Last edited Fri Jan 26, 2018, 01:07 PM - Edit history (2)

If wearing the pants is one of her job duties, and was unwilling or unable -- regardless of the reason -- she shouldn't have been hired because she wasn't qualified for the job as someone who WAS willing and able to wear the pants. Instead, Burger King said she could wear a skirt, and then reneged.

If your religious beliefs get in the way of doing a job, get another job.


rocktivity

That statement, with nothing more, violates the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Last edited Sat Jun 14, 2014, 09:37 PM - Edit history (1)

She wasn't as qualified for the job as someone willing to wear the pants, regardless of her reasons why.


rocktivity

The former is random; the latter is law.

I doubt her skirt meets Biblical standards as far the prohibitions within on mixing certain fabrics.

And there are plenty of even more fundamentalist fundies who would think her skirt is sinful.

What a bunch of maroons!

I could say my religion says that I must wear polka-dotted kilts. When I got fired, I could whine "Religious Discrimination!" and get my job back.

If you think it's different because she asked if she could wear skirts beforehand - that doesn't wash either. How was the question asked? What are the particulars of the skirt? Did she mumble it under her breath? Many details missing.

I wouldn't trust a person whining about "religious discrimination" one inch - because in many religions, Xtianity included, it is considered "OK" to lie as long as you get "forgiven" for the lie later (by praying, AKA mumbling to yourself).

associated with wearing a skirt, or do they just want everyone to look alike? If the former, whoever told her she could wear it needs straightening out. If the latter, they're being jerks.

Although, there might be a problem at the deep fryer if she worked there.

As usual, details matter.

That said, she should not have been fired. There should be more workplace regulations that establish employee rights to refuse corporate idiocy.

With all the kids working there you'd just about have to have them. And dressing people alike actually does help foster a sense of team spirit and the like. But it ain't the army and the shirt with any old black pants, or skirt, should be enough.

You're right, there's no way for employees to check bad corporate attitude.

By for example firing a women for wearing a skirt her religion demands she wear or by giving discounts to customers who present Church bulletins.

Prudhomme's discount does not implicate the 1964 Civil Rights Act. For reasons that have been voluminously discusssed.

BTW, you'll be happy to know its business is thriving.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/08/prudhommes_lost_cajun_kitchen.html

I prefer to spend my time knowing and using the right tools to fight with.

That's why I try to know what the laws are.