Woman fired for eating BLT at work

[Az]

Forcing someone to do something they don't want to do is not the same thing as prohibiting something they may want to do.

That's libertarian thinking.

What if she wanted to wear a t-shirt that had racial slurs on it to work? Would they have no right to prohibit that?

Irrelevant. Those should be banned anyway.

[JohnT]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

A private entity has the right to set its own policies, so long as the policy doesn't infringe on the religious practice of an employee.

Yep. I think the peanut analogy brought up earlier is a good one. If most of the people there believe pork is unclean, they don't want it in their area and have the right to have it around them, just like people allergic to peanuts can have them not in their area.

The difference between this case and peanut allergy cases are the fact that peanut allergies are a health issue, one not easily avoided by the dictum of "if you don't like it, don't eat it."

[lord of the mark]

the rule is "employment at will" - as long as she wasnt fired on account of race,religion or gender (or age under certain circumstances) wasnt fired cause of a disability, or to keep her from collecting a pension, or from joining or organizing a union, shes probably NOT gonna win a lawsuit.

On the other hand, depending on the circumstances (was she warned, what was the rationale, why didnt they have a contract to this effect etc) this COULD result in some fairly negative publicity for this company.

It is possible to be inequitable within the law, and the publicity game is not unknown with this sort of thing.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


There is a quantum difference between asking sexual favors as part of employment (which would be prostitution, which is illegal) and banning the flesh of a wonder, magical animal. There is no law mandating the consumption of pork products, and no relgion requires it.

Thought those people from the "other white meat" campaign should get in touch with this woman.

Does Islam consider the Pig a magical animal? Traditional Judaism doesnt, AFAIK. Its banned cause God said so, without going into his motives, for the most part. Nothing magical about them at all.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Azazel

Forcing someone to do something they don't want to do is not the same thing as prohibiting something they may want to do.

That's libertarian thinking.

I don't care what you call it, it's the way it is. They aren't the same thing.

What if she wanted to wear a t-shirt that had racial slurs on it to work? Would they have no right to prohibit that?

Irrelevant. Those should be banned anyway.

In public? I don't think so. As revolting as they are, people have a right to express such ideas.

[JohnT]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Does Islam consider the Pig a magical animal? Traditional Judaism doesnt, AFAIK. Its banned cause God said so, without going into his motives, for the most part. Nothing magical about them at all.

The "wonderful, magical animal" is a Simpsons quote.

[Thorn]

Gives me an idea of a torture to send to the US central intelligence agency for them to interrogate terrorists..... bathed in pig blood and forced to eat pork... heh.

[GePap]

Originally posted by JohnT


The "wonderful, magical animal" is a Simpsons quote.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
the rule is "employment at will" - as long as she wasnt fired on account of race,religion or gender (or age under certain circumstances) wasnt fired cause of a disability, or to keep her from collecting a pension, or from joining or organizing a union, shes probably NOT gonna win a lawsuit.

But that's why her lawyers are presenting it as a case of religious discrimination.

Of course, the organization could just as easily claim it's a health or working environment issue, not a religious one. My firm doesn't allow people to have flowers kept at their desks because the smell and pollen can bother others. Considering the number of employees at this organization that would be bothered by the presence of pork, they could just say it was their comfort.

It would have been nice, I suppose, if the organization had tried to accomodate her by perhaps designating some empty room or closet as her little space to eat pork all she wanted away from the rest of the employees, but they are under no obligation to do so. And I doubt she'd like that option anyway.

[KrazyHorse]

This is odd. I can't decide.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
This is odd. I can't decide.

yeah, a situation where conservatives are gathering round an expansive view of a fired employees rights to sue, and liberals are going to bat for employment at will, and its confused by the background issues that employer imposing of religious rules on employees is vaguely illiberal (at least if they didnt try to find a compromise, like BG discussed) and a sense that the sensitivity about MUSLIMS doing so is inspired by a certain illiberalism.

yeah, I'll stand aside and watch everyone else squirm.

[Imran Siddiqui]

And I doubt she'd like that option anyway.

Same here. I mean after the first warning she could just not eat pork, but decided to anyway, so I doubt she'd taken kindly to being told she had to eat pork in another room somewhere.

[Ramo]

The firing is definitely wrong, but it isn't illegal.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


yeah, a situation where conservatives are gathering round an expansive view of a fired employees rights to sue, and liberals are going to bat for employment at will, and its confused by the background issues that employer imposing of religious rules on employees is vaguely illiberal (at least if they didnt try to find a compromise, like BG discussed) and a sense that the sensitivity about MUSLIMS doing so is inspired by a certain illiberalism.

yeah, I'll stand aside and watch everyone else squirm.

I don't believe that employers should have the right to fire at will

But behaviour on company grounds is subject to certain restrictions

And she was warned once already

And the management's policy may have a lot to do with the happiness of the company's other employees

So I'm conflicted

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

And I doubt she'd like that option anyway.

Same here. I mean after the first warning she could just not eat pork, but decided to anyway, so I doubt she'd taken kindly to being told she had to eat pork in another room somewhere.

she might not like that, but at least it would look more reasonable. Im not familiar with muslim dietary law, but I know that bringing non kosher meat into a kosher dining facility can be a problem for the kashrut status of said facility. However I cant imagine a commercial institution run by observant jews that didnt make some accomodation for the eating of non-kosher food. Except during Passover of course, when the jewish law is much stricter, but then ALL outside food would probably be banned (as it is at my Synagogue, for example)