Desi Muslim in US sacked for wearing hijab, sues

As a Muslim of Indian and Pakistani heritage living in the US, Hani Khan, 20, never leaves her home without donning a hijab. After the college student took a job in a San Francisco Bay Area stock room of a clothing retailer owned by Abercrombie & Fitch in October 2009, she continued to put on the head scarf before going to work.

As a company that prides itself in its All-American image, Abercrombie has a clearly stated "look policy," or dress code, and Khan was told during her job interview that wearing a hijab would be fine.

[caption id="attachment_33275" align="alignleft" width="380" caption="Hani Khan was sacked from a clothing retailer in the US for not removing her hijab, which the company said violated its all-American "look policy"."][/caption]

And for more than four months, things were. But when a district manager named Adam Chmielewski came to town in February 2010, he noticed Khan's head scarf. He asked Khan to speak with Abercrombie's director of human resources Amy Yoakum, and during their phone conversation, Khan was asked to remove her hijab at work since it violated the company's "look policy." When Khan explained that she wore the head scarf as part of her religious beliefs, Yoakum suspended her from work.

More from World

When Khan continued to decline to remove her hijab, she was fired.

Khan has since decided to take the retailer to court. In a lawsuit filed on Monday, Khan alleged that she was discriminated against because of her religion, and that Abercrombie had violated the US Civil Rights Act of 1964 and California's Fair Employment and Housing Act.

The laws "require that employers reasonably accommodate the religious practices of their employees and by failing to first engage in some way to find an accommodation, Abercrombie & Fitch violated the law, and forced Hani to choose between her job and her religion," said Araceli Martnez-Olgun, an attorney with the Legal Aid Society-Employment Law Center who is representing Khan. "One of the things [Hani] expressed very clearly is that she wants to ensure that Abercrombie & Fitch amends its 'look policy' to accommodate religiously mandated attire."

The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency that oversees employment discrimination claims against private companies, is also litigating the case on behalf of Khan.

"The company's 'all-American look' policy is un-American, because it excludes people because of their race, national origin, gender or religion," William R. Tamayo, an attorney with the San Francisco regional office of the EEOC, said in a statement. "Equal opportunity and fair treatment for all-that's all-American, and that's what the EEOC will continue to fight for."

But the retailer says that it has done nothing wrong. "We are committed to providing equal employment opportunities to all individuals regardless of religion, race or ethnicity, as evidenced by the fact that diversity in our stores far exceeds the diversity in the population of the United States,"Rocky Robins, the company's general counsel, said in a statement."We do make every reasonable attempt to accommodate the religious practices of associates and applicants, including, when appropriate, allowing associates to wear a hijab; and we will continue to do so. In regards to the news around this case, we feel confident that when the case is heard, the facts surrounding this issue will show that we complied with the law."

Not an isolated event

Abercrombie has, however, been sued in recent years by Muslim women in California and Oklahoma for similar prohibitions to wearing a hijab. The Oklahoma case goes to trial in mid-July. In previous litigation, the retailer has reportedly argued that it cannot accommodate headgear like a hijab because it would interfere with its all-American branding.

"They contend that if they allow a hijab in the workplace, it will conflict with their look and impact their entire image," said Jonathan T. Peck, the supervisory trial attorney at the EEOC's San Francisco office. "The EEOC's position is that the look policy violates the law and we don't believe it would impact their advertising. They are doing very well and their stock has gone up. We don't believe their policy is defensible under the statutes, but this is for a court to decide."

Additionally, in previous EEOC litigation over its 'look policy,' Abercrombie was required to pay $40 million to African American, Asian American, Latino, and women workers who claimed they had been discriminated against in hiring and promotions.

Part of a trend

Khans' case is also one in a growing number of religion-based discrimination cases being handled by the EEOC. Religion-based discrimination cases have more than doubled since 1997, from 1,709 to 3,790.

Meanwhile, national origin discrimination cases have also grown by 65% between 1997 and 2011.

The reason for the uptick may have something to do with a diversifying US workforce, EEOC reps said.

"The workforce is changing in its look and constitution," said Linda Li, a spokesperson for the EEOC. "When there is a lack of familiarity [with certain practices] and there's a policy in conflict with it, people are not always good at sorting out how to analyse this under our equal employment laws."

'Hostile, abusive, intimidating and offensive'

Tired of being ridiculed for his turban and accent, Inderpal Nayyar, a naturalised US citizen who is originally from India, is among the growing ranks of workers filing suit against their employer for national origin discrimination.

On Tuesday, the EEOC filed a suit against his former employer, a San Jose security company calledGuardsmark. The suit also claims that Nayyar was subject to age discrimination.

According to the complaint, Nayyar was subjected to "a hostile, abusive, intimidating and offensive work environment due to his national origin, East Indian, and because of his age, 66." This alleged harassment from one of his coworkers was "frequent and pervasive," and though he said he told the management about the problem numerous times, nothing was done, the complaint said. When the coworker was promoted, Nayyar was transferred to another location where he took a cut in hours and thus, his take-home pay.

"You can imagine what it must feel like when everyday, you are bombarded with comments about your turban or your accent when there's nothing you can do about it," said Linda Ordonio-Dixon, a senior trial attorney with the EEOC who is representing Nayyar. "He had no problem at work until the harasser came to work there. [Nayyar] just wanted to work in peace like everyone else."

Nayyar has since found a new job with another security company. (Guardsman did not respond to a request for comment.)

The EEOC has said that Nayyar's case is emblematic of the type of discrimination the agency seeks to eliminate in the workplace.

"The law is very clear: all employees have the right to work in an environment free from hostility, intimidation and ridicule," EEOC Regional Attorney William R. Tamayo said in a statement regarding Nayyar's case. "Employers have a duty to respond promptly and adequately to reports of discrimination. Those who choose to ignore harassment or respond with retaliation will be held accountable in court by the EEOC."

Correction: A previous version of this story misstated that Abercrombie had been sued by a Missouri employee over her ability to wear a hijab at work. Firstpost regrets the error.