U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 07-03-2015, 12:23 AM
 
18,890 posts, read 7,353,404 times
Reputation: 8074

Advertisements

Clerk employees quit rather than issue gay marriage licenses

Here are clerks I respect not due to agreeing necessarily with their views, but by their acknowledgement that this was the ethical path to take..unless they complied with the SCOTUS ruling.

 
Old 07-03-2015, 12:25 AM
 
Location: San Francisco, CA
13,989 posts, read 10,932,935 times
Reputation: 12774
Good for them. Wish them all the best. At least they didn't try to argue that they should remain in a job whose duties they do not wish to fulfill.
 
Old 07-03-2015, 12:25 AM
 
18,890 posts, read 7,353,404 times
Reputation: 8074
Amen. I firmly support Employment At Will.
 
Old 07-03-2015, 12:31 AM
 
Location: Jewel Lake (Sagle) Idaho
27,575 posts, read 17,658,875 times
Reputation: 15653
Shouldn't the employer provide for "reasonable accommodation"?
 
Old 07-03-2015, 12:31 AM
 
Location: Southern California
15,087 posts, read 17,572,046 times
Reputation: 10299
LOL...let them quit. And it's not like they are going to find another County Clerk job where they don't have to issue marriage licenses to gay people because gay marriage is legal throughout the land.

[welcome to the unemployment line]
 
Old 07-03-2015, 12:32 AM
 
18,890 posts, read 7,353,404 times
Reputation: 8074
As long as they do not get paid, nor get unemployment insurance for a voluntary quit, I have no qualms about their actions.
 
Old 07-03-2015, 12:37 AM
 
Location: Jewel Lake (Sagle) Idaho
27,575 posts, read 17,658,875 times
Reputation: 15653
U.S. Department of Labor -- Civil Rights Center: Internal Statutes & Regulations: Religious Discrimination and Accommodation

Quote:
Religious Accommodation
Title VII requires federal agencies, upon notice of a request, to reasonably accommodate employees whose sincerely held religious beliefs, practices or observances conflict with work requirements, unless the accommodation would create an undue hardship.
What is a religious accommodation?
A religious accommodation is any adjustment to the work environment that will allow an employee or applicant to practice his or her religion. The need for religious accommodation may arise where an individual's religious beliefs, observances or practices conflict with a specific task or requirement of the position or an application process. Accommodation requests often relate to work schedules, dress and grooming, or religious expression in the workplace. If it would not pose an undue hardship, the employer must grant the accommodation.
What is an undue hardship?
An agency may justify a refusal to accommodate an individual's religious beliefs or practices if the agency can demonstrate that the accommodation would cause an undue hardship. An accommodation may cause undue hardship if it is costly, compromises workplace safety, decreases workplace efficiency, infringes on the rights of other employees, or requires other employees to do more than their share of potentially hazardous or burdensome work. Undue hardship also may be shown if the request for an accommodation violates the terms of a collective bargaining agreement or job rights established through a seniority system. Undue hardship based on cost requires that the agency show more than a de minimis (minimal impact upon the agency's business) cost to the agency. The hardship upon the agency must be genuine and cannot be merely speculative.
How does a religious accommodation process work?
In requesting an accommodation, an employee or applicant is not required to use "magic words" (such as indicating that he or she is seeking "an accommodation"). However, an employee or applicant must make the agency aware of the need for an accommodation based on a conflict between the individual's religious belief or practice and their work duties or the agency's application process. The request for an accommodation may trigger an interactive process, particularly if the employer reasonably needs more information, between the responsible management official and the individual making the request to discuss the request and assess available options. Examples of religious accommodations may include: scheduling changes (arrivals, departures, floating/optional holidays, flexible work breaks and any other scheduling changes); voluntary shift substitutions and/or swaps; job reassignments, such as changes of position tasks and lateral transfers; and modifications to workplace practices, policies and procedures. An accommodation may also involve designating an unused or private location in the workplace where a religious observance or practice can occur if it is disrupting other workers. The need for accommodations may also apply to such things as dress or grooming practices that an employee has for religious reasons. These might include, for example, wearing particular head coverings or other religious dress (such as a Jewish yarmulke or a Muslim headscarf), or wearing certain hairstyles or facial hair (such as Rastafarian dreadlocks or Sikh uncut hair and beard). It also includes an employee's observance of a religious prohibition against wearing certain garments (such as pants or miniskirts).
Isn't the function of the EEOC to provide for different religious beliefs and prevent discrimination in the workplace?
 
Old 07-03-2015, 12:40 AM
 
18,890 posts, read 7,353,404 times
Reputation: 8074
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake View Post

Isn't the function of the EEOC to provide for different religious beliefs and prevent discrimination in the workplace?
Not when others legal rights are violated.

Surely, these clerks can find jobs where their views and the customer's rights are both upheld.

They did the right thing for all.
 
Old 07-03-2015, 12:49 AM
 
Location: Purgatory
6,322 posts, read 4,763,972 times
Reputation: 9765
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake View Post
Shouldn't the employer provide for "reasonable accommodation"?
Homophobia is not a disability.

As for the religious exemption, all any company ever has to say, and this goes for the disabled as well is UNDUE HARDSHIP.

Disabled people have lost at this "game" for decades. Now the religious may have to start playing too.

It would be great if both groups could get together and work on this. With the law above as it stands, the game is ALWAYS RIGGED IN THE EMPLOYER'S/CORPORATION'S FAVOR.

Last edited by Utopian Slums; 07-03-2015 at 12:57 AM..
 
Old 07-03-2015, 12:54 AM
 
32,474 posts, read 26,356,312 times
Reputation: 19121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopian Slums View Post
Homophobia is not a disability.
maybe not, but freedom of religion is a right guaranteed by the constitution, where as marriage is NOT a right.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top