โ† Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

BU has no issue with government departments demanding the public it serves uphold certain standards when visiting to do business. Barbadians are reminded frequently via radio ads and other media placements about the dress code enforced at the National Insurance Board.

BU was made aware recently of an incident where a young lady went to the Registry to get a death certificate because of her father’s recent passing but was harassed and victimized by a male security guard and refused entry to the department.ย  The guard we understand was rude, chauvinistic and incompetent.ย  His actions were those of – and we quote – an untrained, unprofessional, perverted neanderthal who should be made to issue an apology and given a refresher course in the rules and regulations governing his work.

The reason he forbid the lady from completing her transaction at the registry: her dress was too revealing.ย  Specifically he told her that the split in the dress revealed too much of her legs.ย  Have we reached a stage in Barbados which would allow a security guard to assault the rights of a fellow citizen in such a manner?

The irony of the situation for BU is while the Registry has enhanced it reputation for misplacing files by accident or design, while a senior lawyer has been known to moon a Madame Justice within its precinct and avoid disciplinary action, while hours are wasted daily by citizens and court officers alike because ofย  innumerable inefficiencies โ€“ we have government security guards diligently enforcing an irrelevant dress code to satisfy some accountability handed down. This is the very Registry which received a bomb threat when Plantation Deeds visited a couple years ago to request certain information.

Here is an image of the young lady who was tuned back by the ignorant and rude male security guard.

Dress_Code
Why was this lady denied access to the Court Registry to procure a death certificate because of her dress?

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

159 responses to “Judicial Centre Efficiently Enforcing Dress Code BUT What About Delivering Justice”


  1. I am an employee at the building in question, and I witnessed this unfortunate incident. I was dumbfounded. What was not mentioned is that the young lady had to stand on the outside of the building with an employee who happens to be senior in the registry, to complete the required form to collect the will. Another employee came out to her, went back in to the guard and asked why she was not allowed into the building and was told, because of her dress. When asked what was the matter with the dress he was told by said guard, he has made his decision. The same guard either went to lunch while the lady was on the outside. At that time a female guard came on. They then approached her for entry and was granted entry into the building. At no time did I see the lady retaliate in any unprofessional manner when told that she could not be in the building because the split was revealing too much of her legs, actually she seemed to be shocked and embarassed, as it appears that she thought the dress had ripped.
    This is stupidity at the highess height. How is it that two guards trained in the same line of work aware of the rules of the building can have to completely different takes?
    This lady came to collect a will and death certificate which indicated she was obviously greiving.. What did she do to deserve this treatment.. I see this stupidity ever day!
    I was told that matter is being investigated as powers of security reviewed the footage of that day and are baffled as to why the lady was denied entry by the male guard.

  2. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    Lee

    Have you ever seen a polo shirt? They are designed to be worn out of the trousers.

    Sent from my iPad

    >

  3. Dee Ingrunt Word Avatar
    Dee Ingrunt Word

    David, I hope you get others from the dept. like the Zulu warrior posting.

    It would be really useful to know what our resident hamster can add to the debate based on previous assertions of following the rules.

    How many bloggers on this site have spoken about different sets of rules for the Medes and Persians.

    But that may be seen as intellectually snobbish talk too, so simply stated: there seems to be two sets of rules, one for self important jackasses and the other for self important, logically challenged DLP jackasses!


  4. Zulu April 24, 2015 at 3:25 PM #

    This is stupidity at the highest height. How is it that two guards trained in the same line of work aware of the rules of the building can have two completely different takes?
    ……………………………………………………………………………………………………..
    When dress codes are not as specific as those that we will find in a discipline organisation, such as the Police Force ,the Army or the Boy’s Scouts, individuals ,like the security guards ,tasked to oversee such general dress codes are asked to use their discretion,which is akin to an opinion. And we have seen completely different takes, over the year with learned secondary school Principals.


  5. Once I had applied to an institution for a mortgage. One of the stipulations was that I have to pay their lawyer to scrutinise the contract, and a copy would also be sent to my lawyer for him to scrutinise it as well. Of course I would have to pay my lawyer a similar fee to do so.
    Would you believe that the lawyer representing the mortgage company,was also my personal lawyer? Talk about shooting one bird with two stones.
    There was always a lot of collusion between professionals to bleed their clients.


  6. One of these days some enterprising person will be operating outside of the Judicial Centre and such places doing a brisk trade selling scarves, shoulder wraps and throw over skirts and such like to to persons wishing to do business in the JC, but who do not meet the dress code.


  7. Caswell Franklyn April 24, 2015 at 3:42 PM #

    Lee

    Have you ever seen a polo shirt? They are designed to be worn out of the trousers.

    Sent from my iPad’.
    ………………………………………………………………………………………………..
    Superman and Batman , then would have a hard time getting into the Judicial Centre, as they both wear their underwear on the outside of their pants.


  8. HARRISON COLLEGE is the winner of the 2015 Speak Off Competition

    http://www.nationnews.com/nationnews/news/66598/harrison-college-wins-baop-speak#sthash.KseOy25l.dpuf


  9. @Word

    JAs must of necessity bray.

    Does anyone recall the tattered robes former prosecutor Garvey Husbands would wear into the High Court a few years ago?


  10. bush shite next time u go to the registry try wearing on of them grass skirts u got hanging outside the back door,, dat might work instead of all the shite talk u used to talking here on bu cause fuh sure the kind of ruckus that would break out would have everybody heading for the door including security,
    Btw u cud always tell when the blp batallion ran out of steam they drain the bottom of the barrell,


  11. Here is what managing director of the Nation posted on the subject of dress code practiced by government offices a while ago.

    http://www.nationnews.com/print_article/nationnews/news/61448/public-baobab-rules-absolute-folly?print=true

  12. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ Caswell Franklyn April 24, 2015 at 3:42 PM
    โ€œHave you ever seen a polo shirt? They are designed to be worn out of the trousers.โ€

    On what legal grounds were you refused entry?
    One wonders what is the same government departmentโ€™s policy regarding the bokra and hijab. It would be interesting if a black Bajan female were to visit that same organisation bedecked in a hijab, wearing a miniskirt with tattoos and claiming to be a Muslim.

    Caswell, canโ€™t a person so denied entry to conduct lawful business bring a charge of breach of his or her Constitutional rights under Section 23?


  13. That is why society is going down hill into moral decay,Nobody likes standards ! to some in society Standards only apply to politicians but when put to the test an applied to all of society all hell breaks loose,, not me they say ,trying that one on for size on another fool shouts! those are holier than thou living in society,
    Where is the wrong in asking people to present a decent self image when entering govt buildings.
    I will tell you where the wrong( is) the wrong is one coming from a bunch of selffish ole people who are always quick to condemn and brand the younger generation for their way of dressing, YES!! in essence expecting the youth to live by a code they set and sees as “proper” but when a similar code is presented one which is in unison and a representation of a countries practices ad good standards the ole people cries are Lawd have merci,, that is too hard to tek, time for the ole folks to go out the next exit ,a bunch o0f hypocrites,

  14. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ ac April 24, 2015 at 6:16 PM
    “That is why society is going down hill into moral decay,Nobody likes standards ! to some in society Standards only apply to politicians but when put to the test an applied to all of society all hell breaks loose”

    What are you on about, really? How can wearing a polo shirt not tucked into your trousers or wearing an outfit with a split as depicted in the captioned photo be a violation of “standards” of dress?

    That’s what you get when you practice double standards.

    Remember the Carrington Affair? Remember the Leroy Parris affair?
    Remember the Estwick gunslinger affair?
    Remember the treatment meted out to the Drainage and the NCC workers?
    Remember when you insist on blaming the previous administration for all the ills plaguing the Barbados economy causing the national debt to rise from $ 5.7 billion to over $11 billion?

    What you sow so shall you reap. You plant lies so you will reap only hypocrisy.
    Continue to boil in your no layoffs, no privatization pot of lies.


  15. @ Dee Ingrunt Word,

    Perhaps you can now understand why I stated in a previous posting that I have completely lost my faith in those governing Barbados and her people.

    Quite frankly, what I have read in this blog is consistent with my understanding of how Barbados functions. We excel in the art of mediocrity. Here we have a, jumped-up, security guard who made a self-judgement that the lady in question was not dressed in an appropriate manner to conduct her business inside the building.

    The security guard sounds like a man devoid of any compassion and empathy; and should be appointed to a role where he does not have to interact with members of the public.

    This story is not an anomaly. It is common place and highlights that a large number of Barbadians have become thoroughly institutionalised. They have become a people incapable of rational thought; a people void of imagination; a people who run from challenges; and a people, who though nearly 50 years of age still have the mind-set of a toddler.

    To conclude, I would state that you cannot build a great nation with an institutionalised people.

  16. Dee Ingrunt Word Avatar
    Dee Ingrunt Word

    Well stated Exclaimer, very well stated. Painfully pointedly well stated. Oh dear!

    I still stand by my other remarks to you however that it’s still necessary to fight the good fight and continue to storm officialdom’s folly. That’s all we can do as we strive for incremental improvements and change.

    David, good get on that Roy Morris column.

    Miller, our resident hamster AC will run that wheel regardless of the endless nothingness of their posts. From inception the question you posed as to how: “…wearing an outfit with a split as depicted in the captioned photo be a violation of โ€œstandardsโ€ of dress?” was asked of AC.

    He/she has simply continued to run the wheel. They lie and obfuscate so much that their response was to call the poster a liar: ” what proof do u have that the dress in the pictures is actually what the woman wore that day”.

    Even in the face of others citing similar gross civil rights violations over whimsical actions by security personnel they continue to make nonsensical remarks.

    And Colonel, I was wondering the very same thing. What are the legal and constitutional grounds to refuse entry to a public gov’t building? Caswell’s situation is as inane as this one.

    We may not like how a person dresses but if there is no indecent exposure or other law being broken how actually are these supra imposed rules valid?

    Do we go along to get along because we realize a legal fight is futile.

  17. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    Dee Ingrunt Word

    The Judicial Centre has two entrances for public access: one that leads to the Registration Department; and the other that leads to the courts. Both doors are controlled by security guards, but rather than deal with security, the guards are forced to become fashion police which takes away from their effectiveness as security personnel.

    But as I said earlier, the guards are given instructions on the type of wearing apparel that is allowed through either of those doors. I must admit that sometimes a guard could go overboard but generally they act under strict orders from idiots who rather that do their substantive duty find things to nitpick at.

    Do you know that there is a rule against wearing jeans through the other door leading to the courts. All courts restrict persons from entering while wearing jeans, that is unless you are an accused person. If they are going to lock you up, they don’t care what you are wearing. To this day, I can’t understand the reasoning behind preventing persons from entering the courts if you are wearing a jeans pants.

    Sent from my iPad

    >


  18. Caswell when you beome leader( if and when possible )you would be free to institute all and any laws you want . also free to break as many like you have done in the past, until then do not worry about what kind of jeans that should be worn, but just in case u need to worry ,i belive there is no law that states you cannot wear your “birthday suit ,here is an interesting test case that you can pursue one that u can challenge and take to high Court, You can used Bush shite as your legal adviser ,


  19. @ dee igrunt

    โ€ what proof do u have that the dress in the pictures is actually what the woman wore that dayโ€.

    well for sure the woman face is isolated . i dare say that if i had lodged a complaint i would first use my face as a signature attached as proof that i was not lying,, the dress in question says nothing any one can post a picture of a dress stating it as the one,i believe i am at as much liberty to muddy the water as u or any body else is free to wade through it ,

  20. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ Caswell Franklyn April 24, 2015 at 9:01 PM

    What about males wearing earrings?
    What’s โ€˜wrongโ€™ with that? On what grounds can a man be refused entry to the courts for wearing an earring?

    If a woman can wear a pair of trousers why canโ€™t a man wear an ear bob or two?

    Section 23 of the highest law of the land (the Constitution) needs to be thrown in the faces of these public officials who constantly violate the rights of ordinary citizens.

  21. Dee Ingrunt Word Avatar
    Dee Ingrunt Word

    A new definition of irony, maybe: When the tenure of the first black President and black Attorney General of the USA is marked by the most focused and vicious attempts to suppress black’s ability to vote since the passing of black voting rights legislation!

    or

    The spate of racially tinged cases of police brutality appear to have increased exponentially during the presidency of the first black man and black attorney general.

    Next Monday the first female black attorney general ascends to her post as Mr. Eric Holder leaves that office this Friday. One of her first ‘new cases’ at Justice will involve the murder of a teenager whose spinal cord was broken while in police custody.

    ‘SPINAL CORD AND VERTEBRA BROKEN’ . 25years old. Neck basically snapped.

    A moment of high acclaim and pride for Mrs. Lynch and her black family and the nation; we have arrived she can say.

    But another moment of pain for Freddie Gray’s black family; as they prepare to bury him they ask, will we ever get there to be truly accepted in this nation, .

    Irony all around.


  22. jeans being placed on the list of informal attire is a deliberate attempt to prevent those who would dare attempt to enter the govt buildings in the type of jeans that sag and show their buttocks and under garment, a well know social and accepted fad in society. human nature always wanting to control would be persuasive to the point of being antagonist to prove that jeans were not one of the items not listed and would be belligerent and confrontational in their effort to override the process, hence in an effort to avoid such annoyances jeans was among one of the attire placed on the list


  23. however i am mystified as to why the hullabaloo about presenting one self image positively,,but then again not so surprised as people likes to take control and sees rules and laws as byproducts of dictatorships, yet one cannot deny that a part of social moral decay is giving “up”moral standards that were built into a system to guide and define what is proper and right ,, hence in today society we have men walking around like zombies with their butts hanging out and woman with their sagging breast exhibiting for all too see,


  24. Caswell reports that a security guard was transferred all because he didn’t salute a government minister. Either O’Brien is back in office, or the wheel has come full circle. Give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.Accolades to honorable men and incarceration to criminals. Interchangeable, ya think? What say you MR Speaker?


  25. Sometimes it is not even about the the dress code but treating people with respect like some have suggested.


  26. Here is an example how the socalled dress code is enforced willy billy:

    https://bajanflick.wordpress.com/2013/06/29/dress-code-at-the-registration-department-or-not/


  27. I was wondering when you were going to remember the Bajan Flicks entry David [BU]

    Hopefully this won’t get anyone in trouble.

    The day I was requested to put my shirt jak in my pants I called *** who is the *** at the Barbados Government Security Services to enquire about the vacillating practice that favored party x against party y wearing similar garb.

    He said two things that were important

    One. Not all of the staff that become guards have the intellect to be good guards and, much like our police, and other professions, have bad apples, they get some (AC) idiots too

    Two. A mother brings her two infant boy children with her to the registry. They are aged 3 and 5 respectively. They are wearing little boy short pants which, in the strict interpretation of the rule, are restricted. Invariably the are permitted to enter. When he tries to apply that no dungarees rule to older, but poorer young men, he realizes that they just don’t have the money to afford a Dockers or cotton pants, for court, all they have in their wardrobe is dungarees.

    He personally might be flexible and allow someone who is tidily attired in jeans into the buildings but, the judge may insist otherwise.

    This is all a matter of form without substance really like attorneys and judges wearing the white wigs of years ago on the benches, we need to get with the times.

    As an aside what if it had been AC wearing Pum Pum shorts? Whuloss if that had been posted here I would certainly have objected that is directly after i vomited


  28. @Caswell Franklyn April 23, 2015 at 8:59 PM “A few weeks ago, I went there to get a birth certificate for my son who lives in New York and who asked me to send one for him. The clerk told me that I would have to get a letter from my son, authorising me to apply for one on his behalf. Needless to say, I saw red but I was proud of myself, I remained calm and asked to see a supervisor.”

    Actually Caswell in this case I agree with the Registry, although they should publish the rules about what documents are required in order to collect a birth certificate, or other official document for others. You no doubt had a good relationship with your son and no doubt your son correctly trusted you to do the right thing. But all families do not enjoy such excellent relationships. I have know a case where a deportee obtained the official documents of his son (who is only 17 years his junior) and used those documents, including the son’s Barbados passport to return to Canada from whence he had been deported.

    So yes the registry has to be very careful that they do not facilitate document and identity fraud.


  29. @Hants April 23, 2015 at 9:14 PM “If that woman was WHITEโ€ฆโ€ฆโ€ฆโ€ฆโ€ฆ”

    Indeed. A few months ago I went to National Insurance. I was wearing loose fitting knee length shorts. The security told me that because I was wearing “short pants” I could not proceed. I told the guard that I had paid into the National Insurance for 40+ years (I was paying at the top of the NIS scale for most of those 40+ years), that my contributions had helped to pay for the building, and that my contributions helped to pay his salary. and that he could not forbid me entry, and would he please call his supervisor. While I was waiting for his supervisor 2 white guys (bothe appeared to be under 40) also wearing knee length shorts came in and he was about to permit them entry. At that point I asked the guard LOUDLY why were the white guys being permitted upstairs while I who had paid into to NIS for 40+ years was being forbidden.

    He was cuffuffled. The supervisor eventually “permitted” me entry.

    But still in all I don’t see the reason for these foolish rules.

    Barbados is a VERY HOT AND VERY HUMID place. Some of us do not have cars, we have travel on buses that are not air conditioned, and we have to walk fairly long distances to and from bus stops, and to and from bus stands. I see no reason why we should be compelled to wear so many clothes in this heat.

    Dear David: I thank the young woman for raising this issue and I thank you for publishing it.

    you for raising this issue. I is important. Women are more likely to be challenged that men so the “policy” is discriminatory. Black people are more likely to be challenged than white people so it is discriminatory. Non-religious people are more likely to be challenged that religious people so it is discriminatory. Young people are more likely to be challenged that old people so the policy is discriminatory.

    It fact these foolish rules have ABSOLUTELY NO LEGAL BASIS, and in fact are very likely UNCONSTITUTIONAL.


  30. Caswell Franklyn April 23, 2015 at 10:34 PM “A while ago, I had to deal with a case where a guard was transferred because a Government minister entered the building and the guard did not stand up and salute.”

    This government Minister whoever he or she is is a complete asshole. Lest Mr. or Ms. Minister has forgotten you are a representative of the people, you are only as good as the people and since you are NOT the people’s superior they are not required to salute you.

    This int the army asshole…and you are not a 5 star general.

    LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


  31. What the Hell….

    These dress rules give our public servants something to do with their time…cause
    ..they certainly are NOT managing the country’s business …aside from looking for foreigners to come and make things work..
    .. they certainly not advancing the development of Bajans who seem to be increasing in brass bowlery day by day…
    …they are not dealing with productivity.
    …they are not expediting legal issues and addressing disputes…
    … they are not on top of the crime situation
    … agriculture is dead
    … fishing has sunk
    … manufacturing is a dream
    …. education has been killed off
    … Sport is a joke
    … transport has gone to the ZRs
    … The house is chaired by a felon
    … The Boss is the pal of our version of Al Capone
    … CLICO victims are left to suffer while Al Capone lives it up and hijacks the court

    Meanwhile, All government departments are relocated to high class , air conditioned, high-security posh offices, with LOADS of ‘security officers’ (who mostly look like somebody’s grandmother or sick uncle) dictating what is ‘appropriate dress’…..signing visitors books and pressing access buttons…

    Acting police commissioners in big battles with LEGAL OWNERS of guns, which HIS DEPARTMENT vetted, checked, rechecked and issued….. while children are casually dropping them at funerals and walking around with them in their pockets….

    Anyone noticed that since the firing of the NCC workers, the grass along the WHOLE DAMN highway is ALWAYS neatly cut ….and we hardly notice any discomfort such as heaps of bush alongside the road for weeks…..?
    …anyone also notice that the NCC management – who were UNABLE to keep the place clean, continue to enjoy the benefits of salary, MP cars, etc….. although subsequent events have shown them to be incompetent bowls…?

    …..They are probably busy drawing up dress codes for staff and visitors too…

    Brass bowls…..


  32. Susan Carter April 23, 2015 at 11:59 PM “(Armed hole).”

    Please tell those silly semi-literate people who post these foolish rules at government offices that the correct term is “sleeveless”

  33. John Hanson 1781-1782- I SERVE 1788- 1792 BARBADOES. Avatar
    John Hanson 1781-1782- I SERVE 1788- 1792 BARBADOES.

    Bush Tea April 25, 2015 at 8:52 AM #

    What the Hellโ€ฆ @ How you know so good and all others Blind to the Facts and the Truth, Well we not done yet, A bunch of low and last class fools running stupid in the heads of People, No need to UWI when they teach lies,Speaker of the Rat House of QC Quick Crooks of Justice, People need to stop and study things these people doing , DAM can any of them Google?

  34. Dee Ingrunt Word Avatar
    Dee Ingrunt Word

    @Susan, but ‘armed hoes’ sounds so much better though!

    ‘Sleeveless’ sounds so bland, mundane and vanilla.

    LOL


  35. @islandgal246 April 24, 2015 at 1:53 AM “I must remember to put on my Burka when next I have to do business in these places.”

    Actually islandgal246 a burka might not be enough, because bear in mind that in strict Islamic countries women are only required to do the heavy cover up if men are present.

    Let me tell you my own Barbados story.

    A few years ago I had to go to family court to complete an adoption. Every person present was a middled aged female.

    The child (who was not present at the proceedings) is female.

    I am female.

    The magistrate is female.

    The Child Care Board social worker is female.

    My lawyer is female.

    The guardian ad litem from the Probation is female.

    I was wearing a high necked, sleeveless, below the knee, dress which I generally wear both to church and to work (yes I admit that I am cheap and do not spend a lot of money buying different outfits). I was advised by my lawyer that the proceedings could not take place unless I covered my arms. Family court is essentially a big conference table and some chairs. No witnesses except those mentioned above can be present.

    So yes the rules for family court in Barbados are even stricter (or maybe I should say more foolish) that the burka rules of Afghanistan or the abaya rules of Saudi Arabia. Because I could not appear in an all female court in Barbados unless I was covered up.

    I complied because I wanted the matter finished and done with, but I though then and I think now that it is a silly rule.

    I am sensible enough to successfully raise a child from infancy to adulthood, but according to silly rules made up by only Lord knows who I am not sensible enough to know how to dress myself.

    The child has turned out very well, has graduated from college and is hard at work paying income taxes NIS, and professional registration fees at the same Registry.

    But she still can’t go into the registry to pay her $1,500 professional registration fee the wearing an “armed hole” dress.

    LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    We Bajans are a bunch of jokers.

    De rest ‘o de world laughing at we.


  36. millertheanunnaki April 24, 2015 at 1:31 PM “As the prophet Isaiah observed:
    โ€œThe expressions on their faces give them away. They parade their sin around like Sodom; they donโ€™t even try to hide it. How horrible it will be for them, because they have brought disaster on themselves!โ€

    Pastor miller is that you?

    LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


  37. Nobody wants to follow rules and guidlines no more in bubadus lawlessness is being exhibited and is slowly becoming the exercised norm. The moment any sense of decency is injected into society one can hear the pioneers of disaster weighing their two sense worth of hen picked nonsense a mile off especially from those who revels in intellectual persuasions and should know better.
    Over the past two days this article has quickly exposed the arrogance of those in barbados s society who believes that they have a right to unravell the moral fabric upon which this country was founded
    I might be the lone soldier here fighting against an army of warmongers but i enter with out fear of failure knowing that in the end my actions were for the moral preseverance of this country


  38. If Rihanna turns up at the Judicial Centre adorned in all her tattoos would she be refused entry? Just asking.


  39. @David April 24, 2015 at 5:39 PM Here is what managing director of the Nation posted on the subject of dress code practiced by government offices a while ago.
    http://www.nationnews.com/print_article/nationnews/news/61448/public-baobab-rules-absolute-folly?print=true

    Dear David: Then you should ask the Managing Director of the Nation whether or not they require their female employees to wear high heeled shoes, (and other such silly rules) and if so why.

    I won’t speak for the Managing Director of the Nation ‘casuing I know dat he wordical and can well speak fa’ heself.


  40. Rhianna has no excuse to not abide by the laws of barbados.she has a wardrobe of attire that can be adjusted so that she can be dressed to fit any occasion. However the possibilty of her standing on line for official govt documentation in barbados is slim and none. Furthermore her international status might exempt her such a vigilant procedure due to security purposes
    Any how speckled fowl ( David) your effort to inch the goal post forward on this issue boggles the mind and is truly worrisome especially from one who stands perched high on the integrity pole


  41. Dear David:

    Hallelujah!!!! There is one place in Barbados which does NOT have a silly “dress code.”

    That one place is the Blood Bank. At the Blood Bank they do NOT forbid women from wearing “armed holes” They just give you a cheery good morning, check that you are in good health, take the blood, give you a cool drink, a 20 minute rest period and bid you a cheerful goodbye.

    And NO this department has not fallen into moral decreptitude.

    I salute the sensible professional people of the Blood Collection Center. And yes it is much easier on the staff to take a blood donation if the person is wearing one of those deeply sinful, deeply offensive “armed holed” garments.

    But please note that after doing one’s civic duty at the Blood Bank one cannot proceed directly to the registry to collect a death certificate for one’s dear departed mother. One much go home and get a jacket to cover up one’s sinful arms before proceeding to the Registry.

    The whole ‘o de rest of de wirl laughing at we.

    We have to be the silliest people on the face of the earth.


  42. @ac April 25, 2015 at 9:40 AM “Nobody wants to follow rules and guidlines no more in bubadus.”

    You silly person. Sensible people do not like following silly rules.

    Would you prefer that Barbados was full of silly people who happily follow every silly rule invented by some moron?

    Like those silly people who listened while David Thompson told them that CLICO was safe, even while getting his own money out of CLICO?

    Can’t you see your way to to lead sensible people instead of leading thoughtless drones?

  43. Dee Ingrunt Word Avatar
    Dee Ingrunt Word

    AC as usual I commend your clear and determined thinking! And too your ability to take even the most well crafted, balanced remarks and make them an appeal to warmongering and anarchy.

    So as you “enter with out fear of failure … my actions were for the moral preseverance of this country” I ask you to direct to your political masters SS’s remarks:

    “I was wearing a high necked, sleeveless, below the knee, dress … I was advised by my lawyer that the proceedings could not take place unless I covered my arms…Because I could not appear in an all female court in Barbados unless I was covered up.”

    Ask them to equate such regulations with Errol Barrow and Sir James Cam Tudor wearing shirt-jacks often as their daily attire to any and all official and semi official events. The comparison being they too were suitably if not traditionally dressed.

    Please ask why a sleeveless dress in the courts of law will “unravel the moral fabric upon which this country was founded”.

    Ask them as blogger Exclaimer said if we “have become a people incapable of rational thought; a people void of imagination; a people who run from challenges; and a people, who though nearly 50 years of age still have the mind-set of a toddler.”

    And as he summarized we “cannot build a great nation with an institutionalised people”.

    So ask them too if this slavery to an archaic colonial mentality will be jettisoned under their proposed Republicanism.

    I appreciate that this is a lot to wrap your thoughts around so don’t try to break it down, just ask the questions to the bosses and come back with a well laid out response.

    A response befitting leadership of independent thinkers!


  44. @Simple

    You are on a roll!

    >


  45. ac April 25, 2015 at 10:03 AM #
    Rhianna has no excuse to not abide by the laws of barbados.

    You silly twat.

    The “armed hole” rule is NOT a law.

    It is some silliness though up by some stupid civil servant or government contractor who has way too much time on his hands.


  46. @ David “If Rihanna turns up at the Judicial Centre” they would all swear that the “tattoos” are just an illusion. lol


  47. And David: This silliness is beginning to infect the private sector also. Not too many months ago I was at Scotia Bank WIldey and a young man was there with his elementary school aged son. The man was wearing a backwards cap and the security guard approached the man and aggressively ordered him to remove his cap.

    In the same line was another young man in Islamic garb including the little knitted white skull cap. The guard did not order the Muslim man to remove his head wear.

    What say you Scotia Bank?

    I am sure that if head office in Toronto heard of this racial and religious and gender discrimination against a black Barbadian customer they would be outraged.

    Because I know for sure that no security guard at a Scotia Bank branch in in Toronto can order a man to take off his backwards facing cap.


  48. “a young lady went to the Registry to get a death certificate because of her fatherโ€™s recent passing”

    That guard could have shown a little compassion given the young lady is in mourning.


  49. The BRA building at Warrens has a no head tie rule.

    Can you believe in a country of more than 10,000 black women we are forbidden to wear head ties. and every knows that a lotta we black women, especially we older black women LOVE to wear we head ties.

    From the time I saw that silly rule posted I ALWAYS ensure that I am wearing a head tie when I am going into that building.

    I keep a silk paisley patterned head tie in my hand bag at all time specifically to defy the silly rule.

    Please note that women wearing Muslim dress (as ac correctly noted we cannot know for sure that a person wearing Islamic dress is in fact a Muslim) are not required to uncover their heads in the same BRA building.

    LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    De rest ‘o de wirl laughing at we in we ankle length, long sleeved polyester in the 30+ degree celsius sun and 100% humidity.

    Why oh why do we do this to ourselves?

  50. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    Simple Simon

    Re: your comment at 8:22 a.m.

    You simply don’t understand and I shall attempt to clear up any misunderstanding.

    A birth certificate just like the pleadings in a court case are public documents and anybody is entitled to have access to them on the payment of the appropriate fee. If someone misuses the document that is a crime and therefore subject to prosecution. Call the police for them if they are found out but someone else’s criminal behaviour is no reason to deny me my right to access to public documents.

    When I went to the Registration Department to access the returns of certain members of parliament, I was initially denied. I had to threaten a lawsuit before they were handed over to me. I had a right to have any or all of them. How else would I have been able to publish on this blog that the returns of some of them were bogus, without fear of prosecution?

    Why do you think that certain interested parties applied to the court to have the Clico forensic report sealed. If it weren’t sealed, everybody who wanted a copy would have been entitled on the payment of the appropriate fee.

    I remember going to the Registry and requesting a copy of the divorce documents of a certain former Prime Minister. The only reason I did not get a copy was that they claimed that the file was missing. Mind you, as far as I know it is still missing today.

    A friend of mine went to the Registry to obtain a birth certificate of his six-year old daughter and even with his Barbados ID card and the fact that he is registered on the birth certificate as the father, he was initially denied.

    The people who impose these silly rules do so to show that they have power, and not for any security concerns. A birth certificate by itself does not identify you as anybody in particular. It is used in conjunction with other documents to identify the person. Sometimes you might require a justice of the peace to swear in addition to the certificate to identify the person.

    Sent from my iPad

    >

The blogmaster invites you to join and add value to the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading