Acciona representatives told a hearing that the company has not engaged in discriminatory practices - Ana Saida has been sanctioned on seven occasions - as it applied the same dress code to all its staff. The prosecution service considers that there has been a violation of basic rights. It had held off on making any announcement prior to the hearing but then offered its view, having listened to the evidence from both parties.
Ana Saida told the court that she was taken on nine years ago by the invoicing section at Acciona's handling services at Son Sant Joan. Her religious views developed over time, and in December 2015 she wore the veil at work. Her superiors consulted the company's central administration and she was advised that the veil represented a serious modification of uniform and that she could not wear it.
She challenged this instruction, asserting that the veil was part of her identity. Acciona reacted by initiating a series of disciplinary proceedings, which resulted in suspension of employment and salary. The court heard that the company has a strict dress code which also prohibits piercings and tattoos. Various witnesses, though, said that the company had been flexible on such issues and not imposed any penalties.
The lawyer for Acciona maintained that the rules were the same for all staff and that Ana Saida had sought to unilaterally impose her own conditions. She added that a purpose of the company's dress code was to ensure a professional image.
Margarita Muntaner, representing Ana Saida, presented a psychologist's report which suggested that the company's actions had caused stress and harm. The lawyer also demanded that more than 4,000 euros of salary (payments that have been suspended) should be paid to her client. She also made a claim against Acciona for moral damages. Ana Saida, meanwhile, is not actively employed but continues to have a "fijo discontinuo" contract with Acciona.
Ana Saida told the court that she hoped her case would set a precedent, explaining that there are other women in the same situation as herself who have not dared to take the same step because of problems that their religion creates in finding work.
6 comments
To be able to write a comment, you have to be registered and logged in
Sarah. They have zero moral respect, they rebel against any socoety lacking their beliefs, live outside their society, and many will murder without scruples to dominate our way of life. I've witnessed a young child climbing up onto a terrace handrail while the "mother" was engrossed in prayer while I paid a visit. It's very simple, and as they say in their lands, - adapt or get out.
This ruling is outrageous, and offensive to the majority,- which should count in a democracy. A law should be established by the majority, before it's too late, on the level of integration that these rebels must adopt to live here. The judges making these rulings are paving the way for resentment among nationals, increased social tension and violence. Wake up somebody !
Interesting. So do I, as well as many other hundreds of millions. Unfortunately our politicians, except for a few well known ones, one of which has been recently been making all the headlines, have the guts to do anything about it, and if they do raise the issue are subjugated to a torrent of social media insults by people who can't, or don't want to, see the future that lies ahead.
It has started now in Spain. It is incredible how a persons mind can so easily be changed. I dated a so called Westernised - 3 generations Muslim - within 4 months he very slowly, cleverly changed my way of thinking. I began to see my fellow Westeners as appalling human beings who drank and had no moral respect, he included my friends in that also. I luckily had the strength to get away. I now fear for us all.
You start cowing down to them and you will regret it make her wear the uniform or sack her you will only open the floodgates she will want prayer mats next
Religion has nothing to do with it. When this Spanish lady started working for Acciona, she was quite happy to wear the standard uniform. She then became interested in the islamic faith due to, as I understand, a relationship with someone else who also professed it. As the article indicates she then unilaterally decided to dress like a lot of, note, not all, women of the same faith, many believe due to her partners insistence on the matter. It will be interesting to see what the tribunal dictates, but whatever happens, she will no doubt receive a handsome payout for the "distress" caused.