Britannist

British Airways has finally backed down over its hugely unpopular politically correct ban on the visibility of the Crucifix as worn by its staff (it has just been announced).

Nadia Eweida, 55, a member of the British Airways (BA) staff was suspended after refusing to take off her tiny Crucifix on her necklace whilst on duty. The Crucifix was not much larger than a 5 pence piece.

The way she was treated by BA management led to a big row with the Archbishop of Canterbury backing her. The Vatican also indicated their support for Miss Eweida.

A statement by BA issued on the evening of 19.1.2007 said "Staff will be allowed to wear symbols of faith openly. We have held a comprehensive review of our uniform policy and have consulted with a wide range of religious groups."

No complaints were ever received from BA customers about the Crucifix worn by Miss Eweida who works at London Heathrow in the BA ground staff team. A number of people of the Muslim faith said that they fully supporterd Miss Eweida and her right to wear the Crucifix.

Source of the above BA statement quotes: ITV 1 Teletext, analogue page 307, 19.1.2007 at 7.09 pm.

Westcountryman

Victory

Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6280311.stm

__________________
Manus haec inimica tyrannis ense petit placidam sub libertate quietam - "This hand of mine, which is hostile to tyrants, seeks by the sword quiet peace under liberty."

Britannist

I still don't like British Airways (BA).

This was a deliberate attack on the rights of Christians.

We will not forget.

The pressure that BA management put the poor and brave Miss Eweida under is a disgrace.

She has shown more honesty, principles and resolve than the majority of politicians.

Simon Heffer (the eurosceptic columnist) wrote in the Telegraph a few weeks ago that even if BA lifted their Crucifix ban he thought that Christians would still be justified in avoiding using the airline.

I wonder what the BA shareholders think - those responsible for the Crucifix ban got millions of Pounds of bad publicity worldwide for BA.

I would advise Miss Eweida to turn up for work tomorrow wearing a Crucifix half-a-foot long. And, if she were a Roman Catholic, I would tell her to wear a full set of Rosary beads too. The largest she can find.

22ANDUK

How is it dscrimination though?

If they banned Christians from flying on planes then fair enough.

But Miss Eweida wasn't. She was given a uniform to wear.

The main issue wasn't the ban on the crucifix but the fact that other religions could wear symbols. Best thing to do would be to bann all displays of religious items - fair and sqaure.

Britannist

Banning the Crucifix should be made illegal.

We are talking about a Sacred item here.

No one objected to the small Crucifix as worn by Miss Eweida (except elements of British Airways management).

British Airways (BA) has created tens of millions of Pounds worth of bad publicity worldwide for itself in trying to ban the visibility of the Crucifix as worn by staff.

I suspect one of the reasons why BA has climbed down on this is not because it has discovered the error of its ways regarding its Crucifix ban - but because the Archbishop of Canterbury quite rightly allegedly said several weeks ago that if BA don't end their ban his Church might withdraw its investments in BA.

Besoeker

[quote="Britannist"]British Airways has finally backed down over its hugely unpopular politically correct ban on the visibility of the Crucifix as worn by its staff (it has just been announced).
[quote]
Britannist
That is just plain wrong.
The ban was not for the visibility of the crucifix.
It was for the wearing of a necklace. All necklaces are proscribed.

Britannist

[quote="Besoeker"][quote="Britannist"]British Airways has finally backed down over its hugely unpopular politically correct ban on the visibility of the Crucifix as worn by its staff (it has just been announced).
Not any more they're not :twisted: .

Westcountryman

[quote="Besoeker"][quote="Britannist"]British Airways has finally backed down over its hugely unpopular politically correct ban on the visibility of the Crucifix as worn by its staff (it has just been announced).
Yes - which included displaying a cross. Thankfully, crosses now have an exemption.

__________________
Manus haec inimica tyrannis ense petit placidam sub libertate quietam - "This hand of mine, which is hostile to tyrants, seeks by the sword quiet peace under liberty."

Britannist

Here's a report from the Daily Express (20.1.2007) about the humiliating climb down the politically correct British Airways have had to make over their ludicrous ban on the visibility of the Crucifix:

:arrow:
http://www.express.co.uk/news_detail...63818275576-H5

Besoeker

[quote="Britannist"][quote="Besoeker"]Doesn't say anything about necklaces.
As I recall, a small lapel badge was what was suggested.

Edit:
I stand corrected.