8 ms·

The article says he claims he was fired based on his religion, but it doesn't sound like it was related to religion. It just so happened it was a religious holi

The article says he claims he was fired based on his religion, but it doesn't sound like it was related to religion. It just so happened it was a religious holiday. Maybe there is more to the story, but it sounds like he could just as well have been golfing. Either way, Yelp sounds absolutely toxic if they required him to be available like that. Expecting anyone to be available 24/7/365 is absurd. Set up an on-call rotation. Establish escalation chains. Designate backups. These are basic procedures. If this guy was so critical that there was no-one else in the company that could do whatever it was, hire someone else.

reaperducer 8y ago
it doesn't sound like it was related to religion "Lee also told Weathers, who is pursuing a degree in ministry leadership and has a severely autistic son, that he didn’t care about Weathers’ religious holidays or children, the suit claimed."
- Spivak 8y ago
  That's how you wind up with zero sympathy from a potential jury.
  - zbentley 8y ago
    Workplace discrimination suits are vanishingly unlikely to end up before any sort of jury, at least in the US.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - robbrown451 8y ago
      But what a jury would do can still be relevant.
- akerl_ 8y ago
  Discrimination would be saying “I’m making you work this weekend because it’s a religious holiday for you”. Saying “I don’t care about your religion and personal circumstances, I demand you work or ill fire you” isn’t discriminating, it’s just shitty.
  - reaperducer 8y ago
    Neither of us are lawyers, but it's my understanding that the law is that an employer must made accommodation for religious services. Several people my wife works with are deliberately scheduled around their weekly religious obligations. Perhaps an actual lawyer on HN can chime in, or post a helpful link.
    - dragonwriter 8y ago
      > Neither of us are lawyers, but it's my understanding that the law is that an employer must made accommodation for religious services. Employers must, on request, make reasonable accommodation (one which does not impose an “undue hardship”) for religious practices. [0] Nothing in the narrative provided (which comes from the lawsuit filed by the fired manager) seems to indicate that an advance request for an accommodation was made. An employer can fire you for failing to perform job duties due to a religious observance for which you did not ask for an accommodation, as I understand it. [0] https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/wysk/workplace_religious_accommodation.cfm https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/wysk/workplace_religious_...
  - Aloha 8y ago
    No, discrimination isnt just changing the norms for an employee because its a religious holiday, its about not respecting that employees right to worship as their religion calls them to.
    - elgenie 8y ago
      Reasonable accommodations can be made, but if availability during those times is a core job duty (known beforehand), then the firing is eminently justified. If your religion says you can't handle pork and you take a job at a pig slaughterhouse, the employer should not be obliged to pay you to do nothing.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- elgenie 8y ago
  "I don't care about your religious holidays or children" in this case likely should be interpreted to mean "your exact reason for not doing your job doesn't matter".
  - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
    It may mean that to the employer. To the employee, it means "I'm a psychopath with zero human empathy." And to the jury, it probably means "You lose; pay the man."
jhall1468 8y ago
I agree with you. That said, this case is likely just forcing a payout. While Yelp would be unlikely to lose the case, even if he did say all the crap the former employee claimed, they certainly don't want this as national news for several months while it makes its way through the courts.
harimau777 8y ago
Companies have an obligation to make reasonable accommodations of employee's religions. Not expecting them to be available during major religious holidays is well within the bounds of reasonable accommodations. In addition, unless there is more to the story, it doesn't seem believable that someone acting in good faith wouldn't be able to work something out; I mean Christianity only has two major holidays. This is excluding extreme cases like if someone claimed that their religion has dozens of major holidays a year. To my knowledge, no major religion does that.
- felipemnoa 8y ago
  >>This is excluding extreme cases like if someone claimed that their religion has dozens of major holidays a year. To my knowledge, no major religion does that.<< Let me speak to you about the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster... https://pastafarians.org.au/pastafarianism/holidays/ https://pastafarians.org.au/pastafarianism/holidays/
  - godelski 8y ago
    glob glob (happy Talk Like a Goldfish Day)
- JBReefer 8y ago
  Judaism does that, but most of my Jewish coworkers have just taken PTO for the minor ones. Purim is fun but no one expects off for it!
- threatofrain 8y ago
  I hate to sound like whining, but I feel jealous and cheated that people with professed religions get special benefits. It's not as though people who don't profess their religions, or those without specific religious affiliation don't have inner needs of their own which they also need time to tend to. I feel like there should be an "average" compromise and everyone should get the benefit. That way there is no awkward incentive in any direction.
  - 8y ago
mindslight 8y ago
Yes, the real problem is that Yelp was attempting to prohibit the guy from doing anything else outside of work without even paying him for it! Unfortunately this is no longer even illegal, as overtime laws were destroyed through the "exempt" loophole. So he is (we are) left grasping at straws for something specific that was illegal to have prohibited rather than expecting congress would actually do anything for workers and address the general problem.
phonon 8y ago
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) https://www.workplacefairness.org/religious-discrimination https://www.workplacefairness.org/religious-discrimination 10. Can my employer prevent me from taking off on religious holidays or my day of worship? You should start by letting your employer know that there is a conflict between your religious observances and your work schedule. When your employer's workplace policies interfere with your religious practices, you can ask for what is called a "reasonable accommodation": a change in a workplace rule or policy which would allow you to engage in a religious practice without conflicting with your work obligations. Your employer is required to provide you with such an accommodation unless it would impose an "undue hardship" on the employer's business, defined as an accommodation that is too costly or difficult to provide. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) who oversees these types of claims, has interpreted an undue hardship to mean anything more than regular administrative costs, anything that reduces workplace efficiency or impairs workplace safety, anything infringing on other employees' job rights or causes those said employees' to carry the accommodated employee's share of burdensome work, or if the proposed accommodation conflicts with another law or regulation. Thus, employers are obligated to try in good faith to resolve the religious conflict, or identify an actual monetary or administrative expense. It is important for you to work closely with your employer to find an appropriate accommodation. If the accommodation would impose a burden on the employer that cannot be resolved, the employer is not required to allow the accommodation. Many accommodations, however, do not require any monetary or administrative burdens. Whether your employer can accommodate your religious practices will depend upon the nature of the work and the workplace. Usually, your employer can allow you to use lunch or other break times for religious prayer. If you require additional time for prayer, your employer can require you to make up the time. Employers must give time off for the Sabbath or holy days except in an emergency, unless the employee works in key health and safety occupations or the employee's presence is critical to the company on any given day. This time off does not have to be paid, however. If employees don't come to work, employers may give them leave without pay, may require the amount of time to be made up, or may allow the employee to charge the time against any other leave with pay, except sick pay.
- time0ut 8y ago
  Thank you. Would this then hinge on whether or not he discussed it with them before hand? I'm obviously not a lawyer.
mithr 8y ago
It's not that he was fired directly "because he was religious", exactly; it's about whether Yelp discriminated against him by violating the following (from https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/religion.cfm https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/religion.cfm): > The law requires an employer or other covered entity to reasonably accommodate an employee's religious beliefs or practices, unless doing so would cause more than a minimal burden on the operations of the employer's business. This means an employer may be required to make reasonable adjustments to the work environment that will allow an employee to practice his or her religion. IANAL, but I believe there is a difference between a person being unavailable due to golfing vs. due to a religious belief, since a person's religious belief is a protected category whereas their sporting activities are not. If it was company policy to shave one's head, but an employee's religion prohibited them from doing so, the company would be discriminating against that person even if they required everyone to shave their heads (caveat: assuming a shaved head was not actually important to the employer's business). Otherwise, a company could "uniformly" apply a rule that "just so happens" to only apply to a specific religion (or gender, or any other protected category), and use that to effectively ban those who fall under that category. Now, in this specific case, I don't know if he'll be able to show that supporting his beliefs wouldn't have caused Yelp "more than a minimal burden", but I think that's what he's going after.
- time0ut 8y ago
  Ya that makes sense. I wasn't thinking of it that way.
johnminter 8y ago
I could understand a coverage rotation, but having to be available 24/7/365 is basically being treated as a slave. He might not win his case - and unless his attorney is working on a percentage of a win - he should get a second opinion. For his own health and well being as a family, he needs to find new employment. Find a job with a more reasonable work/life balance and adapt lifestyle choices to fit the budget. I know a chaplain that has been at the bedside of many people during their final hours. None ever thought that they should have spent more time at the office.
mannykannot 8y ago
As it happens, this particular incident does appear to have a religious-observance aspect. It is also the case, however, that religious observances have specific protections in US law (stemming from the 1st. Amendment), making this aspect of the incident particularly suitable for making a case against the employer. If this is so, then, regardless of whether one is particularly religious, one should reflect on the implication that demanding 24/7/375 fealty is not regarded, prima facie, as abuse.
- bdhess 8y ago
  The first amendment has nothing to say about private discrimination on the basis of religion.
  - mannykannot 8y ago
    I see what you mean - it seems to be title VII of the Civil Rights Act that is relevant here - or did you have some other point in mind?
thirdsun 8y ago
My first thought as well. The religious aspect of the issue should be irrelevant. Expecting your employees to be available at all times is absurd regardless of belief and shouldn't need any religious defence.

reaperducer 8y ago

it doesn't sound like it was related to religion "Lee also told Weathers, who is pursuing a degree in ministry leadership and has a severely autistic son, that he didn’t care about Weathers’ religious holidays or children, the suit claimed."

Spivak 8y ago
That's how you wind up with zero sympathy from a potential jury.
- zbentley 8y ago
  Workplace discrimination suits are vanishingly unlikely to end up before any sort of jury, at least in the US.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - robbrown451 8y ago
    But what a jury would do can still be relevant.
akerl_ 8y ago
Discrimination would be saying “I’m making you work this weekend because it’s a religious holiday for you”. Saying “I don’t care about your religion and personal circumstances, I demand you work or ill fire you” isn’t discriminating, it’s just shitty.
- reaperducer 8y ago
  Neither of us are lawyers, but it's my understanding that the law is that an employer must made accommodation for religious services. Several people my wife works with are deliberately scheduled around their weekly religious obligations. Perhaps an actual lawyer on HN can chime in, or post a helpful link.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > Neither of us are lawyers, but it's my understanding that the law is that an employer must made accommodation for religious services. Employers must, on request, make reasonable accommodation (one which does not impose an “undue hardship”) for religious practices. [0] Nothing in the narrative provided (which comes from the lawsuit filed by the fired manager) seems to indicate that an advance request for an accommodation was made. An employer can fire you for failing to perform job duties due to a religious observance for which you did not ask for an accommodation, as I understand it. [0] https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/wysk/workplace_religious_accommodation.cfm https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/wysk/workplace_religious_...
- Aloha 8y ago
  No, discrimination isnt just changing the norms for an employee because its a religious holiday, its about not respecting that employees right to worship as their religion calls them to.
  - elgenie 8y ago
    Reasonable accommodations can be made, but if availability during those times is a core job duty (known beforehand), then the firing is eminently justified. If your religion says you can't handle pork and you take a job at a pig slaughterhouse, the employer should not be obliged to pay you to do nothing.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
elgenie 8y ago
"I don't care about your religious holidays or children" in this case likely should be interpreted to mean "your exact reason for not doing your job doesn't matter".
- AnimalMuppet 8y ago
  It may mean that to the employer. To the employee, it means "I'm a psychopath with zero human empathy." And to the jury, it probably means "You lose; pay the man."

jhall1468 8y ago

I agree with you. That said, this case is likely just forcing a payout. While Yelp would be unlikely to lose the case, even if he did say all the crap the former employee claimed, they certainly don't want this as national news for several months while it makes its way through the courts.

harimau777 8y ago

Companies have an obligation to make reasonable accommodations of employee's religions. Not expecting them to be available during major religious holidays is well within the bounds of reasonable accommodations. In addition, unless there is more to the story, it doesn't seem believable that someone acting in good faith wouldn't be able to work something out; I mean Christianity only has two major holidays. This is excluding extreme cases like if someone claimed that their religion has dozens of major holidays a year. To my knowledge, no major religion does that.

felipemnoa 8y ago
>>This is excluding extreme cases like if someone claimed that their religion has dozens of major holidays a year. To my knowledge, no major religion does that.<< Let me speak to you about the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster... https://pastafarians.org.au/pastafarianism/holidays/ https://pastafarians.org.au/pastafarianism/holidays/
- godelski 8y ago
  glob glob (happy Talk Like a Goldfish Day)
JBReefer 8y ago
Judaism does that, but most of my Jewish coworkers have just taken PTO for the minor ones. Purim is fun but no one expects off for it!
threatofrain 8y ago
I hate to sound like whining, but I feel jealous and cheated that people with professed religions get special benefits. It's not as though people who don't profess their religions, or those without specific religious affiliation don't have inner needs of their own which they also need time to tend to. I feel like there should be an "average" compromise and everyone should get the benefit. That way there is no awkward incentive in any direction.
- 8y ago

mindslight 8y ago

Yes, the real problem is that Yelp was attempting to prohibit the guy from doing anything else outside of work without even paying him for it! Unfortunately this is no longer even illegal, as overtime laws were destroyed through the "exempt" loophole. So he is (we are) left grasping at straws for something specific that was illegal to have prohibited rather than expecting congress would actually do anything for workers and address the general problem.

phonon 8y ago

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) https://www.workplacefairness.org/religious-discrimination https://www.workplacefairness.org/religious-discrimination 10. Can my employer prevent me from taking off on religious holidays or my day of worship? You should start by letting your employer know that there is a conflict between your religious observances and your work schedule. When your employer's workplace policies interfere with your religious practices, you can ask for what is called a "reasonable accommodation": a change in a workplace rule or policy which would allow you to engage in a religious practice without conflicting with your work obligations. Your employer is required to provide you with such an accommodation unless it would impose an "undue hardship" on the employer's business, defined as an accommodation that is too costly or difficult to provide. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) who oversees these types of claims, has interpreted an undue hardship to mean anything more than regular administrative costs, anything that reduces workplace efficiency or impairs workplace safety, anything infringing on other employees' job rights or causes those said employees' to carry the accommodated employee's share of burdensome work, or if the proposed accommodation conflicts with another law or regulation. Thus, employers are obligated to try in good faith to resolve the religious conflict, or identify an actual monetary or administrative expense. It is important for you to work closely with your employer to find an appropriate accommodation. If the accommodation would impose a burden on the employer that cannot be resolved, the employer is not required to allow the accommodation. Many accommodations, however, do not require any monetary or administrative burdens. Whether your employer can accommodate your religious practices will depend upon the nature of the work and the workplace. Usually, your employer can allow you to use lunch or other break times for religious prayer. If you require additional time for prayer, your employer can require you to make up the time. Employers must give time off for the Sabbath or holy days except in an emergency, unless the employee works in key health and safety occupations or the employee's presence is critical to the company on any given day. This time off does not have to be paid, however. If employees don't come to work, employers may give them leave without pay, may require the amount of time to be made up, or may allow the employee to charge the time against any other leave with pay, except sick pay.

time0ut 8y ago
Thank you. Would this then hinge on whether or not he discussed it with them before hand? I'm obviously not a lawyer.

mithr 8y ago

It's not that he was fired directly "because he was religious", exactly; it's about whether Yelp discriminated against him by violating the following (from https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/religion.cfm https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/religion.cfm): > The law requires an employer or other covered entity to reasonably accommodate an employee's religious beliefs or practices, unless doing so would cause more than a minimal burden on the operations of the employer's business. This means an employer may be required to make reasonable adjustments to the work environment that will allow an employee to practice his or her religion. IANAL, but I believe there is a difference between a person being unavailable due to golfing vs. due to a religious belief, since a person's religious belief is a protected category whereas their sporting activities are not. If it was company policy to shave one's head, but an employee's religion prohibited them from doing so, the company would be discriminating against that person even if they required everyone to shave their heads (caveat: assuming a shaved head was not actually important to the employer's business). Otherwise, a company could "uniformly" apply a rule that "just so happens" to only apply to a specific religion (or gender, or any other protected category), and use that to effectively ban those who fall under that category. Now, in this specific case, I don't know if he'll be able to show that supporting his beliefs wouldn't have caused Yelp "more than a minimal burden", but I think that's what he's going after.

time0ut 8y ago
Ya that makes sense. I wasn't thinking of it that way.

johnminter 8y ago

I could understand a coverage rotation, but having to be available 24/7/365 is basically being treated as a slave. He might not win his case - and unless his attorney is working on a percentage of a win - he should get a second opinion. For his own health and well being as a family, he needs to find new employment. Find a job with a more reasonable work/life balance and adapt lifestyle choices to fit the budget. I know a chaplain that has been at the bedside of many people during their final hours. None ever thought that they should have spent more time at the office.

mannykannot 8y ago

As it happens, this particular incident does appear to have a religious-observance aspect. It is also the case, however, that religious observances have specific protections in US law (stemming from the 1st. Amendment), making this aspect of the incident particularly suitable for making a case against the employer. If this is so, then, regardless of whether one is particularly religious, one should reflect on the implication that demanding 24/7/375 fealty is not regarded, prima facie, as abuse.

bdhess 8y ago
The first amendment has nothing to say about private discrimination on the basis of religion.
- mannykannot 8y ago
  I see what you mean - it seems to be title VII of the Civil Rights Act that is relevant here - or did you have some other point in mind?

thirdsun 8y ago

My first thought as well. The religious aspect of the issue should be irrelevant. Expecting your employees to be available at all times is absurd regardless of belief and shouldn't need any religious defence.