4 ms·

His hairstyle is part of his religious practice. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rastafarianism#Locks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rastafarianism#Locks

VladRussian 16y ago
where is in the law it is said that you must accommodate and bent over to whatever quirk/fantasy my pastor/guru can come up with? Lets say there are 2 guys - one with long hair as personal preference, another - as part of religious practice. The company would fire the number #1 because he doesn't follow the dress code, yet coudlnt' fire #2 because of religion. Is this what the law provides for?
- joshuacc 16y ago
  Yes, this is what the law provides for. See the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's guidelines: http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/religion.html#_Toc203359518 http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/religion.html#_Toc203359518 -- A religious accommodation claim is distinct from a disparate treatment claim, in which the question is whether employees are treated equally. An individual alleging denial of religious accommodation is seeking an adjustment to a neutral work rule that infringes on the employee’s ability to practice his religion. The accommodation requirement is “plainly intended to relieve individuals of the burden of choosing between their jobs and their religious convictions, where such relief will not unduly burden others.”[118]
  - VladRussian 16y ago
    i don't believe my eyes. You're right, and i was wrong. The law does provide for preferential treatment on the basis of religion. Time for non-religious people to stand up and fight against the discrimination Btw, thank you for the information and bearing up with me :)
    - run4yourlives 16y ago
      Um, before you go on a crusade you might want to re-think the consequences: Freedom of religious expression guarantees the right to no have a religion. As in it's just as illegal to only hire Christians than it is to not hire one.
      - VladRussian 16y ago
        you're missing the point. A company can not fire a religious guy over long hair and can fire a non-religious one with the same hair length and dirtiness. That is discrimination, a penalty for being non-religious.
        run4yourlives 16y ago
        Considering you are perfectly free to join the exact same religion and have the same protections, it is not. The fact that your choosing to not join the religion - also your protected right - doesn't come with exactly the same perks is not grounds for discrimination. I consider the fact that I'm not mandated by the government to pray to Mecca three times a day at work a pretty acceptable trade off.
        VladRussian 16y ago
        >Considering you are perfectly free to join the exact same religion and have the same protections thank you, i couldn't say it better myself. Reminds me about Medieval Europe - either join the religion or burn at stake.
        joshuacc 16y ago
        Actually, that doesn't constitute discrimination. Consider the case of a disabled worker in a wheelchair. The employer is required to make reasonable accommodations if the employee is otherwise suited for the job. That doesn't mean that the US discriminates against the non-disabled. Incidentally, the same law protects the atheist with a tattoo of His Noodliness* as a statement of non-belief, as well as the Christian with a tattoo of the Cross. * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster

VladRussian 16y ago

where is in the law it is said that you must accommodate and bent over to whatever quirk/fantasy my pastor/guru can come up with? Lets say there are 2 guys - one with long hair as personal preference, another - as part of religious practice. The company would fire the number #1 because he doesn't follow the dress code, yet coudlnt' fire #2 because of religion. Is this what the law provides for?

joshuacc 16y ago
Yes, this is what the law provides for. See the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's guidelines: http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/religion.html#_Toc203359518 http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/religion.html#_Toc203359518 -- A religious accommodation claim is distinct from a disparate treatment claim, in which the question is whether employees are treated equally. An individual alleging denial of religious accommodation is seeking an adjustment to a neutral work rule that infringes on the employee’s ability to practice his religion. The accommodation requirement is “plainly intended to relieve individuals of the burden of choosing between their jobs and their religious convictions, where such relief will not unduly burden others.”[118]
- VladRussian 16y ago
  i don't believe my eyes. You're right, and i was wrong. The law does provide for preferential treatment on the basis of religion. Time for non-religious people to stand up and fight against the discrimination Btw, thank you for the information and bearing up with me :)
  - run4yourlives 16y ago
    Um, before you go on a crusade you might want to re-think the consequences: Freedom of religious expression guarantees the right to no have a religion. As in it's just as illegal to only hire Christians than it is to not hire one.
    - VladRussian 16y ago
      you're missing the point. A company can not fire a religious guy over long hair and can fire a non-religious one with the same hair length and dirtiness. That is discrimination, a penalty for being non-religious.
      - run4yourlives 16y ago
        Considering you are perfectly free to join the exact same religion and have the same protections, it is not. The fact that your choosing to not join the religion - also your protected right - doesn't come with exactly the same perks is not grounds for discrimination. I consider the fact that I'm not mandated by the government to pray to Mecca three times a day at work a pretty acceptable trade off.
        VladRussian 16y ago
        >Considering you are perfectly free to join the exact same religion and have the same protections thank you, i couldn't say it better myself. Reminds me about Medieval Europe - either join the religion or burn at stake.
      - joshuacc 16y ago
        Actually, that doesn't constitute discrimination. Consider the case of a disabled worker in a wheelchair. The employer is required to make reasonable accommodations if the employee is otherwise suited for the job. That doesn't mean that the US discriminates against the non-disabled. Incidentally, the same law protects the atheist with a tattoo of His Noodliness* as a statement of non-belief, as well as the Christian with a tattoo of the Cross. * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster