A police project that involved spending £100,000 helping a Sikh officer find a chemical and biological attack suit to fit over his turban and beard has been described as “ridiculous”. The junior officer, who has not been named, encountered problems trying to join West Midlands Police’s counter-terrorist operation support unit because he could not fit protective gear over his religious headwear and beard.
Police chiefs decided to let him spend 18 months trying to find new respirators and helmets suitable for Sikhs. But after failing to come up with an alternative he was restored to his regular role – only to go on long-term sick leave for stress.The cost of the 18-month project has been estimated at £100,000 and has been criticised for being a “ridiculous” waste of taxpayers’ cash.
John Mellor, a former West Midlands Police chief superintendent, said: “Taking 18 months out of an officer’s duties and the colossal cost of the project is indefensible.” A spokesman for West Midlands Police said: “West Midlands Police is a diverse organisation, which both serves and recruits from a diverse community. No Sikh officer has applied and been ‘turned down’ from joining the operational support unit because of faith issues. “However, it has been identified that for some members of the Sikh faith, the removal of the turban to wear a helmet and the wearing of a respirator could be problematic. “As an employer committed to equality and diversity, we are working to try to find a solution to what is a national issue.”
When is this ridiculous pandering going to end, when we run out of money? This guy will probably go to work for the Pentagon.
I’ve never understood why god wants me to cover my hair and grow a beard. Maybe he just has bad fashion sense, has got wrinkles or is going bald. Who knows? maybe the next messiah will tell us.
Years ago, for a short time I was a Firefighter. Beards were prohibited, it was a safety issue, pure and simple. You could not get a good seal on your mask, so beards were outlawed. This type of accommodation is idiotic.
I am a British Sikh who wears a turban, and to be honest im glad that they’re even employing non-whites.
However taking £200k to design/find a suitable respirator and mask is ridiculous, that’s just bad management to be honest.
Our religion requires us to to keep our turbans to cover our unshorn hair at all times, so removing it wouldn’t be an option.
I know a couple of guys, who are Sikhs, and they play on a local amateur hockey team.
They explained it to me:
They have a “regular” turban for everyday.
There’s a fancier, more elaborate turban for religious festivals, special occasions, etc.
When they play, they remove their “regular” turban, and wrap up their hair with a small piece of cloth and a hair-twisty. They wear helmets for hockey without any problems.
As for beards, the $1 solution: hair-nets.
The mistake the West Midlands Police made was to offer a someone $100,000 and 18 months off to spend doing anything he wants. I’d take that job. And I’d feel stressed when I had to return to work and be a real police officer.
I think that government policy should be to either accommodate all religious beliefs or none of them. I think that secular society should go with the latter.
#4 We just had to stand in a room full of teargas. That showed the beardies that it was a bad idea. I guess today thats a lawsuit.
Would he have had less stress if he was just told to work without the helmet and mask? Certainly the taxpayers would have been saved the expense of this loser’s bad judgment at choosing a career at odds with his religion’s requirements.
Next up: Nightclub asked to ban drinking, tight clothing and rock music to honor religious zealot’s rights to freedom to be employed in an environment that does not violate his right to worship.
It’s really a simple matter of if special equipment is needed for someone to meet their religious requirements then let them pay for it.
Not sure why everyone else’s wallet has to be dragged into it.
Heres an experiment. Read the article and substitute the word ‘ridiculous’ for ‘religious’.
The article makes much more sense, and becomes much more accurate.
>>Our religion requires us to to keep our turbans
>>to cover our unshorn hair at all times
Can’t you just shear it?
I don’t UNDERSTAND? What to Sikh’s wear in India then? Surely there are hazmat or equivalent jobs in the Punjab area, or other areas that are majority Sikh right? So in THOSE areas, what to THOSE Sikhs wear for hazmat suits? Or are they implying that no Sikh in the entire history of the world has ever worked for a hazmat team? Ever? This is the first Sikh in the history of the world to wear a bio-protection suit? I can’t believe that.
As long as his IQ is not above normal…
How much was spent on retrofitting submarines to accommodate women?
jag,
I’m glad a Sihk showed up.
Question… how far should society go to accommodate special religious garb?
I’m for a HIGH LEVEL of tolerance as much as possible.
But, clearly, there are limits — especially in extreme cases. If you’re from India, you’ve seen the “holy men” walking around naked. Clearly this disqualifies them a wide range of jobs, governmental and private.
On the other hand, jewelry, headscarves, etc should almost never be a problem. (but France has banned these from schools, anyway)
So, what’s the guiding principle?
Well, maybe you’ll remove your turban when facing death by gas. Have you heard the term, adapt or die.
Meanwhile, governments here are doing plenty to accommodate gay lifestyles.
I’m not sure why they let him find or construct a suitable hazmat. Surely he’s not qualified. Why didn’t they get their hazmat supplier to find a solution. Seems like they had 200K to waste anyway.
Civil unions.
#21 – Er…right. Except that it costs nothing (virtually) and has NO impact on your life at all..so piss off. Whether you JUST hand marriage licenses to white Christian couples…or interracial…or Jews…or gays…doesn’t cost anything extra. The process already exists. It’s just a matter of who you ‘let’ apply for it. Keep a little history in mind here, the U.S. government never was involved in saying who could get married, UNTIL they wanted to stop free slaves from marrying at will. The policy you love is based entirely on racism. ANY loving adults should be able to marry. Just cause you don’t like blacks, Jews or gays doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have the same rights. You’re free to move to Alabama with the rest of your racists Republican (just guessing) friends…but leave me and the sane rational normal loving people alone.
MikeN,
“Civiil Unions”
This is at no expense to taxpayers. Furthermore, the accomodation of “the gay lifestyle” is hardy parallel to the blatant disgregard for reasonable spending on behalf of the police force. The two simply cannot be compared. One is an purely a governmental policy shortcomming while the other is a lack of financial regulation.
Religion is a personal choice. Homosexuality is not. The accomodatoin of religoin should be restricted once it crosses into the taxpayers pockets. This is not a matter of civil liberty, rather a matter of fiscal responsibility.
#22 – FSoA
A bit hypocritical aren’t you? MikeN provides a rational and accurate answer and the first thing you do is insult Blacks and Jews by lumping them in with the not-so=gay-but-angry lifestyle.
Then to show what a complete ass and beacon of tolerance you really are, you insult the people of Alabama and call half the country racists.
By this evidence alone it is easy to conclude that your biggest problem is you. Tolerance is not a singular right of gays and lesbians but a two-way street. Stop “hogging” the road.
The following is from the original article… ” John Mellor, a former superintendent in the force, said: “This is health and safety issue. Sikhs fought bravely for the British for centuries wearing their turbans. If this officer wishes to be in the OSU, he should be able to.” “
I just want freedom *from* religion, not freedom *of* religion. What’s the difference between god and santa’s elves??
Things are getting too predictable here.
I read “MikeN provides a rational and accurate answer” and I thought “Whoa!–is that the MikeN we all know and love?
So I found the post, and sure enough MikeN was as full of shit as ever as was immediately pointed out.
So I go back to the commenting post, and sure enough, its Dr. D.
Two warped miscreants if ever there was. I’m glad you two have found each other. With the calcification that has set in though, I do wonder how small a difference in positions it would take for either of you to think the other a “closet liberal” or a “closer gay” or a “closer commie” or anything else you think of as being in the closet?
I agree that spending such a big amount is ridiculous.
However, I have read history of sikhs. They have fought bravely for English forces for centuries. They are the bravest people I would say.
#29–John==how does your “however” affect or modify the validity of your first thought?
I don’t think it does, so why mention it?
# 28 bobbo
Why am I not surprised that you are the one calling someone else “gay” when you disagree with a point or statement.
What’s confusing is that at one point you “take up” for the gay lifestyle, then suddenly take a 180 and use it as an insult. Make up your mind.
You also seem to have an unnatural obsession with closets. I suggest that you immediately exit yours because clearly your mental health is suffering.
Religious issues aside, why throw in the “work for the Pentagon” line? This is in the UK and not the USA. Just want to throw in an extra jab?
#32–Dr D==just for your continuing education on the subject, once again, you fail to perceive pretty obvious satire, taking the clear meaning in the opposite direction.
Even you admit that I “take up” for the gay lifestyle. Now, just imagine that I am being consistent, and part of your brain is non functioning?
#4–myself==darn. Its sarcasm again, not the higher level even more complex, more subject to error, “satire.”
My bad.