BA's Cross U-Turn

So BA has climbed down over its refusal to allow a check-in desk worker to wear a cross. Now, says the company, it will allow staff to wear religious symbols openly and give "some flexibility for individuals to wear a symbol of faith on a chain".

If BA thinks this is the end of the matter, I fear the company is very much mistaken.

When BA announced it would be reviewing its policy, back in November, I was deeply concerned about their apparent intention to allow staff to wear a religious symbol on their lapel badge.

In my experience, it is mostly conservative evangelical Christians who wear a cross or ICHTHUS fish on their lapel. While I am proud to wear a cross around my neck, as more than just a piece of jewellery, I would not choose to wear a lapel badge as I would not wish to labelled 'evangelical.'

So, personally, I would have dropped the lapel idea altogether and just stuck with allowing religious jewellery. A symbol on a chain around the neck is often ambiguous. If, for instance, you saw someone wearing a cross, or a five or six pointed star on a necklace, you might not immediately think it was a religious symbol. You almost certainly wouldn’t make an issue about it and ask the wearer for more details. A lapel badge on the other hand, is a clear, unambiguous symbol of faith, one that - unless you share the wearer's faith - automatically signals that they are ‘different’ to you.

This is why I sense trouble ahead. A Wiccan wearing a five-pointed star on her lapel meets a Christian wearing a cross on his. Are they going to meet each other in a neutral way? Or is religion going to get in the way of a good working relationship?

A current court case in the USA centres on a Wiccan ex-Starbucks barista, who claims she was asked on several occasions to remove the pentacle from around her neck, despite the fact her colleagues, including her Christian Manager, all wore crosses. She claims they also refused to promote or transfer her to another branch.

I fear it won’t be long before we see a similar case here. Evangelicals in all faiths often will not accept open proselytising by those of other faiths, too often refusing to afford them the rights they demand for themselves.

How long will it be before the complaints start, complaints that Satanists, Scientologists and other minority faith group members are wearing badges when ‘they shouldn’t be allowed to?’ How long before atheists start campaigning to be allowed to wear their own badges? No doubt Nadia Eweida would be horrified by the idea, yet all faith groups have equal rights under the Employment Equality (Religion and Belief) Regulations 2003.

I also wonder what BA will do to stop their believing employees sharing their faith when asked by customers what their lapel badges mean?

Nadia Eweida and her supporters clearly didn’t think this through before starting their campaign and neither, in consulting only with faith groups, and mainstream faith groups at that, has BA.

The fact remains; BA should have just ignored that tiny, ambiguous silver cross. As an innocent piece of jewellery that happened to have significance for her, no one but the BA bureaucrats batted an eyelid. As a visible, unambiguous symbol on a lapel, I fear a whole new can of worms has been opened.