It may seem a funny question, but in the case Achbita (A) and another v G4S Secure Solicitons NV (G4S), this was the case.
A worked as a receptionist for G4S, who had a unwritten policy of religious and ideological neutrality due to the broad range of clients they have in public and private sectors.
Back in June 2006, G4S implemented a dress code which prohibited employees from ‘wearing any visible signs of their political, philosophical or religious beliefs and/or from giving expression to any ritual arising from them’.
This meant that A was no longer able to wear her Islamic headscarf to work, however, in April 2006 A had informed the G4S her intentions to wear her headscarf at work which then resulted her being dismissed for breaching the policy.
G4S was taken to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) for direct and indirect discrimination against religion or belief.
The Advocate General has provided the following opinion on the case:
- The policy banning wearing visible religious symbols affects all employees equally and wasn’t based on stereotypes or prejudice against one or other religions or beliefs;
- G4S’s dress code was appropriate and necessary for achieving their objectives, which couldn’t be achieved by a more lenient approach.
Although this opinion has been given, the ECJ does not have to follow this opinion – however in most cases, it does follow the Advocate General’s opinion.