BA is wrong to ban the cross

British Airways check-in desk worker Nadia Eweida will learn this week whether or not she can keep her job. She is currently suspended for breaking BA’s uniform code by wearing a discreet cross around her neck.

This is the second time this year that this particular issue has risen in relation to an airline. Back in January, BMI suggested flight crew who were not prepared to remove their crucifixes or crosses and wear traditional Arab dress on flights to Saudi Arabia should be transferred to short-haul flight crews.

It is also the second time in as many weeks when the issue of wearing a cross has hit the headlines. Apparently there was heated debate in BBC boardrooms recently as to whether TV newsreader Fiona Bruce should be allowed to wear her cross when reading bulletins. It seems she is to be allowed to continue to do so. Whether BA will make the same concession to check-in worker Nadia Eweida, 55, of Twickenham, remains to be seen.
BA refused permission for Miss Eweida to wear her cross on the grounds that ‘jewellery is not allowed.’ But this is no fashion statement for her: her tiny cross, the size of a 5p piece, has deep religious significance. “I will not hide my belief in the Lord Jesus,” she told the Daily Mail. “British Airways permits Muslims to wear a headscarf and Sikhs to wear a turban…I stand up for the rights of all citizens.”

Okay, well let’s not get carried away here Miss Eweida, because I’m not convinced you’d be first in the queue to campaign for the rights on Muslim women to wear the veil. And, as my Druid friend Mark Graham points out, there is nothing in the Bible or Christian teaching that states followers must wear crosses and that BA surely has a right to stipulate a standard uniform for employees. I agree with his conclusion; this is not strictly a religious discrimination matter.

Nevertheless, it infuriates me beyond belief. I am becoming increasingly concerned at the numerous instances in this country where expressions of religion and belief in the workplace are accepted unless that faith is Christianity. As Miss Eweida said, sometimes it feels as if Christianity is being treated as a faith that is ‘null and void,’ despite the fact that 71% of us called ourselves Christian in the 2001 census.

Since 2003 we have had legislation protecting workers from discrimination on the grounds of their religious belief and, if anyone dares complain about a Sikh turban or Muslim hijab they are, quite rightly, considered to be out of order. So why, if Sikhs must be allowed to wear their turbans and steel bangles in the workplace and Muslim women should be allowed to wear hijab, is there an issue about Christians being allowed to wear small crosses? If Miss Eweida was wearing a giant crucifix, fine. She would be well out of order. But is making a fuss about a tiny silver cross really worth all the bad publicity BA has had as a result? I don’t think so. They have made a major blunder.

And what precisely is BA worried about anyway? It seems that in prohibiting the cross from being worn “outside the uniform” BA thinks it will offend its customers. This is nonsense. Apart from a small handful of secular fundamentalists who would do away with any form of religious expression, anywhere, and turn us all into a miserable bunch of atheists, I really don’t think people care. Many non-Christians wear the cross anyway, simply as a fashion accessory and those I have spoken to of other faiths certainly don't find it offensive.

“I feel BA have acted without thinking in this matter and have placed themselves in an absurd situation, Dr Indarjit Singh, Editor of The Sikh Messenger and regular BBC Radio 4 Thought for the Day contributor, told me. “An item should not be dismissed as jewellery if it has another significance. A Cross is clearly a religious symbol and wearing one suggests that the wearer wishes to be identified with Jesus Christ's uplifting teachings. Banning it shows gross insensitivity.”

And this from Ronald Alexander:

"I was raised Catholic and am now a practicing Buddhist and ordained Zen Monk. To not allow one to wear a sign such as a cross to work on ones body and or on ones clothing is disrespectful to the rights of a spiritual person. All faiths are important and symbols are resresentations of ones faith."