Just suppose that somebody noticed a slight (but statistically significant) increase in the number of aircraft near-misses and crashes that were occurring. And just suppose, that after rigorous examination of the evidence it was found that there was a clear trend in the increase in human error as being a factor in many of these crashes.
And just suppose that another pattern emerged - it was found that several of the pilots had been deprived of sleep for a number of hours prior to the crashes (some had been partying, some had been involved in family medical emergencies, some had been delayed at foreign airports or in major traffic jams). How would you feel, if, in the interests of safety, legislation was introduced to require pilots to have a minimum period of sleep in the preceding 24 hours before a flight?
I personally wouldn’t have a problem. It would seem to be a very sensible thing to do. The greater good of the greater safety of many, in my book, would far outweigh any inconvenience to the individual pilots concerned.
But wait a minute. Just suppose one of the pilots was a member of a well-established religion that required its members to stay up half the night once a month in prayer. It would mean that he regularly failed to comply with the new safety rules.
He might be tempted to say: “I have been a good and faithful pilot with this company for a long-time with an excellent work record. I am not prepared to compromise my religious practice. If you sack me it will be religious discrimination!”
If I were his employer, I might be tempted to say: “I value your previous service, but my greater duty is not to you as an individual, but to the passengers that my airline carries. I hope you will be able to find another time to pray that doesn’t affect your working life. However, if you cannot, I will reluctantly have to fire you - not because I am against your religion, but because I am in favour of public safety.”
The newsletter of the National Secular Society recently reported the following:
A Muslim woman radiographer at a Berkshire hospital is claiming she was discriminated against because she refused to follow the national hospital dress code aimed at combating the spread of superbugs. She has now left her job.
The woman refused to follow the ruling that says that arms must be uncovered, either from wearing short-sleeved uniform or by rolling up the sleeves. This policy has been introduced to combat the alarming spread of MRSA and Clostridium difficile.
The woman said Islam teaches that women should dress modestly and cover their bodies while in public, and therefore the rules forced her “to choose between her religious beliefs and her livelihood”. She had worked as a therapeutic radiographer for 10 years, and described her situation as a “continuous nightmare”. She says she has been “emotionally torn about” over losing her job.
She said that she fears she may not be able to get another job, but has vowed to campaign against the NHS’s “bare below the elbows” policy.
The woman, who did not want to be identified, said she wants to “prevent the policy from being universally applied, so other Muslim women do not experience the same trauma.”
Tough one in our politically correct world. I, of course, being a matter-of-fact kind of person see no grounds on that woman’s claim. The problem is that religious people are anything but rational.
It is not clear on the insert if she is suing or not. But I don’t think she stands a chance in court. Among her religious peers, however, she has the power to stir trouble.
I would be interest to know how the courts and the public opinion handle this situation. Also, I have to wonder how and when fundamentalist Muslims will evolve from such B.S.
“…and therefore the rules forced her “to choose between her religious beliefs and the health and safety of everyone she came into contact with”.”
Fixed the NSS’s typo
I hope that in this case safety will take precedence over “freedom”. And yes I appreciate the irony of me being an advocate of freedom over safety when it comes to national security.
I really do think I should set up my own religion just to suit me. I’m sure I would find some believers pretty quickly if I made it the case that only one hour’s work a day was acceptable, and that cheese and wine should be consumed every evening as a sign of gratitude to our Saviour.
The whole thing is amusing at one level, irritating at another - but yes, you are right it does have serious implications for health and safety if these “rights” are upheld.
I had a very nasty sleeve accident at the ski club once actually! Got my sleeve caught in the binding of a ski I was fixing whilst someone had the ski on (never a good idea) and they took off down the slope dragging me behind them.
Reluctant Blogger
Sleeves are obviously potentially very dangerous!
Hi Guys, this is a tough one.
Clearly their are a number of considerations here.
1) The these dress rules really effective in reducing MRSA an dother superbugs ?
Sometime rules can be really gimicks that do not really address the actual issues. For example
1) Making sure their are effective cleaning services. The privitisation of services, and the failure of in-house servies to be interrgrated into an effectice hospital Team, has lead to an increase in superbugs !
2) Making sure that hand washing is compulsory so the deseases are not sprad that way
3) Making sure that clean sheets are used, when patients are discharged and new patients are admitted
4) Looking at air conditioning etc, aming sure it is clean.
5) Making sure that patients are adequitly fed with high quality food. The mass produced and poor quality food in many hospitals is a complete scandle, I know as I organised a pertition at one hospital where my Mother was in, because the food was appauling, and patients even went hungary as their was no one to feed them !
It seems to me that the key issues are !
1) Is the dress code effective
2) If it is contuary to religious beliefs, to follow the dress code, then is it possible to find a compromise that both maintains cleanliness, and at the same time accomodates religious belief ? I am wondering here, if lessons could be learned from hospitals in Muslim countries ?
3) If n0t, then of course public saftey must come first.
I find it difficult to believe that with a little good will, a compromise that achieves both could be agreed !
But them I am a very liberal anglican, and we are use to compromise !
John T
John T, you are missing the point (purposely?).
The point is that certain behaviours increase risks to one’s own health and safety and to those of others and that when simple measures can be taken to alleviate these risks, these should obviously be taken.
I accept that with the multitude of cultures that exist in the world, not all measures are acceptable to all people. But if people are honest, they will recognize the need for the measures and adapt themselves one way or another.
If you have been in a job for a number of years and a new rule is enacted which you cannot, for reasons of conscience accept, I agree that that is tough. But if the rule is enacted in order to remove risks to people’s health and safety you should at least have the honesty to recognize this and not whinge that you are being “discriminated against”. Rather it is you who are discriminating by imposing your own narrow standards on other people.
If a Muslim employee cannot bring herself to bare her arms, then let’s hope her employer can find her alternative work in the organization (or in another one) where she need not do this but if that is not possible, she should accept that the honest course of action is either to accept the rule or to resign. It is dishonest to claim that she is being discriminated against and to insist that she should be allowed special privileges. Will the MRSA bacteria respect her religious scruples? She knows it will not.
There is nothing meritorious about insisting on following some religious precept because there are so many religions and belief systems in the world that almost everything is forbidden by some cult or other. If your religion conflicts with the conditions of the job, get a job somewhere else. Or change your religion: there are plenty to choose from.