able to discriminate and feign ignorance as they are trying to do now. I think that if there is any evidence of a person being rejected or fired from a job based on their race or religion, the store should be punished in some way. For example, the store could be fined, and/or the manager in charge of that decision would be fired. Either way, something should be done to avoid this kind of insensitivity in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I don't think it should be a requirement or an obligation to disclose religious beliefs, race, gender, or sexual orientation when applying for a job. All that shud matter is that the employee is properly qualified and passes the interviewing stage. The problem with these kinds of issues of discrimination is that there's so much gray area and it's very difficult to say "You know what, this is discriminatory behavior" and even then, what's to be done about it?

    ReplyDelete
  10. I think Abercrombie and Fitch's claim that they thought a hijab was a fashion statement rather than a religious garment is a poor excuse for religious discrimination. No company should be able to bar a person based on their religion from getting a job that they are qualified for. Though I think this was wrong, I don't think the government will be able to really make a change. This mentality will remain even if laws are made.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I agree with the above comments. I too have a hard time believing that the Abercrombie manager mistook Elauf's hijab as a "fashion statement." The hijab is a widely recognized garment of the Islamic culture. If they felt it "posed a problem" to their dress code, then they should have asked her about it, especially when she didn't know that it was causing such a problem. Like Becky said, I think that the only thing that should matter when applying for a job is a person's qualifications. Elauf should not have had to disclose her religious beliefs to obtain the job.

    ReplyDelete
  12. While I don't think that there's any grounds for discrimination against anyone, I see both sides to this. Abercrombie is in the business of making money and making their products marketable to their target audience. This means that they have to portray themselves in certain lights. They have the right to hire whoever they believe will best represent their brand image. Unfortunately, a hijab doesn't fit the brand image. Like I said, I feel for Elauf but I think it's a little ridiculous to sue a multi national corporation for sticking to its guns. After all, everyone has the rights to express themselves and most jobs don't allow for piercings or visible tattoos. Despite it not being on the same level as religious practices, it's the same principle.

    ReplyDelete
  13. As Ethan said I am not surprised by Abercrombie's actions just because they do have an image to keep but I dont agree with the decision. It shouldnt matter if a employee wears a hijab because that is how they choose to express themselves. The fact that her application was accepted but then they changed their minds is the worst part. If she was qualified enough to hire than she should be hired.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.