Irish police wearing turbins,what do you think?

[Bally12345]

Whilst the question wasn't directly related to this thread, it followed the thread train.
I thought his question was valid and I was also interested who would be liable, because I was under the impression that safety helmets where worn for protection against small accidents like a brick or hammer falling off a roof. I don't wear a turbin and I don't know how much head protection you would get from one.

Even though it was directly related, I still answered and yes it is a valid question.

 

[digidude]

You clearly dont understand H&S regulations regarding Sikhs wearing Turbans. Do some research and post again. Also on a side note what you have just said is classed as racial discrimination.

this country has gone to the dogs m8, im a minority group myself, its official, and yes i would refuse to employ someone if they refused to wear ANY of the regulatory safety gear, its in my company policy that H&S equipment will be used at all times. call it racist, call it discrimination, call it what you like, no hard hat = no job, im not prepared to leave myself open to claims for not enforcing H&S regulations. in my line of work you HAVE to mear a mountain climbing helmet when working, or a hard hat with a secured chin strap, if your not going to wear it, your not getting in the van

 

[Bally12345]

As I already have mentioned you clearly dont fully understand the regulations you work by. You have the right to your opinion and well done to you for sticking to your guns regarding H&S but a Sikh is allowed to wear his turban instead of a hard hat and on a construction site etc. thats what the law says and has said for a long time.

 

[digidude]

i dont work 'on site' but where i happen to work is classed as a H&S regulated zone, installing dishes and aerials on roofs, this is not sticking to my guns m8, this is working at heights law, no hat, no job, even sky WILL NOT employ you without signing a disclaimer that you will be fired if caught on a ladder without a hard hat on

 

[Temp]

As I already have mentioned you clearly dont fully understand the regulations you work by. You have the right to your opinion and well done to you for sticking to your guns regarding H&S but a Sikh is allowed to wear his turban instead of a hard hat and on a construction site etc. thats what the law says and has said for a long time.

Actually the law states, (been reading up on it: http://www.hse.gov.uk/foi/internalops/fod/oc/200-299/282_27.pdf)

4) at premises other than construction sites, where risks cannot be eliminated or controlled and there remains a significant residual risk, employers should ensure that the only people allowed to work there are those who are wearing appropriate head protection. In most cases, safety helmets meeting appropriate standards will be the means of meeting this requirement, as long as they are suitable and provide adequate fit and protection. Neither 'bump caps' nor turbans are appropriate where there is a significant risk of head injury.

So he could be working in one of those environments.

 

[ice2004]

As I already have mentioned you clearly dont fully understand the regulations you work by. You have the right to your opinion and well done to you for sticking to your guns regarding H&S but a Sikh is allowed to wear his turban instead of a hard hat and on a construction site etc. thats what the law says and has said for a long time.

Nobody denying thats the law, all thats being said is lets use some fecking common sense here.

Hard hat = some level of protection for your brain and skull
Turban = No level of protection for brain or skull

So why is it that someone refusing to wear a helmet still has the same legal protection as the others wearing a helmet? Anyone with half a brain could see this isn't right.

Its got nothing to do with race or religion m8.

 

[Drunken Master]

Nobody denying thats the law, all thats being said is lets use some fecking common sense here.

Hard hat = some level of protection for your brain and skull
Turban = No level of protection for brain or skull

So why is it that someone refusing to wear a helmet still has the same legal protection as the others wearing a helmet? Anyone with half a brain could see this isn't right.

Its got nothing to do with race or religion m8.

can see the point your making, but thats the way the law is written.

 

[Rat]

I know u guys are not intending going down the rasist road but lets be a little carefull here coz it could easily go that way

Rat

 

[Bally12345]

Nobody denying thats the law, all thats being said is lets use some fecking common sense here.

Hard hat = some level of protection for your brain and skull
Turban = No level of protection for brain or skull

So why is it that someone refusing to wear a helmet still has the same legal protection as the others wearing a helmet? Anyone with half a brain could see this isn't right.

Its got nothing to do with race or religion m8.

A non turban wearing sikh cannot refuse to wear a helmet but a turban wearing sikh can. Turban does offer protection and although its not the same amount of protection it is still protection.

At the end of the day from the view of an employment issue this would be classed as Racial Discrimination. I have added quotes and added a link to a pdf which some might find useful.

 

[Seedy_r0m]

Also on a side note what you have just said Quote:
someone in this pussy whipped country needs to put their foot down and they need to do it NOW!
is classed as racial discrimination.

Utter tosh!!

That is not a racial smear by any stretch of the imagination.

This country is going to the dogs, and it's alll due to people tip-toeing through life too scared to speak for fear of offending someone.

 

[Bally12345]

Utter tosh!!

That is not a racial smear by any stretch of the imagination.

This country is going to the dogs, and it's alll due to people tip-toeing through life too scared to speak for fear of offending someone.

So what are you saying? A turban wearing Sikh shouldnt be allowed to wear his turban at work?

tish tosh nothing this country isnt going to the dogs because of Sikhs.

 

[PollyPhfiller]

Its not a case of country going to the dogs..................

JUST; Whats good for the goose, is good for the Gander...........lol

 

[digidude]

m8 i dont think people are saying that sikhs are to blame for the countries downward spiral, but using this as an example of how UK law is changed to suit others. there are many races and religions that have had UK laws changed to suit their own needs, wether political, religious or otherwise m8

 

[Bally12345]

Hi guys,

A controversial issue has arisen in Ireland regarding a potential police officer and practicing sikh wearing his turbin as part of his uniform.The Irish government has rejected this and caused a huge debate on the subject.What do you U.K. guys and gals think of this decision? Are we right or wrong?

Anyway back to the main story, the decision is wrong and at the end of the day the guy was volunteering to do a job which many people cant do well paid.

His turban did not affect his work. Not only in this country but in other countries and states like China, New York , Canada, India etc Turban wearing Sikhs are allowed to wear Turbans as part of their Police Uniform.

 

[Drunken Master]

m8 i dont think people are saying that sikhs are to blame for the countries downward spiral, but using this as an example of how UK law is changed to suit others. there are many races and religions that have had UK laws changed to suit their own needs, wether political, religious or otherwise m8

i think you'll find that part of this is to do with the recruitment of officers from ethnic minorities, and one way is to respect their religous values!

 

[Temp]

Anyway back to the main story, the decision is wrong and at the end of the day the guy was volunteering to do a job which many people cant do well paid.

His turban did not affect his work. Not only in this country but in other countries and states like China, New York , Canada, India etc Turban wearing Sikhs are allowed to wear Turbans as part of their Police Uniform.

As wearing a Turban doesn't affect his work, his safety or the safety of other, I would personally feel that he should be allowed to work for the Garda.

You need to realise that Ireland, while it seems simular to the UK, it isn't.

Been reading up about Turbans or as it is called the Dastaar and have great repect for the time they take to put one on in the morning.

 

[duggie1982]

Turban

The UK police force already have a turban wearing policy and they also have adapted turbans that can be worn that still show the badge etc.

I think in the police force then fair enough as the normal hat doesent offer protection.

Although i agree with the above, but with regards to H&S at the workplace means that if not wearing a hard hat (when wearing a turban) and you have the same legal rights as someone wearing a hard hat then i disagree as i dont think that should be allowed.

 

[earwig999]

Perhaps this would be better in the "Rant Room".

Can we remember the British Airways steward that was told to remove her chain and cross as it could offend. She lost her court case and was not permitted to wear it.

 

[Seedy_r0m]

So what are you saying? A turban wearing Sikh shouldnt be allowed to wear his turban at work?

tish tosh nothing this country isnt going to the dogs because of Sikhs.

DO NOT twist my words around!!

Digidudes comment was not rascist. I think you need to pay attention to what's being said rather than seeing how you can manipulate it to suit your arguement.

 

[Bally12345]

DO NOT twist my words around!!

Digidudes comment was not rascist. I think you need to pay attention to what's being said rather than seeing how you can manipulate it to suit your arguement.

Not manipulating anything, just responding to whats being said. As I said in my earlier posts is what being said relevant to the origianl post. If you want to Rant on how the UK is gone to the dogs then do it another thread why hi-jack this one.

Although Digidudes comments might have not been racist they were as far as an employment issue is concerned racially discriminative.