M&S cashiers can refuse to handle pork and alcohol

[HermioneWeasley]

www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/10532782/Muslim-staff-at-Marks-and-Spencer-can-refuse-to-sell-alcohol-and-pork.html

I would be extremely annoyed at being held up by someone refusing to "handle" alcohol and pork. After all, the stuff is either in bottles or cellophane so it's not coming into direct contact.

Personally, I wouldn't have this policy, but if m&S think it's reasonable to refuse, why not put employees who object in a different part of the store, instead of inconveniencing customers?

And before cries of racism and Islamaphobia start, my family are Muslim (though I am not) and would have no problem with putting bottles and packs through a checkout.

But why would one set of beliefs be given more credence than another, say my vegetarian of whom I'm so fond.

I don't know Clawdius. I didn't frame the legislation!

It'll be connected with def. of a 'religion' and institutional natures and accountability prob. (though I read recently that rastafarianism was included in the def.). I'd think vegetarianism was not viewed as a 'religion' more just an ethical/lifestyle choice. Lines were required to be drawn somewhere I suppose.

It's obviously a massive grey area...

I think, as far as I'm concerned, I'd think quite kindly of an employer that didn't make people sell pork/alcohol/vvhatever if they really didn't vvant to (my kids' Muslim nanny once memorably told me that she'd been brought up to think of handling pork in roughly the same light as I might perceive touching 'radioactive dog shit'!) - but if person A gets to decline for religious reasons, person B should have just as much right to decline for ethical/lifestyle reasons.

& I think it should be ultimately up to the employer vvhether that's a sustainable model or not, given that it may in practice cause a degree of inconvenience to customers &/or the public.

Depressingly unsurprising that the T'graph et al are all over this non-story mind you.

Right, so I've queued for 20 minutes, had to get someone to help me unload (because I have a bad back and can't get to the bottom of my trolley) half my stuff has gone through then along comes the pork/ alcohol product and I have to unpack the half of my shopping already gone through, unload the belt and move to the back of another queue for another 20 minutes?

I'm happy to accept this was a one off incident (although I would be surprised if this was the first customer ever to bring alcohol/ pork through this cashier's till) but I don't agree with people who say if this was to be a policy it wouldn't bother them or they'd be happy to change after half their stuff has gone through.

No, that'd irritate me too.

But I'd be fine vvith a supervisor/colleague scanning it as happens on tills vvith U18 checkout staff, or self service tills.

It'd be a fairly rare occurrence I'd think - if Morrisons say they can “respect and work around anyone’s wishes not to handle specific products for religious or cultural reasons” then I have to say I've shopped at Morrison's on & off for 25 years & never had to svvap tills mid process!

It's actually not causing mass outbreaks of carnage at the tills.

IIRC some 10-15 years ago a woman sued M&S over being rejected for a job or promotion for which she was well-qualified. It involved tasting foods, and she was rejected because, as a practicing Jew, she had said that she would not taste pork, prawns, etc. She lost.

I wouldn't mind too much having to wait for another person to put my item through, as happens with alcohol when the cashier is young, but I would be outraged if I was told to go to a different till.

People should be allowed to follow the practices of their own religion, not to inflict them upon others who are not co-religionists.

It's half-baked, anyway - is the cashier going to read the ingredients of every item in your trolley before deciding whether or not they will serve you?

What really, really, concerns me is that there has been a mishap/staff error/customer policy breach that has inconvenienced customers in a shop on one occasion

...and it has made the national news and caused a huge outcry - because of the religion of the shop assistant who made the mistake.

This is not a good thing.

M&S are a business, if they feel they can make these allowances for their staff without it impacting profits or customer services, then it's up to them (though I do agree with vegetarians/vegans having the same rights). I imagine if this policy became unworkable, it would soon be stopped.

However, I can understand why some companies don't feel they can make these provisions.

Either way, I cannot forsee special tills, or anything like that, so I would agree with the storm in a teacup remarks.

limited -

M&S are so shit these days poor customer service, acrylic clothes this is another reason to avoid shopping there. Some one there needs to get a grip

There was a case where a man who had strong Green views won the right to have them treated in line with laws about religion here.

I would think if push came to shove a lifelong vegetarian etc could argue (and win) the same rights to adhering to their way of life & beliefs.

Which is a good thing for public life, and how you are treated at school and stuff. I still think people shouldn't be going for jobs where they know they won't be able to do a significant part of teh role due to their beliefs though.

There are loads of jobs I wouldn't do due to my beliefs (unless on the breadline - and then you're happy to get the work and do what you must surely). So eg I would never ever ever want a job working with battery chickens. But if I was desperate and really had to I would, but wouldn't take the job and say oh actually I can't do it you've got to put me in the office. Don't know if that makes sense.

I really don't think people should go into the medical profession if they are not prepared to do certain parts of the job in the speciality that they choose. Seems ridiculous to me.

Nice - I noticed that Green views case was 2009 prior to the Equalities Act, which may well shift the legal interpretation?
Is climate change a 'philosophical belief'? Or just a scientific fact?

Hmm interesting.

In the case in point it was a strongly held belief (which is based in scientific theory which has a lot of proof supporting it) and I would say that his belief is as strong as a religious belief so reasonable to give the same accommodations.

I don't understand why religious beliefs are given more weight than others - well apart from all the power and history and stuff - but then as an athiest (I strongly believe there is no god) I would think that

Raven is your W not working?

I think the whole thing is daft. No-one was asking the shop assistant to eat pork or drink alcohol. WTF is she making a fuss about? I'm a vegetarian - for moral reasons - if I worked in a shop of course I'd serve customers buying meat, or leather.

Actually this allegedly happened to ONE unnamed customer in M&S.

How long has the policy been in place?

And only one customer has been 'affected' allegedly by a Muslim till operator refusing to put thro alcohol on the till during Christmas.

So only one person tried to buy booze at M&S this year then?

If it were for real this would be on the front page of all the papers everywhere with names and faces of these customers sad faced and gasping for a drink.

Heck we'd have islamophobia threads filling up the boards here if it was happening.

Perhaps everyone everywhere ever served by a Muslim till operator without any incident, think about it.