Hiring muslim women (and men for that matter) should come with a giant WARNING notice to all potential UK employers. In fact - in light of this most recent case of a muslim woman's shakedown of an employer for CASH makes one wonder why anyone would bother hiring a muslim at all - especially when it may leave the employer and his/her business financially destroyed.
33 yr old Fata Lemes willingly took a job as a COCKTAIL WAITRESS - note we did not say a job at a day care center for babies, or bookkeeper in a office or as a hairdresser (oops! last one is a BAD example!! That has proved to be a lucrative lawsuit for another muslim woman) Nope - Ms Lemes chose to work in a bar - a bar that clearly serves alcoholic beverages and where she would serve alcohol - which surprisingly didn't enter into her lawsuit - maybe because it didn't prove profitable for this fellow muslim.
No it wasn't the alcohol that offended Fata - it was the dress - a dress that was considered the summer uniform for the cocktail waitresses. (See picture below)Yep - Ms Lemes found a nice little earner for her "hurt feelings"..............in a dress.
So as she tossed the"alcohol is haraam" offense under the bus Ms Lemes pulled out her muslim modesty and declared the " short, low-cut dress was "disgusting" and made her look "like a prostitute". " One wonders how she didn't notice the sleeveless RED DRESS being worn by other cocktail waitress when she applied to work at the bar?
That aside Fata told the employment tribunal hearing her reasons why she should receive compensation for being asked to wear what all the other cocktail waitresses wear:
"Miss Lemes told the tribunal that she "might as well be naked" in the dress, adding: "I was brought up a Muslim and am not used to wearing sexually attractive clothes."
Guess her muslim parents must have skipped over the no alcohol and working in a bar Quran lessons.
But here is the greater travesty - Despite the panel at Central London Employment Tribunal making these determinations :
1) It accepted that Miss Lemes genuinely believed that the short, low-cut dress was "disgusting" and made her look "like a prostitute". -------Even though a photo of Miss Lemes on Facebook, however, showed her wearing a low cut T-shirt revealing her cleavage.----(Guess patrons in a bar seeing her in a red dress is worse than millions of internet users seeing Fata with her breasts bulging out of her low cut T-shirt. But then again - Facebook isn't worth some easy money.)
Revealing: Fata Lemes on Facebook
2) It found Miss Lemes "overstated" her trauma (No?!? Really??) at being asked to wear the sleeveless dress that was open at the back.
3) It rejected Miss Lemes' claim that she was left with no choice but to walk out of her job after just eight days. (Bet the employers were real unhappy to have her go??)
4) It branded her compensation claim of £20,000 including £17,500 for hurt feelings - as "manifestly absurd". (and a bold sign of her greediness - wouldn't you say?)
And -- here comes the BIG BUT-----Despite ALL of the above -- in its final ruling the Tribunal panel says:
""In our judgment, the effect of requiring her to wear the dress was to violate her dignity. We further consider that it created for her an environment which was degrading, humiliating and offensive." It pointed out that a summer uniform of "brightly coloured, figure-hugging garb" had not been introduced for male waiting staff."
Thus it awarded her £2,919.95 for hurt feelings and loss of earnings"
In other words -the panel contradicted its prior rulings in order to justify handing a financial payout to a muslim woman -- even after deciding the other "offenses" against her amounted to naught.
Just when I thought there was a glimmer of hope --- muslim pandering and dhimmitude again rears their ugly heads.
One needs no better example - than Ms Lemes - as to why so many muslims have turned British employers - via the soft headed, muslim pandering British judicial system -into "hurt feelings" cash cows.
For article go to: