Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis found in contempt, going to jail

[FlightlessDuck]

You really think expecting Sundays off in a 24/7 job is a "reasonable" accommodation?

Yep.

 

[Gracie09]

You really think expecting Sundays off in a 24/7 job is a "reasonable" accommodation?

someone has to be off sundays. They could work Saturdays when others want off. Its not what I see as reasonable, its what the federal court sees as reasonable. In some cases they have said its reasonable in others they have not

 

[PsychoCelloChica]

You really think expecting Sundays off in a 24/7 job is a "reasonable" accommodation?

'Reasonable' has a very specific meaning in these cases. Directly from the EEOC website:
Religious Discrimination & Reasonable Accommodation & Undue Hardship
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.

In EEOC suits like this, the businesses have to prove why the accommodation is unreasonable. If it is a 24/7 business with a large number of employees, accommodating Sunday's off might not be unreasonable. But if it's a small company with only 3 drivers, it may be. OR if the business specifically handles work that must be done on Sundays (they're contracted to handle theatre tours, which generally close on a saturday night and start moving Sunday/Monday to the next city), that would also be an unreasonable accomodation.

 

[Tiggeroo]

This if from the New Testament not the old. You are right, they are not illegal by man's laws, just acts that God has defined as sins. So, by your own admission you have committed a half dozen of these sins and will not have to answer to the United States law, just God.

and that is how it should be. There are things that my faith and values would not allow me to do on a job. I wouldn't expect to keep that job if those things were legal. I have, in fact left a job for just this reason. I didn't call a news crew, make public statements and insist on my way. I am fairly certain there are very few Christians who follow every rule in the bible, new or old testament. I absolutely doubt it if we include the old. We can't have laws for all of it. Civil rule is one thing, religious another. I wouldn't want to enforce my religious laws because I would not want to be forced to follow somebody else's.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Yep.

Boy, I sure don't.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

'Reasonable' has a very specific meaning in these cases. Directly from the EEOC website:
Religious Discrimination & Reasonable Accommodation & Undue Hardship
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.

In EEOC suits like this, the businesses have to prove why the accommodation is unreasonable. If it is a 24/7 business with a large number of employees, accommodating Sunday's off might not be unreasonable. But if it's a small company with only 3 drivers, it may be. OR if the business specifically handles work that must be done on Sundays (they're contracted to handle theatre tours, which generally close on a saturday night and start moving Sunday/Monday to the next city), that would also be an unreasonable accomodation.

I think it pretty clearly infringes on the rights of the other employees to give preferential scheduling to someone.

 

[pryncess527]

I wouldn't want to enforce my religious laws because I would not want to be forced to follow somebody else's.

And this is the heart of the matter.

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. -- Jesus, 30 AD
No one of you is a believer until he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself -- Muhammad, 632 AD
Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful. -- Buddha, 483 BC
That nature alone is good which refrains from doing unto others whatsoever is not good itself. -- Zoroaster, 483 BC
Let no man do to another that what would be repugnant to himself. -- Krishna, 800 BC
What is hateful to you, do not to your fellow man. -- Moses, 1250 BC

 

[Gracie09]

I think it pretty clearly infringes on the rights of the other employees to give preferential scheduling to someone.

I worked in a school where several Orthordox Jews were allowed to leave early on Fridays. It occasionally made my day more difficult but :shrug: they also often covered when I had a holiday I needed off. People get preferential scheduling for a variety of reasons.

 

[PsychoCelloChica]

I think it pretty clearly infringes on the rights of the other employees to give preferential scheduling to someone.

And that's where EEOC panels come in. Each case is heard individually, NOT just ruled on arbitrarily based on a list of 'reasonable' accommodations. If they have 1500 employees and 17 are requesting an accommodation... it may be no problem at all to get coverage. But if they have 3 and 2 are requesting, it's definitely unfair to the last worker. So in that case, it WOULD be unreasonable.

But, if you had 10 employees, 4 were requesting Sundays off, and they sat down and negotiated... that would be a different story. If someone offered me every Friday-Saturday off and volunteered to work on all the major holidays in exchange for me working every Sunday, I may be amenable to that.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

I worked in a school where several Orthordox Jews were allowed to leave early on Fridays. It occasionally made my day more difficult but :shrug: they also often covered when I had a holiday I needed off. People get preferential scheduling for a variety of reasons.

When it's "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours", that can work. I have a hard time picturing it working where one employee gets all 52 Sunday's off, and nobody else does. He'd basically need to shoulder the load on every crap job that came up the other 6 days of the week to make up for it. Even then, it may not be enough to avoid complaints.

 

[Gracie09]

When it's "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours", that can work. I have a hard time picturing it working where one employee gets all 52 Sunday's off, and nobody else does. He'd basically need to shoulder the load on every crap job that came up the other 6 days of the week to make up for it. Even then, it may not be enough to avoid complaints.

it wasn't a tit for tat. We just covered for each other when needed. Its what good cws do. Now at my new position, if I have to go to a thing with my kids, my cws cover and if they have something come up, I cover. No one keeps track of you took off 4 hours last week and now you owe me so you have to cover for me. We just do what needs to be done. My orthodox cw did what needed to be done as did I. No one wanted a medal for it and no one gave anyone the crap jobs because of it.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

it wasn't a tit for tat. We just covered for each other when needed. Its what good cws do. Now at my new position, if I have to go to a thing with my kids, my cws cover and if they have something come up, I cover. No one keeps track of you took off 4 hours last week and now you owe me so you have to cover for me. We just do what needs to be done. My orthodox cw did what needed to be done as did I. No one wanted a medal for it and no one gave anyone the crap jobs because of it.

Nobody keeps score as long as they feel it's fair. As soon as they don't, the score becomes clear REAL quick.

 

[Gracie09]

Nobody keeps score as long as they feel it's fair. As soon as they don't, the score becomes clear REAL quick.

by your estimation, their leaving at 2:30 52 Fridays a year was unfair. By mine, it was no big deal to allow them to do what they needed to do. Just like my Catholic cw would leave early for Ash Wednesday or take Good Friday off. Everyone just did their thing and no one got bent out of shape. I've even had Muslim cw pray multiple times a day. So we scheduled meetings around that.

 

[kay1864]

I'm curious if Dinolounger believes that a public school should allow a Muslim principal to order all teachers to refuse to teach girls.

Or if they think that it would be ok for a Muslim Secretary of State to order all DMV employees to refuse drivers licenses to women.

That is what Kim Davis was doing. She was ordering her employees to abide by her religious beliefs.

I too would be interested in an answer to these questions.

 

[sam_gordon]

I wouldn't want to enforce my religious laws because I would not want to be forced to follow somebody else's.

This is the part that I think MANY people don't think about.

 

[Chocolate Cake]

I'm curious Dinolounger believes that a public school would allow a Muslim principal to order all teachers to refuse to teach girls.

Or if they think that it would be ok for a Muslim Sectretary of State to order all DMV employees to refuse drivers licenses to women.

You will never get an answer. I promise. I have proposed this question several times to various people both on The Dis and IRL. The conversation shuts down after this very excellent question is asked. That is when the person arguing that the Kentucky Lady is right all of a sudden realizes she is wrong.

But they won't admit it. Crickets.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

by your estimation, their leaving at 2:30 52 Fridays a year was unfair. By mine, it was no big deal to allow them to do what they needed to do. Just like my Catholic cw would leave early for Ash Wednesday or take Good Friday off. Everyone just did their thing and no one got bent out of shape. I've even had Muslim cw pray multiple times a day. So we scheduled meetings around that.

Then consider it good fortune that nobody thought it was unfair. Most places, it would take a LOT less to get someone's nose bent out of shape.

 

[Goofy_Disney_Dad]

You will never get an answer. I promise. I have proposed this question several times to various people both on The Dis and IRL. The conversation shuts down after this very excellent question is asked. That is when the person arguing that the Kentucky Lady is right all of a sudden realizes she is wrong.

But they won't admit it. Crickets.

Oh, they'll more than likely be an answer, but it will twist and turn beyond recognition. It'll be an answer though.

 

[Gracie09]

Then consider it good fortune that nobody thought it was unfair. Most places, it would take a LOT less to get someone's nose bent out of shape.

idk no one seemed to care. Maybe its because it was NYC and we are very multicultural (the public schools even have a Muslim holiday off this year). Maybe its because it was a university and we attract faculty, staff, and students from all over the world. Everyone just respected their right to practice their religion. If I had to deal with 2 or 3 more students on a Friday, no big deal. If someone asked about it, I imagine we shrugged and said they're Jewish and that was that.

 

[Tiggeroo]

If employees are kind and willing to support one another in order to observe that is acceptable. In a perfect world that is how it would be handled. Therefore, in this woman's case the right thing to do would be to tell the other workers she was uncomfortable with this, continued to be kind and polite to all, and allowed other employees to do the gay marriages. Not a perfect solution but likely nobody would even know it was going on.