A lawyer for five women who claim Jetstream Ground Services discriminated against Muslims said the owner of the company told them he wouldn’t consider hiring them if they wore head scarves.
David Norris, Jetstream’s owner, made that statement when he interviewed the women, Iris Halpern told jurors during closing arguments Tuesday at U.S. District Court in Denver.
“Norris told them they would not be considered by Jetstream if they were wearing head scarves. They looked too Muslim for him.”
But Jetstream’s lawyer Andrew Volin, said the company hires many Ethiopian and other immigrants, and that the women may have misunderstood what he was saying when they talked to him in 2008.
Norris did have concerns that they wanted to wear long skirts, because the material could create a safety concern when climbing jetway steps into an airliner, Volin said.
Also, there is no evidence that Norris had any involvement in hiring decisions, Volin said.
In deciding who to hire, the company relied on recommendations from Air Serv Corporation, which had held the contract for cleaning, and servicing planes, before Jetstream got it.
“What they want is people who will show up and do the job, and do the job safely,” he said.
Prior to Jetstream taking over ground services at Denver International Airport, the women worked for Air Serv corporation.
Jetstream replaced the company in 2008, and interviewed the women, and other employees of Air Serv.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued in 2013, seeking back pay and compensatory damages for plaintiffs Safia Abdulle Ali, Sahra Bashi Abdirahman, Hana Bakku, Sadiyo Hassan Jama and Saida Warsame.
The EEOC claims that JetStream violated the civil rights of Muslim women by refusing to hire them or firing them or reducing their hours if they were religiously observant.
The women told Norris they are required to wear the scarves by their religion, Halpern said.
Those who “gave pushback,” during the interviews, weren’t hired, Halpern said. “For David Norris what could be more pushback than asking to wear head scarves.”
Diane King, another of the women’s lawyers, said the jury should award them more than $700,000 in compensatory damages. Though they eventually got jobs, it took years, she said.
The company should pay punitive damages, as well, she said. She didn’t specify an amount. “It is up to you to get (Jetstream) to change their ways and send a message to Jestream and other companies that they must obey the law,” King said.
But Volin said the majority of Jetstream’s employees are immigrants, and that the company makes it possible for them to attain the American dream.
Those employees would be hurt if compensatory and punitive damages were leveled that would break the company.
“Do not ruin this opportunity for other immigrants. Don’t punish them with punitive damages. Jet stream is a good company,” he said.
The jury got the case at about 4:30 p.m., and will resume deliberations Wednesday.