Religious discrimination(work)

It depends entirely on the situation. Some jobs it only matters that they work x hours a week. Other jobs demand you are there at specific times and days.

The needs of the business must be met and I find such exemptions dependent upon the nature of the business.

We have several employees at might job that cannot work or will not work certain days that have nothing to do with religion. There needs are fulfilled but they also understand that if necessity dictates then they will have to work those days or expect their hours to be replaced by a new employee. I've never experienced much hardship at the job working with individuals who will not work certain days of the week for any given reason. It actually opens an opportunity to hire another part timer with inevitable crossover scheduling that allows greater flexibility.

I have no experience with support jobs that require 24 hour on calls but I do know that small businesses that routinely have no more than 2 employees on staff at a given time would be hard pressed to hire on individuals who expect on the job exemptions. The video store I frequent has some nights where only two people may be working and each of them has to have a lunch break so there will be some time with only one employee on the floor. In such a situation, an individual who places demands such as extra time off the clock would place a greater hindrance on store operations and thus I do not feel that an employer would even have to consider such an individual for employment.

At my job, such a request would probably not be that troublesome and I would just be more concerned with that which applies to all employees. Their capability.

I'm more concerned with the notion that employees must consider applicants who hold a belief system that would directly interfere with the job description. For example, the cabbie who refused service to a drunk customer simply for being inebriated. In that case, such an individual does not deserve the job.

ChristineES said:

If one person can't come in, there is usually someone else who can cover him and then vice versa. All problems have solutions- if you are willing to look for them.

Click to expand...

This leads to my comment about whether the manager is willing to go the extra mile and deal with the logistics required to schedule around people or not. And even if he/she isn't, it doesn't mean they are discriminating against a religion but more likely just lazy. This doesn't make it right, in fact, in some ways it is even more wrong, but still not religious discrimination.

Trey of Diamonds said:

Yes but the question is, can a person declare that day as always his day off. If one employee says he needs Saturday off for religious reasons, is that fair to the employee who must now always work Saturdays to cover for him, meaning he never gets a Saturday/Sunday weekend. Is that fair, especially to teenagers whose social life revolve around weekends? The question is not as simple as you make it appear.

Click to expand...

I would think that the teenagers would be working Saturday and Sunday (well, not Sunday at Chick-fil-A, apparently); during the week, they're in school. My impression that it's the shifts that a student can't do, e.g. weekday afternoons and (depending on the establishment's hours) the overnight shift that are hardest to staff; no matter what a person's religious obligations, there would be high-demand times when that person would be available.

And I don't see how giving an employee every Saturday off for religious observance is really that different from giving another employee every Tuesday and Wednesday off to go to college part-time, which is something that (hopefully) most employers would try to accommodate. It may not be simple, but it seems within the normal realm of practice.

And I think scheduling every Saturday off for an employee is much less complex than trying to schedule an employee who is trying to making one full-time job out of two part-time jobs when he hands you his schedule from his other job for the upcoming week and says "yeah... this week, I can't come in Wednesday afternoon, Thursday morning or all day Saturday".

9-10ths_Penguin said:

Why would it be difficult?

Click to expand...

Well, as you said it would depend on the business type. It would be more difficult for factories but easier for, say, telecommuting jobs. It would be more difficult for a law firm but easier for a contractor.

It would also be easier in a country or state where the culture values religion in general (and perhaps Islam in particular).

9-10ths_Penguin said:

And I think scheduling every Saturday off for an employee is much less complex than trying to schedule an employee who is trying to making one full-time job out of two part-time jobs when he hands you his schedule from his other job for the upcoming week and says "yeah... this week, I can't come in Wednesday afternoon, Thursday morning or all day Saturday".

Click to expand...

All your proving is that your the type of person who would be fine with the complexities of scheduling. How does the fact that you find it easy to consider these things serve as proof that everyone will and not hire people who are easier to schedule rather than people who are more difficult? Because that's all I'm saying, are you disagreeing with me or simply saying that you personally wouldn't do so?

frg001 said:

I wonder. I have been thinking about this one for a while now.
I used to be responsible for interviewing, and taking on certain new staff. Now I always tried to be fair, and not discriminate on any grounds.
But at my last place of work, certain people made it known that they required an extra long lunch break on a friday, and a prayer room.

Now if you were in charge of such matters for a small company, and you had 2 candidates, of equal merit, but one had these requirements, would you hire the other one?

The same can be said for a certain guy I knew who refused to work on sundays, even though the company had a 24 hour support mechanism. That persons refusal meant that the other few people involved had to do even more weekends (which nobody liked)

Would I be justified in both cases for 1. Not taking on anyone with requirements that did not suit the company, and 2. Enforcing compliance, or demoting the individual.

As it happens I never had to make this choice, but if I did, I would.

Click to expand...

In the first case, I'm kind of like 9-10. I tend to think that it would depend on the job. I work in a factory, and I expect everyone to be there or my life gets very difficult. However, I've worked in other jobs where it would be doable without a problem.

In the second, it's really unreasonable to expect everyone else to work Sundays while one person gets it off. People can work shifts on those jobs so everyone can have some time off; that's the way we did it when I worked in the prisons. In other jobs, I asked only for two out of the month (provided they had enough), and I generally got them all because of how I worked and then moved to a night shift.

Granted, I like my Sundays for Church, so I avoid jobs that would make me work it, or I volunteer to work nights so we can both have our way. However, I know that it is unreasonable to expect special perks for myself. I don't have to work that specific job. This, of course, brings up the stipulation: if a job would make a person compromise their religious beliefs or practices, they can get another job. It's a method that works with very little fuss.

Trey of Diamonds said:

All your proving is that your the type of person who would be fine with the complexities of scheduling. How does the fact that you find it easy to consider these things serve as proof that everyone will and not hire people who are easier to schedule rather than people who are more difficult? Because that's all I'm saying, are you disagreeing with me or simply saying that you personally wouldn't do so?

Click to expand...

I'm saying that these sorts of scheduling problems are very common in the retail and food services business, or at least they were when I worked in both of them.

I don't think that incorporating an employee's religious observances into the schedule is any more onerous than incorporating an employee's schedule at school or some other job would be. In my experience, this level of accommodation is common and expected in this line of work, so it's not unreasonable to expect an employer to make reasonable accommodation for the scheduling needs of a religious employee as well.

One thing I've notice, Christian's tend to look at things like going to church a perk where a Muslim and others see this as an imperitive. This makes the discussion that much more difficult.

In the reverse, say you are a Christian with a job in Saudi Arabia, should you get Sunday off? Is it even considered? How many that cry foul in the West would not do so for someone else in the Middle East?

9-10ths_Penguin said:

I'm saying that these sorts of scheduling problems are very common in the retail and food services business, or at least they were when I worked in both of them.

I don't think that incorporating an employee's religious observances into the schedule is any more onerous than incorporating an employee's schedule at school or some other job would be. In my experience, this level of accommodation is common and expected in this line of work, so it's not unreasonable to expect an employer to make reasonable accommodation for the scheduling needs of a religious employee as well.

Click to expand...

Ok, let me make this simple.

Do you think there are some managers who will hire someone who is easy to schedule over someone who is more difficult? Yes or no.

If Yes, do you think this is religious discrimination or simple laziness?

As to what you said, you are of course correct but none of that information answered the above questions.

Thanks

I can see the problem if you only have a few workers to cover the shifts. I wonder if the supervisor didn't want to do it, then the workers themselves could work out something. Most people, I have found, are pretty good about things like that and would switch if they received equal compensation.

Edit: I think the supervisors would agree if the work was being completed and everyone worked 40 hours a week.

Employers are not permitted to discriminate on religious ground in the UK. it is a legal requirement to accommodate them in a reasonable way.

It the College where I worked we had a prayer room/ chapel that could be used by all faiths.
Because we had to accommodate them did not mean that any time they took was "Free" it had to be made up, in the flexihour system
As there was a requirement for some people to work on Christian bank holidays, it was an opportunity for those who had taken religious festival breaks to fill in and provide cover...

in these situations there is no need to be unfair on any one.

The more unfair practice was for smokers to wander off for a smoke... In my department they had to sign off and back on when they returned; but not all departments did this.

Trey of Diamonds said:

Ok, let me make this simple.

Do you think there are some managers who will hire someone who is easy to schedule over someone who is more difficult? Yes or no.

Click to expand...

Yes, of course.

However, I also think there are some managers who will cut corners on safety, but I don't think this means that an employee is unjustified in expecting a safe workplace.

Trey of Diamonds said:

If Yes, do you think this is religious discrimination or simple laziness?

Click to expand...

Probably a combination of both, plus short-sightedness. Happy employees are more productive employees who are less likely to leave, so a bit of head-scratching during scheduling can prevent much greater effort dealing with recruitment, training and other issues that come out of high turnover rates.

And more cynically, if you're the only employer in town who will make allowances for a Muslim employee's needs, you know that it'll take a lot to make him quit.

But my point before was that if you're allowing students to take a specific day off every week for non-religious reasons, then refusing to do the same for someone for a religious one probably is religious discrimination.

Terrywoodenpic said:

Employers are not permitted to discriminate on religious ground in the UK. it is a legal requirement to accommodate them in a reasonable way.

Click to expand...

Same in the US but some times things fall through the cracks. After all, speeding is against the law as well and people still do it.

9-10ths_Penguin said:

But my point before was that if you're allowing students to take a specific day off every week for non-religious reasons, then refusing to do the same for someone for a religious one probably is religious discrimination.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Never disagreed with your points my friend.

9-10ths_Penguin said:

Yes, of course.

However, I also think there are some managers who will cut corners on safety, but I don't think this means that an employee is unjustified in expecting a safe workplace.


Probably a combination of both, plus short-sightedness. Happy employees are more productive employees who are less likely to leave, so a bit of head-scratching during scheduling can prevent much greater effort dealing with recruitment, training and other issues that come out of high turnover rates.

And more cynically, if you're the only employer in town who will make allowances for a Muslim employee's needs, you know that it'll take a lot to make him quit.

But my point before was that if you're allowing students to take a specific day off every week for non-religious reasons, then refusing to do the same for someone for a religious one probably is religious discrimination.

Click to expand...

I agree with this, although in the companies I have worked for, it is incredibly easy to fill in on a weekday. Not so at weekend. Saturday and Sunday for me are nothing more than days I can spend family time, shop, and maybe get a few beers in, but both days are as important to me, as any religious person. In fact I too ended up not getting a promotion for a job I would have, because I began to refuse as many weekend shifts as possible.

Also, in places I have worked there has been another reason not to hire "overly" religious people... Simple workmate camaraderie. In the UK it is very customary for employees to meet outside of work, and often for nights out. It is quite common for groups of people in work to become good friends outside. People in a team that will not participate can be left on the fringe.
I myself have hired people I thought were not quite as good as other candidates (still perfectly up to the job), because I believed they would "fit in" better. You have a team of 3 or 4 people, who are friends outside, to then introduce someone who doesn't want to fit into the culture as well as do the job, can be difficult.

Again going back to your point, I agree, if concessions are made on non-religious grounds, then they ought to be on religious grounds.
Difference is, I would regard family grounds, or medical grounds more important than religious grounds, if it came to a choice.


*EDIT as for the smoking thing above... Yes, I agree, and I used to discriminate on smoking grounds, and make no apologies. I remember someone coming to an interview...smelled of smoke, and asked if he could nip outside for a quick smoke 10 mins before the interview...in every other aspect he was perfect for the job...I gave it to someone else, slightly less qualified.
We worked out in one place that the smokers on average worked 30 mins less every day, not to mention taking more time off sick.

First of all, I don't think your dilemna is in any way discriminatory. Religion is a choice, and if you choose a religion that has certain requirements on your time then you need to live with the consequences, one of which is that you may not be able to function properly in some businesses. Thats not the business owners fault. If say that my religion requires that I be paid a million dollars a day, it's not your responsibility to give it to me just because I applied for a job with you. It was my choice to subscribe to that religion and it's going to limit me to very few job opportunities.

That all being said... I still waffle back and forth on this, but I'm not sure that it's wrong to discriminate against religions. This could get me some hugely negative reactions, but religion in and of itself is frequently discriminatory against people who don't believe the same thing. Religious history is filled with examples of people being told to murder other people on behalf of their god. I think in general religion should be frowned upon, we should not accept it as a persons right. I think the human race has almost grown up enough that we should start ridding ourselves of such a horrible tradition. Is discrimination against a discriminatory group wrong? I tend to think no. I think the KKK should be abolished completely, I don't think they deserve respect and they should not be considered as equals in our society. and is the KKK really that different from most religions?

BaronVonKaiser said:

First of all, I don't think your dilemna is in any way discriminatory. Religion is a choice, and if you choose a religion that has certain requirements on your time then you need to live with the consequences, one of which is that you may not be able to function properly in some businesses. Thats not the business owners fault. If say that my religion requires that I be paid a million dollars a day, it's not your responsibility to give it to me just because I applied for a job with you. It was my choice to subscribe to that religion and it's going to limit me to very few job opportunities.

That all being said... I still waffle back and forth on this, but I'm not sure that it's wrong to discriminate against religions. This could get me some hugely negative reactions, but religion in and of itself is frequently discriminatory against people who don't believe the same thing. Religious history is filled with examples of people being told to murder other people on behalf of their god. I think in general religion should be frowned upon, we should not accept it as a persons right. I think the human race has almost grown up enough that we should start ridding ourselves of such a horrible tradition. Is discrimination against a discriminatory group wrong? I tend to think no. I think the KKK should be abolished completely, I don't think they deserve respect and they should not be considered as equals in our society. and is the KKK really that different from most religions?

Click to expand...

I agree to an extent. But isn't the KKK illegal anyway?
As for banning other groups. I dont think any group that abides by the law should be outlawed. Freedom of speech for me is possibly as important as any other single thing in a democratiic society. So while I dislike right-wing hate groups, so long as they abide by the law, then they should be allowed to exist. If they start inciting violence then they cross the line. If they preach that one race is better than another, whilst distasteful, and misguided, it is their right to hold that view... Maybe it is ours to convince them of their error...But then the similarity to religion pops up... It aint easy to convince someone who has been force-fed jesus, muhammed, or whoever, since birth, that they are wrong...

BaronVonKaiser said:

That all being said... I still waffle back and forth on this, but I'm not sure that it's wrong to discriminate against religions.

Click to expand...

You do realize that freedom of religion also protects your right not to believe, don't you? You should support it out of enlightened self-interest, if nothing else.

This could get me some hugely negative reactions, but religion in and of itself is frequently discriminatory against people who don't believe the same thing.

Click to expand...

Two wrongs don't make a right. Either you believe that people should be free to believe according to the dictates of their conscience, or you don't.

I think the human race has almost grown up enough that we should start ridding ourselves of such a horrible tradition.

Click to expand...

I think you're seeing what you want to see.

Is discrimination against a discriminatory group wrong? I tend to think no. I think the KKK should be abolished completely, I don't think they deserve respect and they should not be considered as equals in our society. and is the KKK really that different from most religions?

Click to expand...

Respect and tolerance are two different things. The former must be earned, while the latter should be automatically extended to almost everyone.

frg001 said:

I agree to an extent. But isn't the KKK illegal anyway?

Click to expand...

No, just impotent.

To clarify a little more. First of all believing in something that you don't have facts to back up makes you closeminded to ideas and even facts that might contradict your belief. History is filled with examples of medical and scientific progress being retarded by religious zealots concered that the findings might contradict their own beliefs. Faith, in general, slows the natural progression of humankind. And there is also the matter of the evils it seems to spawn, different religions fighting each other, genocide being carried out and justified in the name of a god. Most religions don't hold themselves accountable to the laws of men, they are empowered by higher laws which gives them the right to commit unspeakable acts. Think about religion in this light and you have to wonder why we give these religious people so many concessions, why it is that we must say, everyone is free to subscribe to and take part in whatever religious atrocities they like. You have to wonder, is it really ok? It doesn't seem right, it's immoral. Think of victims of things as recent as 9/11, how do you go about protecting the rights and providing for the religious freedom of the terrorists that murdered so many people.