muslim girlArticle Summary:

Good Morning America recently published an online article about18-year-old Hani Khan; she worked at the San Mateo, CA Hollister store in 2010. After roughly 4 months of employment, store managers began expressing concern to Khan that the head scarf which she regularly wore while on the job did not fit in with the store’s “look policy.” The look policy covers everything from an employee’s attire to the way in which he/she should style his/her hair while on the job. After Khan refused to remove the Hijab she was terminated.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit against Abercrombie & Fitch (Hollister’s parent company) on the Muslim teenager’s behalf in 2011. A federal judge issued the ruling in the case last week: Abercrombie & Fitch did in fact discriminate against Khan. The teen is now speaking out, saying that she feels the retailer’s policy is “very unfair.” She expressed hope in the article that Abercrombie and Fitch will implement some changes in their policies. This article demonstrates the principle of there being no such thing as influence. Although Abercrombie’s look policy clearly spelled out a specific way to dress, Khan was not influenced by it and still wore what she wanted to wear. Hani Khan will always do what she wants to do based on who she is.


Article Reference: Muslim Fired by Abercrombie for Head Scarf Says Policy ‘Very Unfair’ – Reena Ninan – Good Morning America – September 10, 2013. Retrieved from–abc-news-topstories.html?vp=1

Comments (6)

  1. Rikin Patel


    Although I do see how Abercrombie has committed an act of discrimination, I still cannot advocate the importance of fighting for Hani Khan’s case. Khan should have left her job knowing that Abercrombie’s strange mentality towards what is cool and appropriate to wear will not change, and that it was not worth working for a company that cares so heavily about superficial aspects of life. There are many other fashionable clothing stores that I am sure would have not cared about her religious garb; and thus there is no need to fight Abercrombie through legislation. Boycotting Abercrombie and causing it to fail within our economy seems more effective than trying to change its corruptness through trying to fine it through legislation.

  2. Reply

    Hani khan is a type (C) person because she is going through a “win-lose” equation by either forcing the CEO to make her stay in her job even if her look is opposite than the targeted (skinny and cool) people wearing the store clothes which make this store different than other stores or sue him.
    Most of the countries are trying to “control” people and believe in “No Freedom” These are considered two of the RS characteristics.
    “SOME” people cannot adapt with countries that believes in freedom such as (America or Australia) and here is my evidence:
    Viral message purports to quote Australia Prime Minister Julia Gillard telling Muslim immigrants they must learn to speak the English language and adapt to Australian culture or leave the country.

  3. John Theis


    The company has a code of conduct that involves what to wear. I don’t see how this is any different from lifeguards having to wear a swimsuit or McDonald’s employees wearing their fancy polos. If I worked their I wouldn’t be able to wear a flat brim hat. What I see as a problem is how America is adjusting to being a “melting pot”? If we are going to be accepting different types of people into the country, we need to adhere and accept their cultures, as well. Companies will have to adjust their code of conduct to let people be who they are. This will involve the topic of dealing with religion in the workplace, and cause more conflicts. I know that some cultures’ clothes represent religious ideas, are we headed to having to blend work with religion..

  4. Eric Bryan


    The events described in this article do not surprise me as I have already become familiar with the way that companies such as Abercrombie conduct business. As mentioned before, the CEO has already made numerous references to the “type” of people he thinks should be buying his clothes. This shows the tendencies of a type c mind that is too narrow minded to successfully run a business without repercussions. By understanding that he has narrow views such as this, it comes as no surprise that his company would breed workers with the same narrow “type c” mindset.

  5. Marlynn Radford-Brown


    This event should not be surprising considering that the CEO of Abercrombie publicly stated that he didn’t make clothes for “those people” in an interview with the New Yorker magazine in 2011. Since this public outrage, the CEO is still in office and has maintained his job to date. The fact that the CEO was not fired in a confirmation that the board and entire executive leadership of the company agree with his racist ideals. If Hani Khan had all the information about her employer and its history of public discrimination prior to applying, she may not have applied for the job, hence avoiding the entire confrontation.

    • Juan Mora


      I provided another article, and like stated before this really is no surprise. As Jeffries, the CEO of Abercrombie, has stated before he only wants “skinny and cool” people to be wearing his clothes. However, media portrays beauty in being a certain manner. It almost discourages diversity. Jeffries wants to continue having this image that is being portrayed for his company.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Protected by WP Anti Spam