Is this really Religious Discrimination?

Question

An owner of a deli in mycity is being sued for religious discrimination after he recently fired a Muslim for not being able to perform the job he was hired for. The owner hired the Muslim, not asking his religious affiliation (because it's illegal) and wasn't aware that Muslims cannot handle pork products. The job, was to cut various lunchmeats, prepare and serve various foods, most of which contained pork products (ham, bacon, sausage) or things like shrimp and crab. The employee refused to handle these products claiming it to be against his religion. The owner even provided him with rubber gloves so his skin wouldnt contact the meats. But, the employee claimed a thin peice of laytex didnt keep out the "uncleanliness"

Now, I am not an authority on Islam but there are quite a few Muslims here that own delis and handle pork products even if they dont eat it. Was this employee wrong or was the owner wrong for fiering him? How do you think the court will rule?

Answer 1

You know what? I am a psychology major, I am also a vegetarian. Part of my minors in Chemistry and Biology require me to dissect little bunnies...I dissect them, regardless of how it turns my stomach, because I want the grade, and I want the knowledge. You can't pick and chose your life...I think meat products are disgusting, but I don't judge others because they prefer to eat it. Judging them would make me a lesser person.

The Muslim should have found another job, or worn 5 pairs of gloves.

Answer 2

Whatever the law says, if the employee can't perform an essential function of his job, even with reasonable accomodation, then the employer should not be forced to pay him. I can hardly believe that the muslim employee did not know he would be handling pork products while working in a deli. The fact that he applied for the job anyway, and then failed to disclose his inability or refusal to handle pork products during the hiring interview process would seem to indicate that the employee is fishing for a lawsuit.

Answer 3

DUh, why would anyone who did not beleive in pork or eat meat even want a job at a DELI of all places?! I think they should favor the deli just because this person never should have applied here in the first place if they really knew they would not be able to do half of what is expected from them. I think they are trying to take advantage of the system here. They could just as easily go to another deli and do the same thing over and over and over again! If you know you arent cut out for the whole job, then dont APPLY for it in the first place. Maybe the boss can give this person cleaning and cashier duties instead? I guess it will all come down to what the job description says when it goes to court.

Answer 4

Discrimination has 2 meanings, and that i imagine our project is that we are eliminating both one among them! dis·crim·i·na·tion Noun: a million.The unjust or prejudicial remedy of diverse kinds of people or issues, esp. on the grounds of race, age, or sex. 2.popularity and understanding of the version between one ingredient and yet another. i imagine we've fairly a lot were given rid of the first. i imagine the concern is that for the duration of society's zeal to make each person be considered as equivalent, it truly is going too a techniques and attempting to make each person be considered as similar - we are honestly taking away the second one style of discrimination besides. Society has realized to well known how we are all an identical. Now it has to commence remembering lower back the techniques in which we are diverse. even as a Christians moral experience received't let them do some thing at artwork, the concern isn't that there is religious discrimination - the concern is that there is an total lack of discrimination, an utter lack of ability on the portion of the regulation to 'recognize and understand the version between one ingredient and yet another', between a Christian and a non-Christian.

Answer 5

I don't know about how the court would rule. I think that the shop owner should have described the job exactly for all candidates. Now, if he did and that muslim took the job, then he has to do it as it is. If the owner lied before he started the job, that's a different story. That's exactly like a bar tender complaining that he has to deal with alcohol on his job.

Answer 6

I'm not sure how the court would rule. In application processes I've gone through, there is usually a question that asks if there is anything that would prevent me from doing this job properly. I would argue on this point if I were the owner (assuming the application did ask for that) that the employee did not say anything on that line (and therefore lied or misrepresented himself on his application).

Then if I got that argument and I was the judge in the case, I would side with the owner. But it does require that that question was asked and not answered correctly.

Answer 7

Sounds to me like the employee did this on purpose so he could turn around and sue the Deli owner.

Why else would someone take a job that they can't preform and are religiously opposed to.

Answer 8

I can understand making a few changes here and there to accomodate someone, but to go in knowing you won't touch pork to work at a deli.. hello! He should not have applied for that job and yes he should have been fired.

Answer 9

The lawsuit will not fly!! I hope the owner turn around and filed his own lawsuit!! Loss of business let them wake up and learn it's a two way street in life!! Fire needs to be fought with Fire!!! IF they can't do the job then they need not apply!!!

Answer 10

If this is not thrown out of court because of frivolity,The store owner should win,and also be paid any costs he spent defending himself.