Muslim girl, 16, complains after she was fired from lifeguard job for wearing bulky 'modesty' garment
A Muslim teenage lifeguard was allegedly fired on her first day on the job for wearing a modest swimsuit cover-up that posed a 'safety concern.'
The 16-year-old and her family claimed she was discriminated against and sent home from Philadelphia's Joan Kelly Pool for her religious attire on Thursday.
She was wearing a long-sleeve rash guard swim shirt and swim pants, Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) legal director Adam Alaa Attia, who is representing the teen, told The Philadelphia Inquirer.
But the garment that caught flak from other staffers was a flowy outer layer 'for the times they are sitting on watch and not engaged in the water,' Attia explained.
This loose-fitting cover was attached to the swimsuit by a piece of velcro for easy removal.
While her swimwear aligned with lifeguard safety requirements, this extra layer got her axed, according to a CAIR press release.
'This young woman was prepared, professional and fully qualified,' Attia wrote in a statement.
'She was forced to choose between her faith and her employment - a choice no worker should ever have to make - especially in Philadelphia, where the Muslim community is foundational to the city's identity.'
The 16-year-old and her family claimed she was discriminated against and sent home from Philadelphia's Joan Kelly Pool (pictured) for her religious attire on Thursday
Attia claimed the girl, who wears a women's size small, was offered a men's 3XL cotton t-shirt and XL men's swim trunks instead.
'This alternative not only disregarded her religious beliefs and bodily autonomy but also undermined any claim that the issue was about fabric or safety,' the press release states.
'Cotton is not approved swim material, and loose, oversized clothing is a well-known drowning hazard.'
Parks and Recreation Commissioner Susan Slawson disputed the assertions that the girl and her family made, claiming she was 'accommodated' rather than 'discriminated against.'
'She was never asked to remove her rash guard. Her faith was never put into question,' Slawson told The Philadelphia Inquirer.
'What she did have on was a safety concern.'
Pool staff had asked the modestly dressed lifeguard to take off the 'cape' attached to her rash guard because it could be a hazard, Slawson said.
'You can't get in the pool with that on because you have to worry about someone getting caught in that guard and possibly drowning because they're caught in this long cape,' the commissioner elaborated.
'We weren't asking her to take off her Muslim attire at all. What we're asking for is for her to not put the cape on.'
While staffers deemed the velcroed fabric dangerous, lifeguards are allowed to wear hoodies and sweatpants over their bathing suits around the pool.
Conflicting with the teen's retelling of events, Slawson said the girl was not initially fired.
Slawson alleged she was paid for a full day of work and was told to come back the following day.
But after she said she was bringing her family along to confront her bosses, the work offer was retracted.
'We're not going to invite trouble,' Slawson asserted.
Slawson also accused the teen's family of showing up anyway - allegedly yelling swear words and racially-motivated comments at a black staff member.
To resolve this wardrobe-related conflict, Slawson, the teen's family and CAIR members have a meeting scheduled for Monday.
The CAIR is demanding a full investigation into the matter and a formal apology from the pool's employees, as well as for the teen to be given her job back.
The group is also calling for the city to mandate religious accommodations training and anti-discrimination policies for staff and supervisors.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
43 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Trump administration accuses CNN of 'sabotaging' ICE with tracking app
Stephen Miller led several members of the Trump administration slamming CNN for helping illegal migrants 'sabotage' ICE by promoting an app that allows people to track the movement of agents. The left-leaning network aired a story on a new app called ICEBlock on Monday which aims to help people facing detention from the agency. 'CNN is openly helping invaders and insurrectionists sabotage ICE,' said Miller, Trump's deputy chief of staff and one of the architects of his immigration policy. The app was designed by Joshua Aaron, a tech developer who describes himself on BlueSky as 'Proud Antifa.' 'ICEBlock is an innovative, completely anonymous crowdsourced platform that allows users to report Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activity with just two taps on their phone,' the app's website says. The app describes itself as 'Waze but for ICE sightings' and cites what it calls 'alleged civil rights abuses and failures to adhere to constitutional principles and due process' as the reason for its existence. 'ICEBlock empowers communities to stay informed about ICE presence within a 5-mile radius while maintaining their anonymity through real-time updates and automatic deletion of sightings after four hours.' CNN running the story caused outrage from the Trump administration, as in addition to Miller, 'border czar' Tom Homan said federal law enforcement should look into the network for 'promoting' the app. 'ICEBlock is an innovative, completely anonymous crowdsourced platform that allows users to report Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activity with just two taps on their phone,' the app's website says 'I'm hoping DOJ steps in here and sees if they crossed that line, impeding federal law enforcement officers,' he said. Karoline Leavitt also attacked the network at the White House press briefing on Monday. 'Surely, it sounds like this would be an incitement of further violence against our ICE officers,' she said, though she admitted to not having seen the segment. 'We'll take a look at it, but certainly it's unacceptable that a major network would promote such an app that is encouraging violence against law enforcement officers who are trying to keep our country safe.' Acting ICE Director Todd M. Lyons called the network 'reckless and irresponsible' for platforming ICEBlock. 'Advertising an app that basically paints a target on federal law enforcement officers' backs is sickening.' Lyons adds that ICE agents already have faced a 500% increase in assaults. 'CNN is willfully endangering the lives of officers who put their lives on the line every day and enabling dangerous criminal aliens to evade U.S. law. Is this simply reckless 'journalism' or overt activism?' Aaron told the network that ICE's efforts remind him of Nazi Germany. 'When I saw what was happening in this country, I wanted to do something to fight back. We're literally watching history repeat itself.' Aaron does not want to see further violence and the app comes with a warning. 'Please note that the use of this app is for information and notification purposes only. It is not to be used for the purposes of inciting violence or interfering with law enforcement.' 'We don't want anybody's device ID, IP address, location,' Aaron said. 'We don't want anything being discoverable. And so, this is 100% anonymous and free for anybody who wants to use it.' A spokesperson for the network defended their reporting on the app. 'CNN reported on a publicly available app, which is generating attention across the United States, and reached out to ICE for comment prior to publication. After CNN published its reporting, ICE posted a response, which is now included in the story.' ICE looks set to see backup from the federal government upon passage of Trump's 'One Big, Beautiful Bill.' The bill would allow the federal government to hire 10,000 new ICE officers as part of a doubling down on Trump's commitment to securing the border.
The Independent
44 minutes ago
- The Independent
Ex-aide to New York governor pleads not guilty to new pandemic fraud charge
A former aide to two New York governors already facing charges of acting as an illicit agent of China pleaded not guilty on Monday to additional charges that she improperly profited from the state's purchase of face masks and other key medical supplies during the COVID-19 pandemic. Linda Sun, 41, and her husband, Chris Hu, 40, — who is also charged — entered not guilty pleas to charges of wire fraud, bribery and conspiracy to defraud the United States. Hu also faces tax evasion charges. The two remain free on bond and are due back in court Aug. 25 ahead of an expected November trial. Sun's lawyer Jarrod Schaeffer declined to comment following Monday's proceedings but has previously dismissed the new charges as 'feverish accusations unmoored from the facts.' Hu's lawyers didn't immediately respond Monday but have also similarly denied the charges. Prosecutors say the couple collected millions of dollars in kickbacks by exploiting Sun's role in helping New York procure personal protective equipment, or PPE, during the pandemic in 2020. They say Sun, a naturalized U.S. citizen, used connections in her native China to secure PPE for the state, though she didn't disclose her family's ties to two vendors that received more than $44 million, prosecutors say. Sun previously pleaded not guilty to charges she used her position in state government to advance Chinese government priorities in exchange for financial rewards, including assistance with Hu's business ventures in China. The lucrative benefits helped the Long Island couple live a lavish lifestyle with multimillion-dollar properties and luxury cars, prosecutors have said. Sun worked for former Gov. Andrew Cuomo and his successor, Gov. Kathy Hochul, until she was fired in 2023.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Supreme court to hear case that could further erode campaign spending limits
The US supreme court agreed on Monday to hear a case that could further erode restrictions on money in politics, in a challenge that comes in part from Vice-President JD Vance. The National Republican Senatorial Committee, National Republican Congressional Committee, Vance and Steve Chabot, a former Republican congressman from Ohio, are challenging limits set on how much political parties can spend in coordination with candidates. The case was filed when Vance was a senatorial candidate, in 2022. The court's landmark Citizens United ruling in 2010 threw away limits on outside spending on elections, allowing corporations and unions to inject unlimited money into elections as a matter of free speech. The current challenge from Republicans makes a similar argument, claiming that limits on how much spending can be coordinated with a campaign impede their first amendment rights. It also comes at a time where unfettered outside spending has become a norm in US politics. The case is challenging limits to what is called 'coordinated' spending between a party and the campaign, while independent expenditures, those often made by political action committees, have been unlimited since Citizens United. The limits themselves vary depending on population and which office a candidate is seeking. On the low end, a candidate for the US House of Representatives in a state with multiple representatives would be limited to $63,600, while a Senatecandidate in a state with a large voting age population would be nearly $4m. The US court of appeals for the sixth circuit upheld the limits based on a prior supreme court ruling in 2001 on coordinated spending, but the plaintiffs have argued this 2001 decision is outdated given other more recent campaign finance decisions. The Trump administration filed a brief in the case that aligned with Republicans, and the justice department called on the supreme court to consider the case. Democratic groups have asked to intervene to defend the existing limits. The case will be heard in the court's next term, which starts in October. ScotusBlog, the much-watched website written by lawyers and legal scholars, says the case 'may be the first potential blockbuster of October term 2025'.
