The crucifix debate: British Airways employee gets her day in court

By Ian Dunt

The British Airways employee who lost her job because she insisted on wearing a crucifix around her neck will find out if the European court of human rights (ECHR) will back her legal battle today.

Nadia Eweida will hear the court's ruling with three other Brits who are claiming they were deprived of their religious freedom, including Shirley Chaplin, who lost her role as a nurse at Royal Devon and Exeter Trust after refusing to remove a crucifix necklace she was wearing.

The cases, which have all failed at every stage of their fights through the British courts, could be vital legal examples of religious individuals securing protections for their faith at work.

All four claimants are relying on articles nine, which guarantees freedom of religion, and 14, which prohibits discrimination, of the European Convention of Human Rights.

Eiweida worked as a check-in staff at British Airways from 1999, during which she wore a small silver cross on a necklace concealed under her uniform. But in May 2006 she decided to put it on the outside as a sign of her commitment to her faith.

In September 2006 she was sent home for failing to comply with uniform regulations which banned jewellery. She returned to work after the company agreed in February 2007 to change their rules to allow religious or charity symbols.

Chaplin's case is slightly different in that she was barred from wearing a necklace due to health and safety regulations at the hospital in which she worked. In November 2009 she was moved to a non-nursing position which ceased to exist in July 2010.

Eweida's case has so far been rejected by an employment tribunal, which found the wearing of a crucifix is not a requirement of the Christian faith, and then by the court of appeal and the supreme court.

The cases have prompted a confused reaction from Downing Street. David Cameron pledged to change the law to ensure religious expression is protected in the workplace but government lawyers have been arguing against the appeals in Strasbourg.

The court will also rule on the case of Lilian Ladele, an Islington registrar who refused to officiate at gay civil ceremonies, and Gary McFarlane, a therapist for Relate who would not provide counselling to same-sex couples.