Crucifix ban "purely health and safety issue", insists BA
26 Nov 2006 by hra
BA, perhaps no longer quite the World's Favourite Airline as far as many in the Christian community are concerned, has today issued a statement defending its position in banning check-in worker Nadia Eweida from wearing a cross at work. Reacting to robust criticism from archbishop Dr. Rowan Williams, chief executive Willie Walsh told DeadBrain's Ethical Investment Advisory Group that BA's decision had been taken "purely on grounds of health and safety" and that BA absolutely refuted any possible suggestion that the airline was in any way "anti-Christian".
Mr Walsh illustrated the seriousness of BA's health and safety concerns. "Just to take one simple example, what if an irate passenger in a check-in queue lost his temper and grabbed hold of a cross worn by a member of staff? And then – admittedly in a worst-case scenario – what if the passenger then suffered a severe allergic reaction to the type of metal it was made from? We could be sued for millions!"
In fact, Mr Walsh revealed, the cross in question has never even been risk-assessed at all. "There could be all kinds of other potential hazards associated with this device", he explained. "An irate passenger could even pick up traces of peanut allergens deposited there by a previous irate passenger. The legal consequences are unimaginable! Corporate policy clearly states a 20-page risk assessment be submitted to the Board of Directors no less than 90 days in advance of any intention to wear or prominently display any emblem or material pertaining to the Christian faith for this very reason".
Ultimately, Mr Walsh's concern is to reassure the public over BA's duty of care. "Ms Eweida's cross blatantly symbolises an individual who, though in a position of responsibility over vulnerable adults and children for over 2,000 years, has never once been CRB checked. What kind of message would that send out to our customers? Rules are rules – no exceptions, even on grounds of divinity. After all, you can't be too careful these days, can you?"
Mr Walsh added a chilling postscript, "In fact our records show Ms Eweida hasn't even had her crucifix analysed by the HPA for radioactive contamination. She could have been wearing it in sushi bars around London for months on end for all we know. In retrospect, perhaps our decision to ban the cross was rather far-sighted. Far be it from us to poison our customers with polonium before they've even had a chance to eat the airline food!"
In a separate statement in Rome, Dr. Williams reacted to BA's sudden attack of conscience over health and safety by saying, "I would question if that is a sensible kind of response."
