[LMB] OT: clothing regulations

[Mark Allums]

Malfoy wrote:
>>>>> There has recently
>>>>> been a case in Toronto of a Muslimah losing her job at an airport
>>>>> because she lengthened her skirt--not to dangerous drag-the-floor
>>>>> level, but to her ankles.
> 
> I wrote that. Dear Ghu, please don't confuse the two of us.

Sorry. :)  What comes of being lazy and just hitting Reply.


Mark A.:
>> Put as simply as possible, one can *hide* things under a long dress or
>> skirt.  The rules say no long skirts, no tolerance allowed.  Options: do
>> it, quit, or be fired.  It's strictly an overreaction on the part of the
>> security Gestapo.  Not a cultural thing.  (Unless you consider the
>> current tightening up and general tyranny of governments worldwide to be
>> a cultural issue.)

Malfoy:
> The articles all quote the woman's employer saying things like,
> "yes, it doesn't seem like that big of a deal, but employees
> cannot just change the uniform."  No mention of security or
> safety issues whatsoever.

[links snipped]

> See what I mean?


Quote:
Muse doesn't understand why the permission she is seeking is such a big 
deal when some of her colleagues hem their skirts shorter and religious 
garb such as turbans, kippas and headscarves are permitted as part of 
the uniform.

Mark A:
Can't hide much under a kippa.


Quote:
[...] Garda spokesman Joe Gavaghan said. "The situation we find 
ourselves in is that when you have a contract with a customer, which is 
what CATSA is, you have to fulfill the requirements that they set forth."

Mark A.:
The customer being the airport, the requirement being a uniform under 
which hidden [undesirable objects] are more difficult, though not 
impossible, to conceal.

--Mark Allums