Religious Beliefs by Employees Put Retailers in a Conundrum
It’s not just Muslims refusing to ring up pork or alcohol products, but also Christians who refuse to dispense the “morning after” pill and other “religions” who refuse to remove body piercings that are presenting a conundrum for retailers.
Can a cashier or clerk wish a customer “Merry Christmas”?
Must a pharmacist dispense birth control devices if his faith forbids it?
Can a Muslim clerk refuse to touch a whisky or beer bottle, or a pork chop?
Disputes between retailers and employees over religious beliefs in the United States can be traced back to the Puritans, who established laws that retail stores must not open on Sundays. Hundreds of years later, retailers are still dealing with how to address an employee’s religious practices.
Religious discrimination complaints to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) have been rising over the past 10 years. Last year, the EEOC received 2,541 complaints, up 48 percent from 1,709 in 1997.
The commission has found that about 60 percent of the cases have “no reasonable cause” and about 4 percent to 10 percent do have a reasonable cause.
In Minnesota, Target has been the subject of scrutiny since a Minneapolis Star Tribune reported earlier this month that some Muslim supermarket cashiers ask non-Muslim co-workers or customers to scan pork products for them. They’re following a strict interpretation of the Koran, which forbids touching pork products.
Unlike the Puritans, today’s workers are armed with Title VII of the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits religious discrimination in the workplace. Under it, employers are required to make “reasonable accommodations” for an employee’s religious beliefs. “Reasonable” is defined as something that doesn’t create “undue hardship” on the employer or co-workers.
The law leaves room for interpretation. When an accusation of religious discrimination is filed against a company, it often becomes news.
“The wording of Title VII is pretty broad. It’s up to the courts to decide in many of these issues,” says Matthew McReynolds, a staff attorney at Pacific Justice Institute, a Sacramento, Calif., legal-assistance group that represents individuals in civil liberties cases, including religious discrimination issues.
Some of the complaints seem ridiculous to me while others seem reasonable. It all depends on perspective of the individual, I suppose.
Please read the entire article.
Written by ~J~
