Comment 2 by ingold.a :

  Okay, I'm about as athiest/secular minded as one can get and I think this is outright ridiculous. I mean, come on it's a necklace. I know that the same respect wouldn't be given to me if I wanted to wear an atheistic symbol to work, but who cares?

So, If I work at a government office, say some government service office should I be fully free to wear my 24 carrot gold swastika pendant? I mean, come on; it's only a necklace. And what about other religious symbols? should people be able to wear full burka's at work? I'm sorry sergeant I won't be wearing my police uniform, I'm muslim and my religious symbol is a black cloth bag. Remember, this case is about religious symbols, not a necklace. If it was a case to be able to wear whatever necklace pendant you wanted at work it would be slightly different, but "religious symbol" opens up a massive hole. Sikhs for instance, have a kirpan as a religious symbol, which happens to be a knife with a crescent shaped blade of various sizes worn on a type of sash across the torso. Is this religious symbol an issue for a Sikh pilot or flight attendant of British Airways?

The cross pendant is not the issue, the words "religious symbol" are the issue; because if you expressly allow one; ANY, then all others have rightful justification. Again, if you allow one, you have to allow them all.

Besides, they can always wear their cross under their shirt, if the point is their personal faith and not shoving their faith in other peoples faces, whether the cross is outside or inside their shirt shouldn't matter. Mormons for instance shouldn't give a crap about this argument since no one will tell them not to where their magic under-where at work. (I guess unless they're a swimsuit model or something)

He accused ministers and the courts of “dictating” to Christians and said it was another example of Christianity becoming sidelined in official life.

I'd say: "It's another wonderful example of christianity becoming sidelined in official life"