• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Respecting Religion in the Workplace - Accommodations to be Re-evaluated by the Supreme Court Soon

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
To add another complication, if employees are expected to just... not work for employers that don't accommodate them, think about what this means for the interview and application process.

"Jews need not apply, we will not allow you to take your holidays off."

Oh boy. This'd be bad for employers, never mind employees. Yikes. Instant run afoul of Title VII and lawsuits, ho!

Ignoring this case, because it's a little more complicated, do you think employers should make allowance for religious accommodations without restriction?
 

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
Ignoring this case, because it's a little more complicated, do you think employers should make allowance for religious accommodations without restriction?

Ideally, yes - though I feel this way primarily because religion is a strong expression of respecting human beings more generally. It's not just about religion, in other words, but more about generally having healthy interpersonal relationships. and treating others well.

In the place where I work, we're a team. In spite of the unfortunate hierarchical structure imposed on us by human resources. We cover each other when life happens, whether it's to take time off for religious observances, take a pet cat to the vet, help a spouse who slipped on the ice, or whatever. There's a recognition of each other as human beings that is just... very lacking in much of the workforce. And that's sad. People aren't treated as people, but disposable commodities. Cogs in the machine. Of course such a system wouldn't care to respect religious observances. Or taking time off for bereavement. Or for getting ill oneself, even. These should be basic things that are just granted and worked around... a recognition of our common humanity and that life happens and should be lived.

I hear some other countries do better about these things than the United States does. But here, it... there's disproportionate power held by the employers. That's shifted a little since the pandemic disruptions, but unions still haven't strengthened up enough to fully resolve these things. Signs are good that workers are getting sick and tired of being treated like cogs, though and unionizing more. That'll be good for religious accommodations, sick leave, adequate pay, mental health, and more.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
Works great if you have a massive team with diversity not only of religion, but also skills, so they can cover each other.

Wouldn't work in the business I work for.

We try to accommodate individual requirements (be they religious or otherwise) as best we can. It's not perfect, and it can become a negotiation, but overall it works in most cases.
I think that's common. In small businesses people are recognized as people and employer are trying to accommodate, in a big firm people are an amorphous mass and even though it would be easier to accommodate, uniformity is enforced.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
While I mostly agree with you regarding entitlement in general, I see this case more in the light that the employer doesn't even want to make a minimum effort to accommodate the wishes of the employee. Iow the employer feels entitled to freely rule over the time of the employee.
The issue with this is that we have a hundred other things more important. Paid sick leave, paid family leave, paid vacation, we have people regularly missing out on their kids growing up and they're worried about being able to go to Church?
As has been pointed out there are options where he doesn't have to work on Sunday rather than expecting an employer cater to his personal religious beliefs.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Ideally, yes - though I feel this way primarily because religion is a strong expression of respecting human beings more generally. It's not just about religion, in other words, but more about generally having healthy interpersonal relationships. and treating others well.

In the place where I work, we're a team. In spite of the unfortunate hierarchical structure imposed on us by human resources. We cover each other when life happens, whether it's to take time off for religious observances, take a pet cat to the vet, help a spouse who slipped on the ice, or whatever. There's a recognition of each other as human beings that is just... very lacking in much of the workforce. And that's sad. People aren't treated as people, but disposable commodities. Cogs in the machine. Of course such a system wouldn't care to respect religious observances. Or taking time off for bereavement. Or for getting ill oneself, even. These should be basic things that are just granted and worked around... a recognition of our common humanity and that life happens and should be lived.

I hear some other countries do better about these things than the United States does. But here, it... there's disproportionate power held by the employers. That's shifted a little since the pandemic disruptions, but unions still haven't strengthened up enough to fully resolve these things. Signs are good that workers are getting sick and tired of being treated like cogs, though and unionizing more. That'll be good for religious accommodations, sick leave, adequate pay, mental health, and more.
I hear a lot that religion is supposed to be about serving a greater good and making people better, but more often than not these exemptions are used for selfish reasons. Like getting out of wearing a mask during the pandemic for whatever reason. Like in the healthcare field. Boohoo, whatever, shut up you don't get to complain because others depend on your compliance but people complained anyways. Beard, gods breathing system, whatever, get a job in another field if you don't want to wear a mask or get vaccinated.
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
I think that's common. In small businesses people are recognized as people and employer are trying to accommodate, in a big firm people are an amorphous mass and even though it would be easier to accommodate, uniformity is enforced.

I'm working for a decent sized business. 800 employees, listed on the Australian stock exchange.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
"A far-reaching federal statute, Title VII, requires employers to make “reasonable accommodations” for the religious beliefs and practices of employees. Yet what exactly that means has been unclear for decades. This issue comes to a head on April 18, 2023, when the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Groff v. DeJoy. Gerald Groff, a Christian postal worker, quit and sued the U.S. Postal Service, alleging it failed to accommodate his religious obligation not to work on Sundays.

The case, which could have wide-reaching impact, is focused on two questions. The first is whether the court should abandon an existing standard that says employers can refuse religious accommodations that would impose more than a minimum, or “de minimis,” cost on their businesses.


Second, the court will decide whether an employer may prove that a religious accommodation imposes an “undue hardship” by showing the burden it imposes on other workers, rather than the business itself."
--- From How far must employers go to accommodate workers' time off for worship? The Supreme Court will weigh in
This was interesting to me because I'd always assumed that religious accommodations per Title VII had more teeth to them than is implied by this scholar. Given how profit-obsessed businesses are it would be a low bar to show more than "de minimis" impact, I would think. I welcome a re-examination of this issue especially in a landscape where employers have disproportionate bargaining power against workers. Still, the idea of shifting the measure to burdening one's fellow workers is a bit troubling.

I'd recommend giving the entire article a read - it also links out to external references relevant to the story. What do you think about this case and issue?

I haven't read the article, but I'll go ahead and call the entire "measure" bs.
Imho, no employer should be under any kind of obligation in any sense of the word to accomodate for anyones particular religious belief.

For example:

"failed to accommodate his religious obligation not to work on Sundays."

What the aitch??? If you don't want to work on sundays FOR WHATEVER REASONS.... perhaps don't do a job that requires working on sundays??

What's next? A cop sueing the police department because his religion forbids him to use violence and weapons? A muslim chef sueing the pork chop restaurant for "forcing" him to put pork on the BBQ? A christian woman sueing her porn producer for "forcing" her to engage in adultery?

Gimme a friggin' break.
If you have ethical / religious /whatever issues with aspects of a certain job, then perhaps don't do that job and do something else instead.

I, as an employer, feel no need whatsoever to accomodate for the personal sensitivities of employees while it's simply standard part of the job. The job is the job. Don't like it: do something else.

No employee of mine is forced to work here. Nobody is forced to apply for the job. Nobody is forced to stay once hired.

But if you are going to stay and expect to get paid, then I expect that person to do the job he or she was hired to do. And if that means working on sundays, then that person will be required to work on sundays. Refusing to do so will give me grounds to fire said person and hire another which will not demand "special" treatment.
 
Last edited:

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
I must say I think it's quite reasonable that an employer should not require its workers to be at their beck and call all seven days of the week. What about observant Jews and the Jewish Sabbath? What about muslims and Friday? In many European countries, even though Christianity is fading in intensity, people are not contractually obliged to be available for work on a Sunday. Work-life balance, anyone? I hope the Supreme Court finds in this guy's favour.


Work schedules are predetermined in the contract which was signed by both parties.
The employer can't just change that willy-nilly.

The employer can only "force" the execution of the signed contract.
If the contract didn't include the possibility of working on sundays (or whatever other day), then he can't just force / demand otherwise.

My workforce works monday till fridays. It has happened a few times that due to deadlines, we worked on weekends as well. I didn't "demand" anyone to do so. Instead, I asked nicely.

Those who complied were royally paid for it. Those who refused, I wished them a happy weekend and "see you on monday". And I didn't ask them for what reason they refused. It matters not.

"I'm lazy and want to sleep in on weekends" is just as good a reason for me as "my religion doesn't allow it".

I don't care.

None of my workers are, or can be, forced to work outside of the schedules as determined in the contract.
And that goes both ways.


Now, if there are "environmental" changes at play which require us to change schedules / opening hours / whatnot... then that might indeed mean that it would impact the present workforce. In that case, the change will be proposed to all workers and the contract adjusted, requiring new signatures. They are free to refuse and find other jobs.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
I'm not sure what to make of the fact that someone could reasonably believe that anti-vaccination "entitlements" are in the same attitude category as wanting to engage in joyful celebrations or days of rest and study pertaining to a religious practice. o_O

Anti-religion, much?


Nope.

Both are beliefs (anti-vaxx vs theism).

I don't see a difference. The point is about third parties having to accommodate for personal beliefs.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
While I mostly agree with you regarding entitlement in general, I see this case more in the light that the employer doesn't even want to make a minimum effort to accommodate the wishes of the employee. Iow the employer feels entitled to freely rule over the time of the employee.

Allow me to be brutally honest here.

As an employer, I don't give a rat's behind about the "personal wishes" of my employees.
As an employer, I care about the job I'm paying for being done correctly. Anything else - I don't care. Do whatever you want.

You want to work from home? Whatever.
Do you want to work at night? Whatever.
Do you want to work while naked? Whatever.
Do you want to work while sniffing coke from a prostitute while getting a bj? Whatever.

Get the job done and do it well. Give me what I pay you to do. Do whatever you want aside from that.
 

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
I haven't read the article, but I'll go ahead and call the entire "measure" bs

You really should read the article, based on the rest of your response. It also may be a good idea to look into Civil Rights and Title VII more broadly. It's interesting, and intended to prevent employers from discriminating based on protected categories.


Nope.

Both are beliefs (anti-vaxx vs theism).

No, they are not.

Religion =/= theism. Non-theistic religions exist, and there are also many types of theism.
Furthermore, characterizing religion as being exclusively about beliefs or exclusively a personal matter is incorrect.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
Work schedules are predetermined in the contract which was signed by both parties.
The employer can't just change that willy-nilly.

The employer can only "force" the execution of the signed contract.
If the contract didn't include the possibility of working on sundays (or whatever other day), then he can't just force / demand otherwise.

My workforce works monday till fridays. It has happened a few times that due to deadlines, we worked on weekends as well. I didn't "demand" anyone to do so. Instead, I asked nicely.

Those who complied were royally paid for it. Those who refused, I wished them a happy weekend and "see you on monday". And I didn't ask them for what reason they refused. It matters not.

"I'm lazy and want to sleep in on weekends" is just as good a reason for me as "my religion doesn't allow it".

I don't care.

None of my workers are, or can be, forced to work outside of the schedules as determined in the contract.
And that goes both ways.


Now, if there are "environmental" changes at play which require us to change schedules / opening hours / whatnot... then that might indeed mean that it would impact the present workforce. In that case, the change will be proposed to all workers and the contract adjusted, requiring new signatures. They are free to refuse and find other jobs.
I would argue for a law that contracts with terms requiring 7 day availability should be invalid. Telling workers if they don't like the contract terms they can find another job is not good enough, in my personal opinion. I think there should be statutory protection of a right to a day off, which day of the week to be set by agreement between the parties, unless the worker waives the right.
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
Ideally, yes - though I feel this way primarily because religion is a strong expression of respecting human beings more generally. It's not just about religion, in other words, but more about generally having healthy interpersonal relationships. and treating others well.

In the place where I work, we're a team. In spite of the unfortunate hierarchical structure imposed on us by human resources. We cover each other when life happens, whether it's to take time off for religious observances, take a pet cat to the vet, help a spouse who slipped on the ice, or whatever. There's a recognition of each other as human beings that is just... very lacking in much of the workforce. And that's sad. People aren't treated as people, but disposable commodities. Cogs in the machine. Of course such a system wouldn't care to respect religious observances. Or taking time off for bereavement. Or for getting ill oneself, even. These should be basic things that are just granted and worked around... a recognition of our common humanity and that life happens and should be lived.

Hmmm...I don't have a problem with making allowances for religion in the same manner I would make allowances for other things employees are wishing to do. I've managed (and currently manage) a team of various faiths, but that is actually one of the less impactful aspects of my employees battle for work-life balance. Pets impact more (people in my team travel at times), kids impact more, etc. One of the reasons I like where I am is that despite being a decently large (800 employees), listed business, I have been given space to treat my employees as I will, as long as we hit our targets. The last is a neccessary evil when dealing with a for profit, listed business, but there is a lot of wiggle room too.

As a manager (ignore the business itself for a second) I'm constantly trying to juggle employee wishes, strengths, weaknesses, etc against each other. Employee A doesn't want to travel because there is no one to feed their pet. Employee B doesn't want to because it's their kids birthday, so Employee C does it. I'm really concerned that Employee C doesn't end up the loser everytime these sort of decisions are made, since some people (including me!) have more going on outside of work to try and balance, and some hinges are just squeakier.

Long story short, if I'm picking an Employee to work on Christmas Day (a public holiday) I wouldn't want it to come down to a test of 'Who is the most Christian?' There appears very little reason for a business to engage with religion to that degree. I'd merely ask for volunteers, and if there were none, set up some sort of roster so an employee who works it once, wouldn't work it in the future. As an atheist who celebrates Christmas, you can probably understand why I've used a somewhat ham-fisted example.


I hear some other countries do better about these things than the United States does. But here, it... there's disproportionate power held by the employers. That's shifted a little since the pandemic disruptions, but unions still haven't strengthened up enough to fully resolve these things. Signs are good that workers are getting sick and tired of being treated like cogs, though and unionizing more. That'll be good for religious accommodations, sick leave, adequate pay, mental health, and more.

I've worked closely with American teams, and I've also once managed an international teams. I've also poached an American to come to Australia and work for my team.
Many countries do this stuff better than America, if 'better' means protect employees and provide better legal protection for conditions. Indeed, I'd go further and say that out of the really rich, liberal democracies, America does this about the worst. My country provides more sick leave, annual leave, maternity leave, etc. Countries like Sweden and France go much further again.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
You really should read the article, based on the rest of your response. It also may be a good idea to look into Civil Rights and Title VII more broadly. It's interesting, and intended to prevent employers from discriminating based on protected categories.

Discrimination works both ways.
Granting extra special privileges because of a certain belief, is "discrimination" as well.

I don't discriminate at all.
Every one of my employees gets the same treatment. Regardless of how they like to spend their private time or what they believe.

No, they are not.

I disagree

Religion =/= theism. Non-theistic religions exist, and there are also many types of theism.
Furthermore, characterizing religion as being exclusively about beliefs or exclusively a personal matter is incorrect.

I disagree also.

Both are personal beliefs.
I don't care about personal beliefs.

I might sound blunt, but that's how I feel. And I think that's fair.
 
Last edited:

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
I would argue for a law that contracts with terms requiring 7 day availability should be invalid. Telling workers if they don't like the contract terms they can find another job is not good enough, in my personal opinion. I think there should be statutory protection of a right to a day off, which day of the week to be set by agreement between the parties, unless the worker waives the right.

Well that certainly depends on the job.
In Belgium, it's illegal to force people to work 7 days without rest. But depending on the type of job, you certainly might be required alternativing availability for all days.

Intensive care doctors come to mind, for example. But those are always in shifts. If you are on call for the weekends this week, you will not be for the next week.

But here's the kicker.............. that's about worker rights and it has NOTHING to do with "special privileges" for people who happen to follow a certain religion.

Worker rights are for EVERYONE. Theist & atheist

This thread is specifically about "special privileges" for "certain" people for religious reasons.
 
Last edited:

exchemist

Veteran Member
Sure. And that is the case in Belgium btw.

But here's the kicker.............. that's about worker rights and it has NOTHING to do with "special privileges" for people who happen to follow a certain religion.

Worker rights are for EVERYONE. Theist & atheist
Well of course. Not much of a kicker, that. No one in their right mind would give religious people special employment privileges. That would break employment laws all over the place.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
Well of course. Not much of a kicker, that. No one in their right mind would give religious people special employment privileges. That would break employment laws all over the place.

And yet, that's exactly what the thread is about.

This is not about expecting people to work on sundays.
It's about expecting people to work on sundays while their religion says that they can't.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
And yet, that's exactly what the thread is about.

This is not about expecting people to work on sundays.
It's about expecting people to work on sundays while their religion says that they can't.
Nope. Respecting religion can, and obviously has to be, done in a way that does not confer special privileges on any one group of employees. The thread is not about special privileges, it is about making room in employment terms (within reason ) for religious observance.
 

Guitar's Cry

Disciple of Pan
Allow me to be brutally honest here.

As an employer, I don't give a rat's behind about the "personal wishes" of my employees.
As an employer, I care about the job I'm paying for being done correctly. Anything else - I don't care. Do whatever you want.

You want to work from home? Whatever.
Do you want to work at night? Whatever.
Do you want to work while naked? Whatever.
Do you want to work while sniffing coke from a prostitute while getting a bj? Whatever.

Get the job done and do it well. Give me what I pay you to do. Do whatever you want aside from that.

Yikes. You can still care about the job being done and still understand that the employee is an individual human being simply trying to survive by offering you their time, health, and liberty.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
Yikes. You can still care about the job being done and still understand that the employee is an individual human being simply trying to survive by offering you their time, health, and liberty.

I said... as an employer.
I was very careful to say that explicitly.

As a person, I'll be the judge of what I find reasonable and fair - without it being legally binding.
As an employer, I don't care one way or the other.

I don't do discrimination. That goes both ways: negative discrimination AND positive discrimination.

I will never not hire someone because of anything concerning their personal life or skin color or whatnot.
And I will also never do the opposite.

If an employee starts following a religion that says he can't work on wednesdays, then that's that employee's business. But (s)he'll still be required to work on wednesdays. If that person refuses to do so, (s)he is free to find another job that doesn't require working on wednesdays.

Why the aitch would I be expected to accomodate for that person's personal beliefs??
 
Top