Sikhs must wear hard-hats.

[morseman]

From the Toronto Star today
A group of Sikh truck truck drivers is set to lodge a human
rights complaint against CP Rail, over the enforcement
of a regulation requiring them to hear safety hard hats on
the job in lieu of turbans. The estimated 500 Punjabi
drivers contracted by various companies to unload & pick up
containers were outraged when they were barred from accessing
two Greater Toronto Terminals two weeks ago under a memo
dates Aug 1st to enforce the rule In 1978 a Sikj was fired
from Cn for wearing a turban rather than a hard hat.
Seven years later the Supreme Court of Canada ruled employers
do not violate human rights laws when then prohibit Sikhs
from wearing turbans on the job.

[DSchmitt]

Many ago the British army tesred the Sikh turban against the helmet they were using at that time. The turban provided better protection against bullets.

[Junctionfan]

Unless they wi***o sign a legal waver saying if they get injured, they can't sue; too bad for them.

Forget CP Rail though, I am almost certain for sure that it is a federal requirement for them to wear hard-hats so they are going after the wrong folk.

[vsmith]

I suggest they have a test with 2 volunteers...

One wears a Hardhat,

The other the Turban.

Then we drop the bricks...

First one not to lose conscienceness, wins.

Simple solution?

[corwinda]

How about some inventive person makes a hardhat that can be worn on top of a turban?

[chad thomas]

.....I was wondering why they don't just wrap the turban over the hard hat.........

[Junctionfan]

QUOTE: Originally posted by corwinda

How about some inventive person makes a hardhat that can be worn on top of a turban?

How about a hardturbin?[:D]

[jeaton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

QUOTE: Originally posted by corwinda

How about some inventive person makes a hardhat that can be worn on top of a turban?

How about a hardturbin?[:D]

Get a patent on that quick. You guys could get rich.

[DSchmitt]

QUOTE: Originally posted by chad thomas

.....I was wondering why they don't just wrap the turban over the hard hat.........

The turban is it made by wraping their own hair with cloth in a prescribed manner. If they wore any kind of hat they would not be able to wrap it properly. Unshorn hair and wearing the turban is a requirement of their religion.

[morseman]

The turban is six metres long. the under lay is a strip of one metre
and the top is a strip of sive metres. if the top part is removed a
hard hat could be comfortably worn. CP rail has granted a
two month reprieve before enforcing this ruling.

A few years ago several recruits in the Royal Cdn. Mounted Police
were Sikhs and refused to remove their turbans. After careful
consideration they were given a standard Sikh turban with the
RCMP insignia on the front. These rucruits graduated from
the RCMP college inRegina and are serving very well, mostly in B.C.

[Anonymous]

shave their heads.....wallah, no need for a turban. everybody wins!

[mudchicken]

Hard tukes? (The McKenzie Brothers ride again, eh?)

I agree with Junctionfan here on the waiver issue and agee as well that the beef should be directed at Transport Canada and their version of OSHA.

(After many years they came up with C'Boy hats that passed the ANSI test for hardhats. Time to do the same for Turbans. Can't wait to see how the local dimestore cowboys try to now reverse the ruling that bans cowboy boots on most US railroads)

[mvlandsw]

Never heard of a cowboy hat ban. I remember a conductor who always wore one.

[jchnhtfd]

It's a Federal and Provincial rule both; you want to go on the site, you wear a hard hat. If the employer or site owner allows someone on without the hat, they can get fined, big time, and if someone gets hurt guess who gets the problem? Not the guy without the hat.

If you don't like the rule, change the rule.

My own hard hat is one of those cowboy types MC was mentioning; it works (don't ask me how I know...)

[Junctionfan]

Folks should not be allowed to wear cowboy hats either. Hardhats are for a reason if not for safety reasons, legal protection reasons as it is currently the law. Unless waivers are distributed to those who aren't going to wear the hard-hats which incidently won't be worth a plug nickle if the government says that it isn't a legal alternative, the Sikhs are going to have to obey the law and put them on.

Freedom and diversity is all fine and dandy but really where does this end? What happens when some such as Sikhs decide to become firefighters? Do we allow them to where their turbins as alternative to protective helmets? We really need to establish some boundaries here; safety is more important.

[siberianmo]

Pretty interesting stuff - but I'm left with this thought: When did common sense make it's exit [?]

There have been doucmented accounts of people demanding that their driver's license photo's be taken with the face covered by a veil or other such encumbrance - all in the name of religion.

There have also been situations whereby some have been extremely upset by having to remove head gear, veils, etc. while checking through security at airports.

In my rather simplistic view of it all it goes like this: Don't want to comply with the law or regulation [?] Fine - you don't get the privilege of driving or boarding the plane, or ........

Change the law or regulation, but until then, use common sense.

See ya!

[eolafan]

Simple potential solution, have these people give up all rights to medical or injury insuracne of any kind if they suffer head injury on the job and with no right of appeal whatsoever and then let them wear their turbins (or is that turbines since we are on a railroad forum here?). How about that?

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

I folk should be allowed to wear cowboy hats either. Hardhats are for a reason if not for safety reasons, legal protection reasons as it is currently the law. Unless waivers are distributed to those who aren't going to wear the hard-hats which incidently won't be worth a plug nickle if the government says that it isn't a legal alternative, the Sikhs are going to have to obey the law and put them on.

Freedom and diversity is all fine and dandy but really where does this end? What happens when some such as Sikhs decide to become firefighters? Do we allow them to where their turbins as alternative to protective helmets? We really need to establish some boundaries here; safety is more important.

I may have to take an English course just to understand Canadian.[:I]. What does the first sentence mean?[?]

[Junctionfan]

Oops..first sentence should read "Folks should not be allowed to wear cowboy hats either"

Thanks for catching that for me.

[Junctionfan]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

Folks should not be allowed to wear cowboy hats either. Hardhats are for a reason if not for safety reasons, legal protection reasons as it is currently the law. Unless waivers are distributed to those who aren't going to wear the hard-hats which incidently won't be worth a plug nickle if the government says that it isn't a legal alternative, the Sikhs are going to have to obey the law and put them on.

Freedom and diversity is all fine and dandy but really where does this end? What happens when some such as Sikhs decide to become firefighters? Do we allow them to where their turbins as alternative to protective helmets? We really need to establish some boundaries here; safety is more important.

There I fixed it so it sound like good englishes.[:D][:D]

[vsmith]

I wonder what happens when we get the first Sikh astronaut?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

Folks should not be allowed to wear cowboy hats either. Hardhats are for a reason if not for safety reasons, legal protection reasons as it is currently the law. Unless waivers are distributed to those who aren't going to wear the hard-hats which incidently won't be worth a plug nickle if the government says that it isn't a legal alternative, the Sikhs are going to have to obey the law and put them on.

Freedom and diversity is all fine and dandy but really where does this end? What happens when some such as Sikhs decide to become firefighters? Do we allow them to where their turbins as alternative to protective helmets? We really need to establish some boundaries here; safety is more important.

There I fixed it so it sound like good englishes.[:D][:D]

You need to pull out dandy, that ain't quite better graghmer iether [;)]

Hey! I was raised in public schools. [:D]

[Junctionfan]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dthurman

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

Folks should not be allowed to wear cowboy hats either. Hardhats are for a reason if not for safety reasons, legal protection reasons as it is currently the law. Unless waivers are distributed to those who aren't going to wear the hard-hats which incidently won't be worth a plug nickle if the government says that it isn't a legal alternative, the Sikhs are going to have to obey the law and put them on.

Freedom and diversity is all fine and dandy but really where does this end? What happens when some such as Sikhs decide to become firefighters? Do we allow them to where their turbins as alternative to protective helmets? We really need to establish some boundaries here; safety is more important.

There I fixed it so it sound like good englishes.[:D][:D]

You need to pull out dandy, that ain't quite better graghmer iether [;)]

Hey! I was raised in public schools. [:D]

ROFL.[:D]

[Tharmeni]

As soon as we can strap one onto an Atlas.