Jane owns a store with 25 employees. All are full time employees. This is the optimal contingent of workers for the greatest level of success.
The store is open from 9:00 a.m.to 7:00 p.m., seven days a week.
Schedules are based on seniority. The person with the most seniority chooses first, the second most chooses next, etc.
Only five employees can be off work on Saturdays and Sundays.
Carl has three years seniority. There are only three people with less seniority. Carl knew when he was hired that weekend work would be required until he moved up the seniority ladder.
Carl converts to a religion that prohibits working on its sabbath (Sunday in this case). Carl tells Jane he can no longer work on Sundays. Jane refuses to give him Sundays off, citing that he doesn’t have enough seniority as the reason.
Carl does not show up for work the following three Sundays and is fired. He sues Jane for religious discrimination.
How do you think the courts should rule on this law suit?
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
Against Carl. He signed a contract. Every one has the right to believe whatever they want, but those beliefs don't entitle them to break the law.
Don't show up for work on a certain day 3 weeks in a row in protest? I assume no call no show? In a position that where the worker is fairly easily replaceable? Do not even try to work with the employer to make it work? (Plenty of larger churches have an early mass that lets out early in the morning, the person could go to mass in the morning and still easily make a 11 am to 7pm work schedule.) The person also could of worked with the other workers to swap shifts.
Not much of a case for the person to stand on. They agreed to work sundays when hired, What is to stop someone joining a recognized religion that for "religious reasons" can not work before noon each day? When really the person just wants to party late and sleep in every day? An employer firing someone for the scenario described is not religious persecution in my mind.
Edit: On a side note, wal-mart the largest private employer in the world, bans having people privately swap shifts, because people would have to organize and collect contact information of everyone, which leads to... possible union forming! Wal-Mart's anti union practices are truly legendary, an interesting read of strong arm depravity wal-mart takes part in. You do not become the biggest being nice.
In civil law, in the case, there are only two things to consider.
1) Was the employee aware of the rules for employment and agreed to those rules?
2) Do those laws violate any individual right or target in person based on their faith?
No private employer has to make specific accommodations for anyone based on their religion. They just cannot deny that individual their religious right nor can they force a religion in any way upon that individual.
I would say in this case that when the suit came up for initial case review, it would be thrown out. That Jane did not violate carl's individual rights.
This specifically applies:
"Duty to Accommodate an Employee's Religion
While employers have a duty to accommodate the religious beliefs of their employees, the employer does have some leeway in how it conducts its business. There is a point where the changes that are required to accommodate an employee become too burdensome on the employer. Most likely, a request by an employee to trade shifts when his or her faith prevents working on Saturdays is likely to be reasonable. However, less reasonable might be a request that an employee have a particular holy month off each year. Whether an employer's policy that limits the conduct of members of a particular faith is unreasonable depends on the circumstances. A job may also have certain qualifications or requirements that have the effect of limiting participation by a particular religious faith. "
Didn't a ball player sue to get Sunday's off so that he could attend church?
The courts will rule in favor of the business as long as they have applied their attendance policy consistently and without prejudice.