Muslim truck drivers refuse to deliver beer, win $240,000 lawsuit

[MDM4AU 282]

Muslim truck drivers refuse to deliver beer, win $240,000 lawsuit

As UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh explained to The Washington Post, the trucking company admitted that drivers often switched their assignments, meaning it would have been reasonable to accommodate the men's request, rather than firing them.

http://news.yahoo.com/muslim-truck-drivers-refuse-deliver-beer-win-240-172947936.html

[aujeff11 6,243]

Reminds me of the time that a Muslim woman refused to serve alcohol on a plane. Ended up getting fired. I'm not sure if she ever got her job back.

Edit) suspended,not fired.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/09/07/muslim-flight-attendant-suspended/71852754/

[AUUSN 823]

So, what's the outrage?

How does a religious accommodation process work?

"In requesting an accommodation, an employee or applicant is not required to use "magic words" (such as indicating that he or she is seeking "an accommodation"). However, an employee or applicant must make the agency aware of the need for an accommodation based on a conflict between the individual's religious belief or practice and their work duties or the agency's application process. The request for an accommodation may trigger an interactive process, particularly if the employer reasonably needs more information, between the responsible management official and the individual making the request to discuss the request and assess available options. Examples of religious accommodations may include: scheduling changes (arrivals, departures, floating/optional holidays, flexible work breaks and any other scheduling changes); voluntary shift substitutions and/or swaps; job reassignments, such as changes of position tasks and lateral transfers; and modifications to workplace practices, policies and procedures. An accommodation may also involve designating an unused or private location in the workplace where a religious observance or practice can occur if it is disrupting other workers. The need for accommodations may also apply to such things as dress or grooming practices that an employee has for religious reasons. These might include, for example, wearing particular head coverings or other religious dress (such as a Jewish yarmulke or a Muslim headscarf), or wearing certain hairstyles or facial hair (such as Rastafarian dreadlocks or Sikh uncut hair and beard). It also includes an employee's observance of a religious prohibition against wearing certain garments (such as pants or miniskirts)."

http://www.dol.gov/oasam/programs/crc/2011-Religious-Discrimination-and-Accommodation.htm

[MDM4AU 282]

No outrage from me. The company could have made accommodations and didn't.

[AUUSN 823]

Sorry brother. I had you confused with Raptor. I forgot level-headed people still post quality threads meant to inform. My apologies.

[MDM4AU 282]

No problem, sir.

[AURaptor 1,113]

But hobby lobby & sisters if the poor must pay for abortions?

Yay for religious equality !!

[AUUSN 823]

This is a religious accommodation in the workplace subject, not religious equality.

[penguin149 354]

Looks like all of the bakeries/SSM wedding cake makers used the wrong lawyers!!

[cptau 140]

Reminds me of the story of Colonial Sepoy Hindu and Moslem troops serving in British India who mutinied in 1857. One of their grievances was the use of paper cartridges used to load the British 1853 Enfield musket. a greased paper cartridge contained the musket ball and powder was used to load the musket. The sepoy solider had to first bite or tear open the greased paper covering, but they objected saying they thought the grease was beef or pork based. The Hindu troops disliked both, the Moslems disliked the idea of pork. To make it worse lower caste Hindu workers taunted the higher caste Hindu sepoy troops about having to bite the greased paper cartridge. Not sure if they used the greased cartridges during their mutiny, but after a year it was put down by the British.

[AURaptor 1,113]

Reminds me of the story of Colonial Sepoy Hindu and Moslem troops serving in British India who mutinied in 1857. One of their grievances was the use of paper cartridges used to load the British 1853 Enfield musket. a greased paper cartridge contained the musket ball and powder was used to load the musket. The sepoy solider had to first bite or tear open the greased paper covering, but they objected saying they thought the grease was beef or pork based. The Hindu troops disliked both, the Moslems disliked the idea of pork. To make it worse lower caste Hindu workers taunted the higher caste Hindu sepoy troops about having to bite the greased paper cartridge. Not sure if they used the greased cartridges during their mutiny, but after a year it was put down by the British.

Yep, I was thinking the exact same thing !

[AUUSN 823]

Looks like all of the bakeries/SSM wedding cake makers used the wrong lawyers!!

Ok, one more time. This is a religious accomodation in the workplace issue.