»   And let's be clear - in the aftermath of 9/11, plenty of 'patriots' called for Muslim groups to be outlawed simply because of their views. 1 hr ago

»   The day we let police shut down groups or protests simply because we don't like their views is when we lose our battle against extremism. 1 hr ago

»   I'm proud to live in a country that still cares about (tho record is patchy) civil liberties enough to let extremists hold demos today. 1 hr ago

»   ...if UAF crew were as vigorous in opposing Muslim extremists, they'd be able to deny EDL oxygen and support too. 2 hrs ago

»   Overheard one EDL guy telling a passerby: "We are the only group that oppose these [MAC] extremists". Therein lies the problem. 2 hrs ago

» More updates...


  • Family

    • Liberal Conspiracy
  • Comrades

    • Andy Worthington
    • Angela Saini
    • Bartholomew’s notes
    • Bleeding Heart Show
    • Bloggerheads
    • Blood & Treasure
    • Campaign against Honour Killings
    • Cath Elliott
    • Chicken Yoghurt
    • Daily Mail Watch
    • Dave Hill
    • Dr. Mitu Khurana
    • Europhobia
    • Faith in Society
    • Feminism for non-lefties
    • Feministing
    • Gender Bytes
    • Harry’s Place
    • IKWRO
    • MediaWatchWatch
    • Ministry of Truth
    • Natalie Bennett
    • New Statesman blogs
    • Operation Black Vote
    • Our Kingdom
    • Robert Sharp
    • Rupa Huq
    • Shiraz Socialist
    • Shuggy’s Blog
    • Stumbling and Mumbling
    • Ta-Nehisi Coates
    • The F Word
    • Though Cowards Flinch
    • Tory Troll
    • UK Polling Report
  • In-laws

    • Aaron Heath
    • Douglas Clark's saloon
    • Earwicga
    • Get There Steppin’
    • Incurable Hippie
    • Neha Viswanathan
    • Power of Choice
    • Rita Banerji
    • Sarah
    • Sepia Mutiny
    • Sonia Faleiro
    • Southall Black Sisters
    • The Langar Hall
    • Turban Head



  • Technorati: graph / links

    Gurmeal Singh wins turban case


    by Rumbold
    2nd October, 2009 at 3:34 pm    

    PC Gurmeal Singh, who I blogged about here, has won his case (in part):

    “Out of the officer’s 15 grievances, two were ruled in his favour: Harassment from a superior and “indirect discrimination” because the rules around the riot training lacked “clarity”.

    Speaking outside the employment tribunal, Pc Singh said the judgment was “a weight off my shoulders” and said the grievance process had been a “very long road”.”

    (Hat-tip: Mangles)


                  Post to del.icio.us


    Filed in: Sikh






    22 Comments below   |  

    Reactions: Twitter, blogs
    1. antonvowl

      I imagine the unmoderated Mail discussion of this story will be insightful and balanced http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/6066


    2. pickles

      New blog post: Gurmeal Singh wins turban case http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/6066




    1. aybee — on 2nd October, 2009 at 4:34 pm  

      A couple of his allegations appeared far-fetched, as in claiming that he couldn’t wear any insignia on his turban for religious reasons…Since when has that been a taboo for sikhs? What about decorative plumes that the Guru’s wore?

    2. Kismet Hardy — on 2nd October, 2009 at 4:35 pm  

      Will police be allowed to carry knives now?

    3. aybee — on 2nd October, 2009 at 4:39 pm  

      Well according to Met Police dress code ‘unless precluded by a risk assessment or operational order, items of religious significance may be worn, for example staff who are Sikh may wear the Kara and carry the Kirpan’.

    4. Kismet Hardy — on 2nd October, 2009 at 4:43 pm  

      That should make the little black chaps feel it’s a fair cop during random knife searches

    5. long — on 2nd October, 2009 at 5:06 pm  

      And if he’d been injured he’d have course sued. The race and or religion card is being milked in the UK. Think I’ll head down to a mosque and refuse to take of my shoes.

    6. long — on 2nd October, 2009 at 5:07 pm  

      Has anyone been in touch with this geeza to let him know he’s a TWAT!

    7. Don — on 2nd October, 2009 at 5:49 pm  

      Kismet,

      You mean like a Sikh copper version of this?

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=681zVPfnKN8&feature=related

    8. Chris — on 2nd October, 2009 at 6:28 pm  

      I am becoming more and more sick of this pathetic excuse for a country. Just what will we be doing next to make our immigrants welcome? A riot helmet is uniform and safety equipment so if you are unable to wear it then you are in the wrong job. Do Sikhs not ride motorbikes or are they allowed to ride around without crash helmets.
      I wouldn’t be surprised that PC Gurmeal Singh next claims compensation for a head injury during a riot because he didn’t have suitable protection.

      Question: would a white British person win a similar court case in an Eastern country if we refused to follow rules?
      Answer: Hell no! We would be locked up and/or decapitated.

      If you do not like our rules then set up home in another country. You are not welcome here!

    9. Edward Token-Darky — on 2nd October, 2009 at 7:03 pm  

      The editing is fast and furious today!

      Some comments - civil ones, too - stay up for a matter of minutes before being erased.

    10. Shatterface — on 2nd October, 2009 at 7:14 pm  

      ‘Speaking outside the employment tribunal, Pc Singh said the judgment was “a weight off my shoulders”’

      Helmets aren’t that heavy, surely?

    11. Don — on 2nd October, 2009 at 7:24 pm  

      If you do not like our rules then set up home in another country.

      Or, if you don’t like the rules lobby through the appropriate channels to have them changed, if you can make a valid argument. There are some rules I don’t like, do I have to move too? If not, why not?

      You see, Chris, one of the ‘rules’ is that you get to argue your case. Are you 100% happy with the ‘rules’? No? Planning on moving anytime soon?

      For the record, I think this was an iffy case (he won two points out of fifteen) but I don’t think ‘Take what we give you or fuck off’ is a policy I could subscribe to.

    12. MaidMarian — on 2nd October, 2009 at 7:45 pm  

      Got to be honest here Rumbold, it doesn’t really look like a victory to me and the BBC article you link to looks rather more like a story of poor management than racism, direct or otherwise.

      It also sounds like the bloke is far from the easiest person to get on with.

    13. Rumbold — on 2nd October, 2009 at 8:52 pm  

      That is why I said he had won his case in part. I always say that employers should be able to stipulate what their employees can wear, providing that they make this clear in any contract.

    14. aybee — on 2nd October, 2009 at 9:47 pm  

      however ridiculuous and arbitary the stipulations might be?

    15. binky — on 3rd October, 2009 at 9:27 am  

      TEN THOUSAND!

      COOL!

      http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/pound10000-for-pc-ordered-to-remove-turban-1796652.html

    16. Rumbold — on 3rd October, 2009 at 10:05 am  

      Aybee:

      Employers have a right to dictate what their employees wear, providing that this is made clear from the start.

    17. falcao — on 3rd October, 2009 at 11:50 am  

      It looks as though communication from both parties was not adequate it could have been dealt with in house. Instead we have a community relations disaster instead. The employment contracts must have stated riot police training is part of the job and protective equipment like helmets will be used!

    18. Sajn — on 4th October, 2009 at 7:18 pm  

      long — on 2nd October, 2009 at 5:06 pm
      “Think I’ll head down to a mosque and refuse to take of my shoes.”

      I think you mean “off”? I wish people would at least use the proper grammar.

    19. shawn — on 5th October, 2009 at 1:22 am  

      “If you do not like our rules then set up home in another country.”

      You uneducated thicko, the guy did follow the rules, he took the matter to court as he believed he was being discriminated against according to uk law, & the judge agreed with the sikh officer that the laws protecting his right to wear the turban in all situations had been broken, hence it was his superior officers who broke the law & NOT him.
      I guess its the ‘real british’ officers turn to ‘set up home in another country’ isn’t it?

    20. Mangles — on 5th October, 2009 at 12:58 pm  

      Maid Marian #12:
      ‘It also sounds like the bloke is far from the easiest person to get on with.’

      Why do you think that Maid Marian?

    Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

    Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
    With the help of PHP and Wordpress.