Attention

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent our advertisers

Tuesday, November 03, 2015

Religious Accommodation, or Political Favoritism?

For the Obama administration, some religious accommodations are, to borrow a phrase, “more equal than others.”

In Illinois, a jury awarded two Muslim truck drivers $240,000 in damages and back pay after their claims that being forced to transport alcohol constituted religious discrimination were upheld by U.S. District Court Judge James E. Shadid, a Barack Obama appointee. The Somalian Muslims, Mahad Abass Mohamed and Abdkiarim Hassan Bulshale, worked for the Star Transport trucking company based in Morton, Illinois, and were fired in 2009.

Shadid made his ruling in March, when Star Transport admitted liability. Yet the most telling element of the case was that both men were represented by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which took up the case in 2013.

The EEOC asserted Star Transport had violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which requires accommodations for employees' religious convictions provided those accommodations do not present an “undue hardship.” The EEOC insisted its investigation revealed the trucking company “could have readily avoided assigning these employees to alcohol delivery without any undue hardship, but chose to force the issue despite the employees' Islamic religion.”

A jarring note of boasting was added by EEOC General Counsel David Lopez following the decision:

“EEOC is proud to support the rights of workers to equal treatment in the workplace without having to sacrifice their religious beliefs or practices,” he said. “This is fundamental to the American principles of religious freedom and tolerance.”

More here

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

The trucking company has learned its lesson: don't hire Muslims.