Muslim and Sikh employees of New York’s transit system will now be able to wear their religious headgear freely, without attaching a government agency logo to them, in a major legal victory after new uniform rules were imposed following the 9/11 attacks.
The US Justice Department on Wednesday reached a settlement with the New York City Transit Authority (NYCTA) eight years after it had filed a complaint in September 2004 in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York alleging that NYCTA engaged in a pattern of religious discrimination.
Under the agreement, the NYCTA would be required to adopt new uniform headwear policies, allowing employees working in public contact positions, like operating buses and subways, to wear khimars, yarmulkes, turbans, kufis, skullcaps, tams and headscarves without attaching the logo of the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) to the headwear. MTA is the parent agency for the rail and bus operator NYCTA.
The NYCTA would also pay $184,500 to eight of its current and former employees, some of them Sikhs and Muslims, who had alleged employment discrimination after they refused to adhere to attach logos to their headwear.
The deal also allows Sikh MTA workers to wear turbans as long as they match the blue colour of the MTA uniform. MTA management and other employees will receive extensive training on the new policy according to the settlement.
“This settlement agreement sends a clear message that the Department of Justice will not tolerate religious discrimination,” Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division Thomas Perez said in a statement.
“I am pleased that the NYCTA has agreed to end its discriminatory practices that for years have forced employees to choose between practicing their religion and maintaining their jobs.”
The MTA had enforced after the 9/11 attacks, Sikh and Muslim workers were forced to either brand their religious headdress with the agency’s logo or forced to work out of public view. The MTA had cited security concerns after 9/11 as the reason for its “brand or segregate” policy and insisted the new policy was necessary despite Sikh and Muslim employees working successfully at Transit Authority for decades.
Beginning in March 2002, the agency began to selectively enforce the new headgear policies against Muslim and Sikh employees.
The Sikh Coalition hailed the judgment saying Sikh and Muslim workers would now be able to wear their religious headdress freely -- as they did before 9/11 -- without fear of segregation or discipline.
“We’re glad that this sad chapter in our city’s reaction to 9/11 has come to an end,” said Amardeep Singh, Programme Director of the Sikh Coalition.
“Innocent Sikh and Muslim workers were essentially punished and segregated for the events of that day. We are ready to turn the page now and are particularly pleased that procedures are in place that better protect the rights of all, not just Muslims and Sikhs, at the MTA,” Singh said.
“I am relieved that the policy of branding or segregating Sikh or Muslim workers is coming to an end,” said plaintiff Sat Hari Singh, who also went by the name of Kevin Harrington.
“The MTA honored me for driving my train in reverse away from the towers on 9/11 and leading passengers to safety. They called me a ‘hero of 9/11.’ I didn’t have a corporate logo on my turban on 9/11. This policy made no sense. It was driven by fear. I’m glad it has come to an end,” Singh, a Sikh train operator, said.
Another plaintiff Inderjit Singh said he had worked as a station agent for more than a decade before 9/11. “My turban never interfered with my work in any way. I’m happy that I can do my job now without having to worry about this policy hanging over me,” he said.
In March 2005, a US Justice Department investigation found over 200 instances of MTA employees wearing headdress without an MTA logo during three days of inspection. The Justice Department filed its own suit against the MTA in September 2004 and primarily led the litigation.
In July 2005, groups like the Sikh Coalition and the Centre for Constitutional Rights filed discrimination charges on behalf of six Sikh plaintiffs.
In a statement, the MTA said its rules had been “reasonable” and “never animated by religious or ethnic bias.”
The transit agency said it agrees “to modify the headwear portion of the NYCT uniform policy to permit employees in those titles to wear turbans, headscarves and certain other forms of headwear that do not contain the standard NYCT-issued logo.”
Shayana Kadidal, a Senior Managing Attorney at the Centre for Constitutional Rights said the MTA’s proposal to brand workers’ turbans with a corporate logo was “unacceptable”.
Keywords: New York City Transit Authority, Sikhs, Muslim transit workers, headgear issue, 9/11 attacks
I feel this is a step backwards. By issuing this judgement, the court
has placed religion ahead of duty. An officer's uniform is there for a
reason. It is part of the job's identity and discipline. The headgear
is a major component of the uniform. By diluting its role, the court
has diluted the identity of the job and associated it with religion.
For example, when I see a Metro employee, I want to see him/her as a
'Metro employee', not as a 'Sikh Metro employee' or 'Muslim metro
employee'. By making your religion more obvious, you are over
communicating and inviting trouble. IMHO, religion is a personal
matter and should not be flaunted or made obvious outside.
The report is incomplete in one aspect - you haven't mentioned whether
non-Muslim and non-Sikh workers of the NYCTA have to have a logo
attached to their uniforms.
Why is that important? Because uniforms go further than racial
discrimination. They demonstrate your allegiance. If the rest of the
workers do have a logo, then this judgement is a step backwards, it
would make the Muslim and Sikh workers different from the others,
which becomes self-imposed discrimination. If on the other hand the
others have no logo, only uniforms, then its a step forward, re-
affirming them all as workers of the NYCTA, irrespective of race and
faith. Its similar to taking an oath of allegiance when you seek
citizenship in a country.
Patience pays and the fruit is in front of us. Thanks for undersatnding the sentiments and showing respect for the cultures.
One can easily make a case out of it, which would help others to overcome the prevailing biaseness.
What is wrong in having a company logo on a headgear. Every other
uniform has it. If you wear a cap you have the logo of the company on it
then why not in any other head gear.
If you look at women police in Malaysia they wear a logo on their head
gear and its a Islamic country.
I feel one shouldn't take one's religious freedom to extreme levels and
learn to co-exist. As long as a head gear is allowed it is ok I guess.
WELCOME JUSTICE. It is big achievement for the people of India to get victory against discrimination. It is a huge landmark success because it will have an impact on other countries where discrimination, racism and inequality exist to have a fair amount of religious freedom to all human beings.
In any other country, more so in US, where there are multinationals, sikhs havea right to wear what they want, as other religion, chiristian, muslim,Hindus, wear their own way of relgious faith, so far there is no clash between themselves over conversion.In australia,'there is no such as religion, as this is a country of multi culturals, and every citizen has his own faith and freedom.In that Auistrlian govt is far away amongs all these religious clash and so every part of the wrold relgiojn thrives well,without intereferijng in politics as well.But, every australians in which ever parrt of world .globe lives, he is protected by the govt.
three cheers to austrlia in this regard.
This is a remarkable victory against discrimination.The tagging of head gear, was not only biasing but also hurt the sentiments of the person who supported the same.I hope this will be an example for other states/Countries where such instances of discrimination are still prevalent.
Please Email the Editor