In Eweida v. British Airways PLC [Word doc.], (Empl. App. Trib., Nov. 20, 2008), Britain's Employment Appeal Tribunal held that British Airways had not engaged in "indirect discrimination" in insisting that a cross worn on a necklace by check-in clerk Nadia Eweida be concealed by her uniform. Only the holding below relating to indirect discrimination was appealed. BA's policy, which applied to all jewelry including religious items, had an exception if wearing the item was a "mandatory" scriptural requirement and it could not be concealed under the uniform. Ultimately Eweida returned to work after BA amended its policy.
Wearing the cross was not a tenet of Eweida's Christian faith, but instead was a personal expression of belief. The Tribunal found that there was not evidence that BA's policy had a disparate impact on Christians, or a group of Christians, "because there was no evidence that a sufficient number of persons other than the claimant shared her strong religious view that she should be allowed visibly to wear the cross." Personnel Today reports on the decision. (See prior related posting).
