Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Religious Discrimination
There is no one who is supposed to be discriminated on the basis of their religion in the workplace. The rights of employees are protected under Title VII. According to Title VII, religion includes all aspects of religious observance and practice coupled with beliefs .Therefore in a workplace situation unless an employer demonstrates that he is not able to reasonably accommodate an employee or even a prospective employees' religious practice or observance without undue hardship on the conduct of the business of the employer (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2009). In this case MaryJo had every right to file a claim to EEOC. The paper will be an evaluation of the merit to the claim that MaryJo wants to file. First of all every employer is supposed to accommodate an employees religious conflict even if the conflict was not existing when the employee was being hired. Clearly MarJo's proselytizing which is the cause of the conflict started after she was hired. Therefore the law requires that the employer should accommodate her religious action even if it started after she was employed. This is because the employers' duty attaches to the conflict but not when the conflict arises. Once an employer is well aware of the conflict they must make sure that they try as much as possible in good faith to accommodate the religious conflict and the employee should ensure that they assist in the attempted accommodation.in this case MaryJo made an offer of limiting her proselytizing to certain hours of the day.by declining this offer her employer showed that he was not willing to accommodate the conflict. This is against the law and therefore MaryJo had ground to form her claim since she tried her level best to ensure that her employer accommodated her and her religious beliefs. The duty to accommodate is only to a point where it will not cause any undue hardship to the employer. There was no undue hardship if MaryJo went on with her proselytizing at specific hours.
This duty to accommodate only applies to religious practices and not religious beleifs.an employer is normally required to accommodate religious practice to an extent which does not present undue hardship on the employer on the other hand religious beliefs have no limitation. This implies that no matter…
Reference
Bennett-Alexander, D.D., & Hartman, L.P. (2009). Employment law for business (6th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Religious Discrimination With far reaching negative effects that have always culminated into national and regional instability, religious discrimination is not a phenomenon that came up recently. Many authors consider it as discriminations on an individual based on their religious affiliations. Accounts of religious discrimination can be traced back to the 1800s with reference to various discrimination stories that have always appeared in articles talking about religious discrimination. One such story is
Of course, most proselytizing of this nature is also prohibited by law but a non-exclusive hiring policy obviously provides more opportunities to expose non-Christians to the faith in permissible ways than an exclusive hiring policy that excludes non-Christians altogether. 3. How would your answers change, if at all, if they planned to open a Christian school rather than a manufacturing facility? Legal but not advisable. Because a Christian school is a
Coding AnalysisIntroductionIn examining the theme of religious tolerance and discrimination in governmental workplaces, this paper engages with six interviews conducted with various stakeholders: a government employee, a citizen, a Christian at church, a businessperson, an educator, and a community group member. The interviews probed these individuals\\\' perspectives on the subject and sought to understand the nuances of the issue at hand.Description of DataThe interview data offers perspectives on the issue
Obviously, while the statutes prohibit religious discrimination, the courts will not simply rubber-stamp an employee's claim that something conflicts with his religious beliefs. Instead, the court will look at whether a bona fide religious practice conflicted with an employment requirement, whether the employee brought the religious practice to the employer's attention, and whether the religious practice was the basis of the adverse employment decision. Once that is established, the
Although Lundman was evidently the first case to award damages for faith healing, prosecutions of parents whose children die under similar circumstances are reasonably common.(64) Many of the cases involve Christian Scientists who do not accept the superiority of contemporary medicine to their faith-based care; and many others involve Jehovah's Witnesses, who do not accept blood transfusions because of the biblical prohibition on ingesting blood.(65) but official punishment is
Discrimination against the elderly, against pregnant women, against women with children, against people of color are all prohibited under the law. The EEOC or Equal Employment Opportunity Commission was created to administer Title VII of the Civil Rights act and specifically to "progress race, national origin, religious, and sex discrimination claims pursuant to the statue" (Gregory, 2003). Is the EEC doing its job? During the first year alone after