Annoying News: It's a classic case of religious discrimination.
It's not. Not unless you mean 'classic' in the same way that Plan 9 From Outer Space is a classic. "Did you ever sign to or agree to anything that said I will not eat pork?"
"Never. When I got hired there, they said we don't care what religion you are."
(Actual genuine quote ends)
"But did they say they don't care what smelly substances you bring into the workplace?"
"But... religion!"
"I didn't ask you about religion, I asked you about pork, which is not a religion. Shut up you stupid person." Workplaces are allowed to have arbitrary rules that don't discriminate against a religion. "You must wear a suit" is an arbitrary rule. "You must not eat pork in the lunchroom" is an arbitrary rule. Religion could validly be kept out of the argument entirely, using this analogy, unless the woman's religion says that she must eat pork, which it doesn't. They knew she was catholic; they fired her for eating pork. That's not religious discrimination. She was warned about a behaviour, she repeated the offending behaviour, she was fired. That's normal company activity.
Having looked at it from a non-religious angle, how about looking at it from a religious angle - the workplace is legally obliged to not discriminate based on religious, and, to some degree, to accommodate the religions of its employees. The only way a workplace can accommodate the religions of its employees is if everyone who works there accommodates the religions of the employees. The woman was offending the religions of other employees by eating pork in the lunchroom, and was asked to desist. She did so again, and was fired. The workplace was obliged to do so, in order to keep the workplace comfortable for those employees who are Islamic. It would be religious discrimination against the woman if her religion mandated that she must eat pork in the workplace lunchroom, but it doesn't.
"They're making it seem that if you don't follow a certain set of religious practices and beliefs then you're going to be terminated and that's wrong."
Yes indeed that statement is wrong, Mr Nejame. They are not making it seem that you have to follow a set of religious practices. They are making it seem like you have to not offend the other people you work with. Similarly, if you did a huge steaming crap in the lunchroom, you would be reprimanded for it. If you did it again, you would be fired for it. Similarly, there is nothing in the contract that says "I will not do a huge steaming crap in the lunchroom". Similarly, it's not fucking religious discrimination. And even if it were, it most certainly isn't a "classic case".
[14:18]
|