Jesus-row boss 'could sue'

Dean Kirby

October 11, 2007

| Submit Comments | Comments (28) | Previous | Next

AN airport boss who was suspended after he hung a picture of Jesus on a staffroom wall could be a victim religious discrimination, it is claimed.

The M.E.N. revealed how car parks supervisor Gareth Langmead, who is Catholic, was sent home after a Muslim colleague complained.

Mr Langmead was suspended for three days while Manchester Airport chiefs investigated the complaint. He was reinstated without a blemish on his record.

But John Peel, of Eccles-based Employment Law Advisory Services, said Mr Langmead might be able to make a compensation claim against the airport.

He said: "Under religious belief rules, he could argue he had been treated differently from people who are allowed to practice their faith in work time.

"He could easily argue he had been singled out simply because he is a believer in Jesus and not another faith."

Common sense

Mr Peel said the airport should have used `common sense' and added: "The easiest way would have been to call in the staff member to ask him why he put it up. His bosses should have advised him a complaint had been made and suggested that, for the sake of good industrial relations, he take it down."

Mr Langmead, 40, from Atherton, found the picture of the Sacred Heart of Jesus - the subject of devotion by many Catholics - in a desk drawer while cleaning out an office.

He hung it on a wall in a staff rest room - and it is understood the person who complained alleged it was an act of provocation. But an investigation found he had not acted maliciously and he was reinstated.

Trade unions said his suspension was an `over-reaction'.

Mohammed Shafiq, from the Rochdale-based Ramadan Foundation, a leading Muslim youth organisation, said: "We protect the right of people of different religions to wear their own religious symbols. But to put up a picture of Jesus in a communal area shared by people of different faiths and of no faith is not appropriate."

He said the supervisor `should know better'.

You need Flash player 8+ and JavaScript enabled to view this video.

460

275

false

Articles

Row over Jesus picture

| Submit Comments | Comments (28) | Previous | Next

Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All

Ms D, Manchester (11/10/2007 at 08:19)

And who is Shafiq to decide what is and what is not appropriate ? Many large businesses have prayer rooms so do cater for other religions. Why the problem with this picture ? It's time for the minority to stop whingeing about anything and everything and only can they then integrate when they accept other's beliefs. This whole thing is pathetic.

Frank Hancock, Manchester (11/10/2007 at 08:31)

I didn`t realise that England had stopped being a Christian country, and that, after 2000 years we weren`t allowed relevant symbols. However, just as a nude picture would be inappropriate on a communal room wall, perhaps also the iconic image of Jesus. There was a time, however, when a `wee word` with the `perp` would have been enough. Common sense isn`t so `common.

tezza, tyldesley (11/10/2007 at 09:44)

I thought that most solicitors had plenty of work to do and did not need to tout for business, the man concerned in this row should just get on with his job and banish any thought of suing anybody, he was a fool and so were his bosses, so lets just get on with life and keep our hobbies (religion) to ourselves.

The Bobelesque, In The Rye (11/10/2007 at 09:59)

Yep, good old religion. These silly idiots need to take a deeper look at the tenets of their faiths. The sooner all forms of religion are accepted as being the rubbish they clearly are the better off we shall be. There's only one kind of atheist so we never argue with each other.

Surprise surprise though eh - there's a chance of blame and claim - pathetic.

Mark, South Manchester (11/10/2007 at 10:34)

I wonder if an employee of the Manchester Evening News started "hanging & posting up" pictures of Jesus around the M.E.N offices - whether they would be asked to take them down? And if they refused, would the M.E.N bosses discipline him/her?

Personally I've worked in many office buildings and I've NEVER seen or heard of anybody - putting up a picture of Jesus before. Sounds like a workplace wind-up to me!

Surfin' Bird, Tameside (11/10/2007 at 10:57)

The God Squad - Muslims, Christians, Jews , whatever, have no right to impose their self righteousness on the rest of us. If they want to practice a faith, they should do it in their own time and in an appropriate environment.

ant (11/10/2007 at 12:04)

Mark, you are missing a point. They ask why the guy was suspended. He shouldn't have been for something like that. Even if it is wrong.

Plainspeaker (11/10/2007 at 12:21)

I can't believe how such a beautiful, gentle picture of Christ could cause offence. To me it would be a souce of peace and calm. When I worked at Hope Hospital there was a communal Prayer Room. Catholics attended Mass there, Muslims and Jewish people came to pray. I thought then what a shame the whole world couldn't be like that. Of course Britain is now considered a secular country. What a terrible shame. In Ireland where I come from, there are religious pictures and statues all over the place and I hope the day never comes when that country too turns secular. One question I would like to know the answer to, is why on earth didn't the person who complained about the picture, just have a quiet word instead of going to management, sounds very petty to me.

The Bobelesque, In The Rye (11/10/2007 at 13:22)

Palinspeaker:

" ...In Ireland where I come from, there are religious pictures and statues all over the place"

There are also just emerging the details of a terrible history of abuse of the poorest citizenry of your beautiful homeland by ... erm ... the catholic church.

Sorry, Plainspeaker, a superabundence of religiosity does not make for a perfect society - quite the opposite.

ant (11/10/2007 at 14:17)

You are right, Plainspeaker. Imagine something opposite happened in Iran. We are too crazy with this political correctness. What about identity?

Kodi, Manchester (11/10/2007 at 14:57)

I notice lots of people have mentioned that their place of work provides a prayer room. That's good, because religious imagery is kept in its place. I think when large posters of a religious figure (of ANY faith) are displayed in communal areas, that's when you can start running into problems. That said, I think it's OK to allow subtle religious imagery on a very small scale in the office (I myself have a tiny jade Buddha beneath my PC monitor, but it's not prominently displayed). It serves as a visual prompt which helps me stay calm on stressful days, and none of my work mates has ever commented on it. Similarly, I do not take offence at the crucifixes or indeed pentacles worn as jewellery by some of my colleagues. We respect each other's beliefs, and no-one makes overt statements about where their spirituality lies. That's as it should be.

The Bobelesque, In The Rye (11/10/2007 at 14:59)

ant: the current thinking is that 'identity' leads to 'nationalism' leads to 'fascism' leads to 'genocide'.

Is that what you really want ant? What does dec think?

Evangelist, Birkenhead (11/10/2007 at 15:14)

Have we gone PC mad. We won't be able to preach the word of God soon. How can a picture of Jesus cause discrimination. He loves all people.

The Bobelesque, In The Rye (11/10/2007 at 15:23)

Evangelist: the majority do not want you to preach the word of god, or stick icons on walls.

I am aware that you believe your salvation depends upon you doing your best to convert me but I am not prepared to cooperate. I hate happy clappy music and singing in tongues.

ant (11/10/2007 at 16:10)

The Bobelesque: I don't agree with this current thinking.

Plainspeaker (11/10/2007 at 16:33)

The Bobelesque, In The Rye,

Yes, I am well aware of the dreadful abuse in my country, and I knew when I wrote my comments, this would be brought up. There are wicked people in every walk and station of life. But ultimately it is the Singer, not the Song. I still think what a petty thing for someone to complain about. Such a beautiful picture, a work of art like many pictures from other religions. Is not Jesus considered a prophet in the Islamic religion? I would have no issue with Buddhas on desk tops,stars of David on walls, a prayer mat in the corner for muslims to pray on, religious holidays for all faiths along with smoking breaks, early finishing for mothers etc.and the odd day off too for those of no faith, but I'm getting away from the main point here, which is freedom from the PC beaucrats of today. Live and let live I say, in a hundred years it won't matter.
Plainspeaker.

Calamity (11/10/2007 at 16:34)

I commented on this yesterday, when the first news item about it came out. I speculated that the person who complained was probably a muslim. This wasn't printed. No surprise that it was a muslim. I find it offensive to see women covered up so you can only see their eyes, yet this isn't banned. I think the muslim religion is very intolerant. I am not a fan of the catholics either, in fact, I don't believe in organised religion of any description. However, if the muslims can have separate prayer rooms in many public places and force their women to wear impractical clothing, then objecting to a photograph on a wall seems a bit hypocritical.

'Daddy Dick's Fringe', M40 (11/10/2007 at 17:49)

If it was a Man Utd poster then everyone would be offended, but seeing JC is a blue, why not put a city scarf on top of the photo. Problem solved.

Neil Armstrong. Talking live, from The Blue Moon. (11/10/2007 at 18:58)

he was gonna put up a dart board but the health and safety guy wouldnt let him.

Steve Pottage (11/10/2007 at 20:41)

There can be nothing wrong with this man`s action. For over 1500 years this has been a Christian country, if anyone objects they are free to leave. How could this image offend any reasonable person.People should be integrating themselves into our culture not dictating our actions

M (11/10/2007 at 21:03)

It should be remembered that a good many of us worship naked women (quite rationally), and up until the late 70s it was quite acceptable for us to express our devotion in the form of calendars and motivational posters. If it is acceptable for Christians to express their belief in pictorial form in the workplace then I demand equal rights.

I also demand the right to be able to go into a church and paste up a poster saying "You don't have to be mad to worship here, but it helps.".

Enigma, Trafford (11/10/2007 at 21:17)

Well this is all so stupid, if he wishes todisplay the picture let him same as if a muslim wants to display one, fine.
This was a case ovf over reaction by his boss and religious pettiness by the guy that complained.

Now lets see if I complain about ramadan will that stop the muslim community going to Rusholme and racing up and down the roads causing chaos??????

Lancer565, Nottingham (11/10/2007 at 22:04)

Speaking as a pagan, all that I would like to say regarding this sad indictment on our current trendy, PC society is that perhaps someone should remind this Mohammed Shafiq bloke that before he starts complaining perhaps he should remember that he is living in a Christian Country where both his religion and my own are merely tolerated.

Elfinpunk (11/10/2007 at 23:34)

How pathetic is this. As someone who has no belief in any "god" I find it hard to understand how one person can be so intolerant to another. If the muslim guy had popped a photo of Allah and there had been a complaint then all hell would have broken loose. But then again I find it rather odd that one picture can wind up someone so easily.

Let us face it, religion is good for absolutely nothing... war, abuse, money grabbing, the church and most religions have a lot to answer for.

Let him put the damn photo up and slap a few others of Buddha and Allah and Tom Jones as well. All "God's" in their own right.

pom, Midd (12/10/2007 at 06:13)

as a christian faith country i find your opinions offencesive "Mohammed Shafiq, from the Rochdale-based Ramadan Foundation, a leading Muslim youth organisation, said: "We protect the right of people of different religions to wear their own religious symbols. But to put up a picture of Jesus in a communal area shared by people of different faiths and of no faith is not appropriate."
this is not a muslim country you are allowed to practise your faith here let others get on with who ever they pray to if you dont like it go to wherever you can practice yours in piece

()

Report

News