REMEMBER Fata Lemes? She’s the waitress who claimed last year that her Muslim sense of modesty had been dissed when was told to wear a revealing summer uniform by her employees at the Rocket Bar in London.
The 'offensive' dress modelled by Amanda Bjursten, and 'modest Muslim' Ms Lemes in holiday gear
We reported at the time that Ms Lemes, who was demanding £20,000 compensation, said:
It was indecent. If you put this dress on, you might as well be naked … I did not want men looking at my body. I was brought up a Muslim, and am not used to wearing sexually attractive clothes.
Well, Lemes has won her case, but according to the Times this week, lawyers acting for the Rocket Bar have tried to re-open the case by demonstrating that Lemes – a Bosnian Muslim – is not quite the paragon of virtue she makes out to be.
They did do after a picture emerged of Miss Lemes on Facebook showed her wearing a plunging T-shirt exposing her cleavage while she was at the beach.
Lemes did not get her £20,000 – £17,500 of which she claimed for “hurt feelings”.
The employment tribunal which heard the case said that her claim was “manifestly absurd”, and instead awarded her £2,919.95 for both hurt feelings and loss of earnings.
The tribunal said that Miss Lemes held “views about modesty and decency which some might think unusual in Britain in the 21st century,” and her employer should have taken her feelings into account when asking her to wear the dress.
The ruling said:
Her perception was that wearing the dress would make her feel as if she was on show, as if she was being presented as one of the attractions which the Rocket Bar was offering its customers. In our view that perception was legitimate and not unreasonable. It [the dress] is clearly a garment for a girl or young woman. It is intended to, and does, show the curves of the body.
At the tribunal, the restaurant group submitted photos of another waitress, Amanda Bjursten, wearing the dress in the bar. Ms Bjursten, who appeared at the hearing modelling the outfit said she was “completely comfortable” wearing it.
Luca Scanu, the bar manager, denied the dress was intended to increase sales and tips from male customers by being “sexually inviting”.
I don't see what all the fuss is about, it just looks like an ordinary dress to me. I know it might be considered revealing by Muslim standards but then just about everything is.
Why is it so many of these religious people always feel the need to lie about everything? I don't remember being a compulsive liar when I believed in God.
She should be sued for false pretences or whatever. This is an affort to extort money by dishonest means. Just because Holy Tony and our MPs are at this does not mean we should let her get away with it.
I think she needs more than a short skirt to pull the men.
I wish I could sue every time someone hurt my feelings, I'd be bloody rich. But as I don't have any religious sensibilities for other people to "offend" that particular avenue of extortion is out-of-bounds to me.
The mendacious religious types have learned how to use the “bleeding heart” PC obsessed lawyers to exploit the system, and make a lot of money. I feel sorry for the employers; glad I'm no longer an employer. The lawyers and "charities" that assist stupid people in their vexatious claims are parasites.
If the photograph was taken before the trial then it seems likely she has committed perjury. It would be good to get a few of these serially-offended religious types done for that.
No objection to alcohol, I notice.
_____
I am offended that you would publicly accuse us innocent Muslims of "extortion"! This is strictly forbidden by the Holy Profit (Bless His Cotton Socks) in "Noddy Goes to the Tribunal" (Ch. 5: Para. 3: Lines 24/25). I am suing you for £20 Million for my hurt feelings, and if I don`t get the money we can see to it that your life becomes very unpleasant indeed, Sunshine!!
Atishoo! Atishoo! We all fall down!
Mustafa Nerve.
My very dear Muslim brother, Mustafa Nuffer, is deeply offended by this totally unwarranted, totally uncalled for, and totally undeserved shluuur on the inregtitry of teh Msulimm bruhtrehood (hic!). We give notcie that we inetnd to use you for £20 mlilloin…blah!blah!blah! (I think you get the picture.)
Yes but on the other hand –
'Luca Scanu, the bar manager, denied the dress was intended to increase sales and tips from male customers by being “sexually inviting”.'
Come on…that dress is not intended to be sexually inviting?
If this woman had gone for a job at a slaughter house, she'd no doubt have asked whether it was "halal". Since she seems to have thought that she was applying for a job at a knocking shop, why didn't she ask whether she would be expected to shag the customers? Hadn't she got eyes to see what the the resident waitresses were up to? Or not, of course, not having an offer of thousands more for being offended than they could have got for their sexual favours.
You're probably right, but what did she expect? Having got the job, she might have been expected to attract male customers but what did she think she was applying for, a job in a funeral parlour? Who's supposed to be wearing shrouds, the staff or the customers?
you could always sue for having your non-religious feeling hurt, c'mon guy, 'get with it'!!
has anyone seen this?: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?stor…
Sorry, my last couple of posts weren't very precise – a bit late at night, and all that. I was just saying, don't apply to McDonald's if you aren't prepared to flip burgers. <add simile of choice>
Brian.