Law and the Wearing of Religious Symbols

Howard, Erica

doi:10.4324/9780203181485

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Ayrıca bu kıyafetlerin kullanımı başarısız bir entegrasyon sürecinin de göstergesi mahiyetindedir. 52 Bir başka deyişle, burka giyen kadın kendi ile toplum arasına bilinçli bir mesafe koymaktadır. Burka yasağını getiren devletlere göre söz konusu mesafe hem toplumdaki birliğin korunması hem de İslamofobinin artmaması için kaldırılmalıdır.…”

Section: B Birlikte Yaşamunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Analysis of Burqa Bans in Europe

Sayin

2020

İnönü Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Özet Herkes düşünce, din ve vicdan özgürlüğüne sahiptir. Bu hakkın içsel bir alanı olduğu kadar devletin müdahalesine konu olma ihtimali yüksek bir dışsal alanı da bulunmaktadır. Dini inancı açığa vurma hakkı da bu kapsamda korunmaktadır. Kişiler dini inançlarını dışarıya yansıtırken, dini semboller ve kıyafetler kullanabilirler. Ancak devletler, kişilerin dini sembol ve kıyafetler kullanmasını birtakım amaçlarla sınırlayabilir. Bu sınırlamalar da ayrımcılık içerebilir. Son yıllarda Avrupa'ya doğru artan göç dalgası ile göçmenler beraberlerinde dini uygulamalarını, dolayısıyla dini sembol ve kıyafetlerini de getirmişlerdir. Bu da iş yaşamında, kamuya açık alanlarda, eğitim kurumlarında, güvenlik geçişlerinde hatta kimlik kartlarına koyulacak fotoğraflarda dahi tartışmalara sebep olmuştur. Bu çalışmanın konusunu ise kamuoyunda burka yasakları olarak bilinen, yakın zamanda Avrupa'da çoğu devlette peş peşe kanunlaşan yüzü örten kıyafetler giyme yasağı oluşturmaktadır. Makalede yasakların kanunlaşma süreci ulusal ve uluslararası mahkeme kararları ışığında ele alınacak ve yasaklara ilişkin devletler tarafından ileri sürülen meşru amaçlar ile kamuoyundaki ve literatürdeki tartışmalar karşılaştırmalı bir yaklaşımla ortaya konulacak ve incelenecektir.

show abstract

Section: B Birlikte Yaşamunclassified

“…Duyma engelli bir kişi içinse bu iletişim neredeyse imkansızdır. 56 Yasağın "birlikte yaşam" amacına hizmet edip etmeyeceği ise tartışmalıdır. Yasak sebebiyle işine ve eğitimine devam edemeyen, günlük işlerini yapmak için kamuya açık alanlarda bulunamayan kadınlar, git-gide toplumdan uzaklaşabilir.…”

Section: B Birlikte Yaşamunclassified

An Analysis of Burqa Bans in Europe

Sayin

2020

İnönü Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, the principle of non-discrimination can be defended from a macroeconomic perspective because it helps to correct market failures. 12 It is common sense that anti-discrimination laws generate more social benefits than costs, especially if one considers the moral costs of discrimination. 13 Although the original function of anti-discrimination law is to facilitate market access, it also pursues an ambitious social goal.…”

Section: Striking a Balance Between Non-discrimination And Freedom Tomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…19 Moreover, "the protection of the right to property guaranteed under EU law, as now established in Art. 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, does not apply to 12 For as long as there are free riders and high bargaining costs, the free market cannot by itself maximise wealth. 13 From the individual perspective "discrimination has both a financial impact (because it may touch on a person's ability to earn a living in the employment market) and a moral impact (because it may affect that person's autonomy)."…”

Section: Striking a Balance Between Non-discrimination And Freedom Tomentioning

confidence: 99%

Is there a place for the Islamic veil in the workplace? Managerial prerogatives and the duty of reasonable accommodation in the EU anti-discrimination governance

Śledzińska-Simon

2016

ERA Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article analyses whether an employer may justify a ban on religious symbols because of economic interests, such as the protection of a company's image or customer preference. It explains the concept of managerial authority and conditions under which economic interests must yield to the principle of nondiscrimination. It also suggests a method of aligning the duty of accommodation in the justification of derogations to non-discrimination. It posits that the employer needs to demonstrate that accommodating religion in a particular post or position would impose a disproportionate economic burden on the company. It concludes that the Islamic veil controversy demonstrates a need for tailor-made solutions in the private employment context and a shift from norm compliance to anti-discrimination governance.

show abstract

“…There are numerous examples of forms of religious expression, but the majority (and certainly those forms which have led to legal disputes at work) can be categorised under the following broad groupings: a) Dress/Personal Appearance. Many religious adherents choose (or feel obliged) to express their religious beliefs through dress and grooming or the wearing of religious symbols (Howard, 2012). Sikh women, for example, may wear the Kara bracelet and some Sikh, Jewish and Muslim men may choose to wear facial hair.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing workplace religious expression within the legal constraints

Hambler

2016

Employee Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose\ud – The purpose of this paper is to consider in broad terms how employers may respond to different forms of religious expression by employees in the workplace, within the discretion afforded to them by law.\ud \ud Design/methodology/approach\ud – Through a discussion of relevant legislation and case law, and a review of relevant literature, it seeks to identify the legal constraints within which employers must operate when determining policy and practice in this area and gives consideration to how they should respond.\ud \ud Findings\ud – It is observed that employers enjoy considerable freedom either to impose restrictions or to encourage religious expression.\ud \ud Originality/value\ud – The paper considers some of the over-arching principled arguments both for and against encouraging religious freedom at work, whilst concluding that support for religious expression may be the better option, not least for the positive benefits for employee well-being, commitment and engagement which, it is argued, may result

show abstract

Law and the Wearing of Religious Symbols

Cited by 9 publications

References 0 publications

An Analysis of Burqa Bans in Europe

An Analysis of Burqa Bans in Europe

Is there a place for the Islamic veil in the workplace? Managerial prerogatives and the duty of reasonable accommodation in the EU anti-discrimination governance

Managing workplace religious expression within the legal constraints

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About