Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-31-2015, 08:26 AM
 
Location: Home is Where You Park It
23,856 posts, read 13,683,412 times
Reputation: 15481

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roaddog View Post
a little double standard.
Nope.

The EEOC doesn't care if the people refusing to transport alcohol are muslims or seventh day adventists.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-31-2015, 08:44 AM
 
Location: California
11,466 posts, read 19,320,634 times
Reputation: 12713
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqueg View Post
Nope.

The EEOC doesn't care if the people refusing to transport alcohol are muslims or seventh day adventists.
Yep double standard
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-31-2015, 09:12 AM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
22,152 posts, read 19,393,003 times
Reputation: 5284
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeywrenching View Post
more like muslim vs christian.

be muslim at a trucking company and you get money for not doing your job of delivering alcohol because of your religous views.

but if you are christian, and you do not want to serve homosexual couples on their wedding day you get fined, threatened with jail, or lose your business, then that is just fine.

double standards for muslims and christians.
There is something in the law called reasonable accomidation. I don't know enough about this speciifc case, but it seems like they were asking for a reasonable accomidation, by hauling truckloads not containing alcohol. In the case of the bakery,not doing it themselves, but having someone else do it for them would be a reasonble accomidation. but they never made that offer. Kim Davis's case was a bit different considring she was a public employee and refused to follow the law. Not only that, but she could have also gone the reasonable accomidation route by giving them job to someone else in her office. Not only did she not do that, but she flat out refused to allow her deputy clerks from issuing the licenses. That is really why she was held in contempt, and she was released when she agreed to abide by the reasonable accomidation, not do it herselff, but not innterfere with the clerks from doing so.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-31-2015, 09:12 AM
 
Location: Newport Beach, California
39,034 posts, read 27,456,929 times
Reputation: 15950
1. The law requires an employer or other covered entity to reasonably accommodate an employee's religious beliefs or practices, unless doing so would cause more than a minimal burden on the operations of the employer's business. This means an employer may be required to make reasonable adjustments to the work environment that will allow an employee to practice his or her religion.

Examples of some common religious accommodations include flexible scheduling, voluntary shift substitutions or swaps, job reassignments, and modifications to workplace policies or practices.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In my humble opinion, accommodating this employee's religious beliefs would cause more than a minimal burden on the operations of the employer's business.

The employer did not fire the two Muslims because of their religious belief, let's not get too excited about this. They were fired because they couldn't do the job.

2. According to LAW, An employer does not have to accommodate an employee's religious beliefs or practices if doing so would cause undue hardship to the employer. 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.


-----------------------------------------------------------

again, if you cannot do the job, maybe you should seek other employment opportunities. You were FIRED because you couldn't do the job. Has nothing to do with your religion. As a employer, the company does not have to accommodate an employee's religious beliefs or practices if doing so would cause undue hardship to the employer.

3. Wrongful termination cases are civil lawsuits. If you file a civil wrongful termination lawsuit, you (the plaintiff) are asking the court to order your former employer (the defendant) to pay money to compensate you for losses caused by the termination.

What earnings have you lost because you were fired? This element of damages includes the pay you would have received if your employer had not fired you, as well as any earned and unpaid wages, overtime, or other compensation the employer has withheld.

Damages in a Wrongful Termination Case | Nolo.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Doubt the damage is worth $240,000

This case is not the same as the Muslim woman vs Abercrombie case.

The trucking company needs a better lawyer. Not sure this will change the outcome, but this does not change the fact that the trucking company did not discriminate against them because their religious belief. They have a business to run.

The standard is "a reasonable accommodation." In the case of the Muslim truck drivers, the company had often allowed drivers to trade loads - a reasonable solution - but apparently a new dispatcher decided to enforce a no-trade policy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-31-2015, 09:14 AM
 
Location: Newport Beach, California
39,034 posts, read 27,456,929 times
Reputation: 15950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
There is something in the law called reasonable accomidation..
yes, there is.

unless doing so would cause more than a minimal burden on the operations of the employer's business.

looks like he who has the better lawyer would win in this case.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-31-2015, 09:18 AM
 
1,615 posts, read 1,635,160 times
Reputation: 2714
What would be interesting to know is were they legal and citizens? This country seems to be looking like a free for all for anyone who makes in over the border.Its funny how quickly people become Americanised and pick up our bad habits just likes its a business suing for something. No education needed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-31-2015, 09:21 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,167,958 times
Reputation: 5239
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
Not really. There was the case of the Muslim cab drivers where they were told that they would have to pick up passengers with dogs or alcohol or lose their licenses.
The issue in the truck driver case is that they company said that they could have easily shifted the Muslim drivers to other deliveries. If the bakeries had said that I personally won't make your cake, but someone in the store will, then there wouldn't be a problem, the problem was complete refusal of the service period.

Different cases different outcomes.


no, it is the same. both cases were because of their religous views and because muslims are in a protected class, they are given a free pass.

either make it the same for both or give both a free pass.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-31-2015, 09:24 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,167,958 times
Reputation: 5239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northeastah View Post
You know, you're absolutely right. It IS a double standard. That fat ugly bigot Kim Davis should have been fired too.


i was not talking about kim davis, but yes, since she was a public official, she should have been fired for not doing her job.

I was talking about the christians that owned a bakery not wanting to make a cake for a homosexual wedding.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-31-2015, 09:27 AM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
22,152 posts, read 19,393,003 times
Reputation: 5284
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilyflower3191981 View Post
yes, there is.

unless doing so would cause more than a minimal burden on the operations of the employer's business.

looks like he who has the better lawyer would win in this case.
True, and as I mentioned I do not know enough about this speciic case iff it meets the burden criteria for a reasonable accomidation. With that being said the company did admit liability. Now whether that means that their lawyer simply sucked, they admitted something along the lines of yeah it wouldn't have been much of an issue to have them deliver something else, or perhaps both I really don't know, but that is important to note in this case as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-31-2015, 09:28 AM
 
Location: Newport Beach, California
39,034 posts, read 27,456,929 times
Reputation: 15950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
True, and as I mentioned I do not know enough about this speciic case iff it meets the burden criteria for a reasonable accomidation. With that being said the company did admit liability. Now whether that means that their lawyer simply sucked, they admitted something along the lines of yeah it wouldn't have been much of an issue to have them deliver something else, or perhaps both I really don't know, but that is important to note in this case as well.
agreed,

I would also argue that in civil cases like this, $240,000 damage seems excessive. This element of damages includes the pay you would have received if your employer had not fired you, as well as any earned and unpaid wages, overtime, or other compensation the employer has withheld. Doubt they lost $240,000 for losing this job.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


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

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top