new thread
Check out the link below for a news story today about a lad being expelled from school for having hair like David Beckham's. Not content with sex discrimination the headteacher has shot him/herself in both feet by throwing in some racial stereotyping as well. Oh dear. Sue the pants off 'em I say.
http://www.btopenworld.com/news/topstories/0,,csn=646|csr=3792003,00.html
He won't win. If it's a catholic school as it says, I believe they are not government funded. If that's the case they can set whatever dress codes they want :-/.
unfortunately a true story...
furthermore, article explains that the newspaper mentionned that "...white men who wear the style could risk going prematurely bald."
Actually, this comment (not judging its veracity) tends to make the young dude even more guilty...Newspaper ain't only describing the situation, it takes sides against the boy.
A sad newspaper article, about a sad story, about a sad and unfounded discrimination...
Or you can find it here:
So far as I know, the legal battle will be over whether hair discrimination is legal in the UK. The fact that it is a Catholic school, and therefore probably not state funded is not relevant. Private schools (known confusingly in the UK as Public Schools!) have greater powers of expulsion than State schools, but this will probably not be enforceable if they give illegal reasons for the expulsion.
If it comes to a legal battle, the school may well back down, not wishing to have t pay the if it loses. Compare the situation over the girl whose mother threatened to sue the school for not letting her wear trousers as part of the uniform. Legal rulings in the UK on that subject, which have many parallels with the long hair for men/boys question have decided that trousers for women are 'normal and acceptable in formal society'. Long hair on men, ditto.
But the law is a strange animal, so we await developments!
Religious schools seem to think they are above the law. They are not. The same applies here as in other, similar cases. Does the dress code discriminate unfairly against boys in comparison to girls? If the overall dress code is fair and evenly applied, they will get away with it. If, howver, no similar restriction applies to girls, they probably will not.
Also, the European Convention on Human Rights is npow on the statute book. Article 10 gives us the right to freedom of expression. Any dress code that restricts that must be justified - that being; necessary as opposed to the old defence of reasonable.
As said, we await with interest.
Any form of dress code or uniform clearly restricts freedom of expression to some extent, but as you say, restrictions have to be justified on grounds of safety or something reasonably substantial. pIt would be considered reasonable to expect a longhaired employee to tie hair back when operating machinery in which the hair could easily get caught, for instance, or when cooking using a naked flame.
Yes - or food handling. Tying it back is not an unreasonable restriction anyway. Expecting someone to cut it is. I suspect that we will see some interesting cases where ECHR articles 8, 9 and 10 are cited.
Beckam in no way bears long hair.
He`s just a celebrity, that is, a NORMAL human being, who is just famous because of his football talents.
Beckham just plaited his hair, because he had to go to SouthAfrica and thus he wanted to make a good impression on the Africans of SA, with his Carribean style braids. That`s the story.
Beckham in no way is an icon in long hair