The ADA Case Study

In “Working it Out” by Diana Eck, she writes about religious oppression in the workplace. The examples she gives on the many ways people have been fired, or the ways in which people's faiths have been compromised, reiterates that the amendment that states freedom of religion in the United States, is

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) “prohibits discriminating against an individual in the selection process” (Moran, 2014, p. 32) due to a potential disability. A disability can be defined as a mental or physical condition that can result in some sort of handicap. As a result, the employer may be required to accommodate the people who are considered as disabled, to help them perform his or her job duties.

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is one of the most significant laws in American History. Before the ADA was passed, employers were able to deny employment to a disabled worker, simply because he or she was disabled. With no other reason other than the person's physical disability, they were turned away or released from a job. The ADA gives civil rights protections to individuals with disabilities similar to those provided to individuals on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, age, and religion. The act guarantees equal opportunity for individuals with disabilities in public accommodations, employment, transportation, State and local government services, and telecommunications. The ADA not only opened the door for

Early during Maalick’s employment at TCI’s Midwest Division, Maalick was the recipient of invasive questioning surrounding his religious preference by several employees who opined about the legitimacy of his chosen religion. Subsequently, the office of Maalick was decorated with various references to religious

This says it is unlawful to discriminate against people at work because of their religion or belief. The regulations also cover training that is to do with work.

An employee is refused e.g. training or lost a job, because of their beliefs, race or sexuality

The former employee also bears the burden of proving his prima facie case. In Lawson v State of Washington (2002), Washington State won over Lawson on a claim of constructive discharge on religious discrimination. Lawson showed that he had a genuine religious belief that conflicted with his duties and that he had informed his employer about his beliefs. The 3rd prima facie of proving discharge for failing to comply with the requirements that caused the conflict was not accepted by the court because Lawson quit of his own volition. In the company’s case proving this will result in the same ruling as the former employee quit on his own and there was no threat of discharge or discipline on part of the company. The schedule change was for all employees and not just the former employee. And the company was never informed by the former employee of the religious belief that is genuine and sincere that was in conflict with the new duties. This shows that the former employee cannot prove the 2nd prima facie either. The former employee may be able to prove the 1st prima facie but that will be the only one.

Although the ADA does not specifically list any disabilities, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) guidelines state that when an individual has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activity then the individual is in fact disabled. It goes on to state that impairments can include any physiological disorder or condition, cosmetic disfigurement, or anatomical loss affecting one or more of several body systems, or any mental or psychological disorder (Dessler). Among the protected classes are persons with AIDS and substance abusers who are in treatment. Some 50 million current or potential workers are estimated to be covered by the law's provisions (Columbia Encyclopedia). However, the act does list some

Second, in 2013 the 10th Circuit Court ruled, an employee must communicate the disaccord between a religious practice and a work rule. The Court determined that an employee understands whether the practice observed by the employer is predicated in an inflexible religious practice. (10th Circuit Court, 2013) The relevance of this ruling is that only the employee can determine whether or not the employer is being inflexible in

The United States is one of the most culturally and religiously diverse countries in the world. The founding fathers of the United States wanted to ensure that its people would have the ability to practice their religion with no threat of persecution. In order to accomplish the goal of religious freedom and continue to ensure that all people of any religion would be free to practice their religion, the United States passed Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that prohibits an employer from discriminating based on the religious views of its employees. As the citizens of the United States spend a large amount of time in their places of employment, religious practices that these employees feel are necessary for the true observance of their religion must be accommodated by the employers. This law contends that in cases where the accommodation of religious practices of its employees does not create undue hardships, an employer must make reasonable accommodations for employees to practices the beliefs of their religion. As the demographics of the United States continues to change with more religiously diverse people immigrating to the country, employers are coming under more pressure to ensure they are taking all possible precautions to accommodate the religious practices of its employees. These precautions are important as the once an employee has established a bona fide complaint of religious discrimination, the burden of proof then falls on the employer to prove they

A woman from South Carolina was denied unemployment benefits because of her religious beliefs. She was a Seventh Day Adventist who worshipped on Saturday. Her place of work originally only operated five days a week. Sherbert converted to Seventh Day Adventist and began to worship on Saturday. Her work then decided to be open six days a week including Saturday. She then refused to work on Saturday her day of worship and was fired because of it. After being fired she looked for a new job but could not find one that would accept

1. When can an employee’s religious belief qualify as a bona fide occupational qualification? In order to use the BFOQ exception, an employer must prove that no member of the group you are discriminating against could perform the job. Using the religious example, a Lutheran church would argue that only a Lutheran could effectively practice and preach the tenants of their religion and a Catholic would be unable to perform the job due to his or her beliefs.

People with disabilities have become an integral part of the workforce. The ADA forbids discrimination against people with disabilities when recruiting, hiring, training, and compensating employees (Sotoa & Kleiner, 2013). The ADA prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in employment, transportation, public accommodation, communications, and governmental and establishes requirements for telecommunications relay services (activities (Stryker, R. (2013). Employers are not allowed to ask employees if they have a disability. The employers are not allowed to ask employees with disabilities to undergo a medical exam before an offer of employment unless all applicants are required to take the same exam (Kaye, Jans, & Jones,

Bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) requires a person of specific race, gender, national origin, religion or color to be hired for certain positions or roles. These qualifications are considered when employers are making decisions for hiring for a “certain role in theatre, motion picture, and television” (Moran, 2014). To not be considered discriminatory, the BFOQ must be reasonably necessary to the operation of the business. For example an airplane pilot must have good eye sight since it is integral to carry out the duties of a pilot’s job, a religious school might seek out employees who are of that certain

Religion in the workplace can bring up some of the most difficult issues employers have to face. Resolving these issues requires understanding the law and balancing the business's needs with an employee's desire to practice his or her religion. One of the most contentious conflicts is between an employee's desire to take time off and the potential reduction in productivity and profitability. In ruling on Title VII religion cases, the courts have held that employers aren't required to accommodate employees' religious activities when it involves increased financial costs, transferring supervisory personnel or employees from other departments resulting in inefficiency, or discriminating against other employees or violating seniority systems. Accommodations that don't constitute undue hardship to the employer include voluntary substitutions or employee "swaps," flexible work schedules, floating or optional holidays, staggered work hours, and allowing employees to make up lost time. Transfers and job changes also are options if they don't cause reduced efficiency or