Muslim flight attendant suspended for not serving alcohol

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Associated Press

Muslim flight attendant suspended for not serving alcohol
Published 12:30 pm, Monday, September 7, 2015

MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) — A Muslim flight attendant says she was suspended by ExpressJet because of her refusal to serve alcohol due to her religious beliefs.

Charee Stanley, 40, filed a discrimination complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in Detroit last week.

Her attorney says the Atlanta-based airline initially agreed to a religious accommodation, telling her another flight attendant could handle passenger requests for alcohol. However, she said Stanley was put on a 12-month unpaid leave last month after another attendant complained.

Lena Masri, an attorney with Michigan chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, says the employee's complaint against Stanley had "Islamophobic" overtones, noting she carried a book with "foreign writings" and wore a head scarf.


Read more: http://www.chron.com/news/us/article/Muslim-flight-attendant-suspended-for-not-serving-6489244.php

[NutmegYankee]

1. Why should another attendent have to take on extra duties with no increase in pay?

It's time to nip this shit in the bud.

[Warpy]

2. Good. She's allowed to refuse to drink it.

She's not allowed to force other people to do without.

[Fred Sanders]

3. Fundie flight attendant complains and the Fundie airline bosses go with the Fundie whining?

[DRoseDARs]

14. A little unfair to label her a fundie, no? EDIT: Misread Fred's, but leaving up.

She's just wearing a scarf over her hair, face uncovered, was being reasonably accommodated with her issue by the company (prior to some asshole co-worker whining), wearing a regular-issue uniform on her body, and interacting with non-family men. I bet she drives herself to work without her husband's permission too. Some fundie she is...

[Fred Sanders]

15. I was talking about the employee that complained about the one asking for a religious accommodation.

[DRoseDARs]

22. I owe you an apology. Misread your post. A lot of anti-Muslim piling-on in this thread.

eom

[Fred Sanders]

23. Yes...blissful ignorance is rampant about the law and the false equivalency to the elected public official.

Anti-Islamic rhetoric unfortunately rather rampant with some at DU, as you say. Similar rhetoric regarding other religions however.... can get you arrested!

[DRoseDARs]

25. I've been in the position of being an employer needing to accommodate.

I speak from experience; it really isn't that big a deal to work around religious or physical disability issues. She had a reasonable request, her employer made a reasonable accommodation, it was working just fine for the involved parties until an anti-Muslim co-worker decided to be an asshole.

[Fred Sanders]

27. Exactly. No one was complaining except this one fundamentalist Christian weaned on Fox no doubt.

Folks going so far as to say she should not have been hired in the first place are ignorant of:

1) the detailed facts- always important
2) the law
3) the Constitution
4) what "reasonable accommodation" means and how easy most requests are easily accommodated
5) over stating the value of and the work required of inflight alcohol sales.
6) failing to see the vast difference between a minor religious accommodation request of one person that effects others inconsequentially, with the contempt of court of a public official sworn by oath to do a vital public function.

[longship]

103. Bing! Bing! Bing! Bing! Bing!

Fred, again you nail the issues.

These are what the discussion should be about.

As an lifelong atheist, I embrace your framework. In spite of the fact that I despise religion, I do not despise the religious.

Let us all start what you have laid out here.

I'll stand next to you.

[Fred Sanders]

104. DRoseDars deserves the credit, his sticking to the principle of law is the winning argument.

[longship]

108. Indeed! DRoseDars!

However, when one has been won over by a better argument and one admits it, that too is laudible.

And, your framing was still right on target.

To both of you:

[DRoseDARs]

109. I deserve no credit, silly, but t/y. To think, I got involved because I was dumb...

And misread your post.

[Judi Lynn]

151. It's amazing others couldn't see your points immediately, Fred Sanders.

It was a shock seeing the instantaneous outpouring of anti-Islamic hatred. I most surely didn't anticipate it when I posted the article. Stunning.

Thank you for your patience, and steadfastness in sticking with the insight you already had, as well as several others. Clearly propaganda does have a powerful effect on some, sometimes, and upon right-wingers all the time!

[FrodosPet]

156. I realize accusing others of being right wingers is a lot easier than accepting that others have...

...differences of opinion with you.

This is NOT a binary world. There are many hues and shades of opinion and experience.

[FrodosPet]

123. I want a job as a bartender

But I don't want to serve alcohol. I'm OK with serving the food, but I refuse to mess with the booze, so my co-workers will have to work harder while I indulge my fairy tale. Meanwhile, I am still expecting full pay and tips.

Ummmm... No.

[Fred Sanders]

152. See post 151 and keep learning.

[FrodosPet]

153. Can't speak about others, but I am not anti-Islam. I am anti-lazy.

I am anti-"I'm going to use my religion to shirk my work duties, adding a burden onto my co-workers".

I am in the cab business in metro Detroit. I work with Muslims, and I have them as passengers. I've known and worked with Muslims since I was in U.S. Navy ET "A" school. Some that I have known, are wonderful people who perform their job with honor. They don't burden others, they haul drunks, they haul service animals, they haul people to Christian churches and Jewish Synagogues without complaint.

I could care less which flavor of fantasy they believe in. Hospitality is a major part of the FAs duties. They, like anyone else, have the right to follow their sincerely held beliefs. What she is doing is a combination of making herself eligible for single FA flights and adding to her co-worker's workload on dual FA flights.

[Fred Sanders]

155. "Reasonable religious accomodation" is a technical legal term...if you are familiar with it you

not make the apparently common mistake and misunderstanding you have made.

Law school is 3 years for a reason.

For example, if you are Catholic and your boss asks that you drive on Sunday, and you will not due to your sincerely held religious beliefs, then a reasonable accommodation can be made that perhaps you work double shift on Saturday....do not confuse freedom of religion from government with religious freedom to do as you please.

[FrodosPet]

157. Making other do the work that you are paid for is NOT REASONABLE.

How about, "OK, you don't have to serve alcohol, but we are going to dock you 35% of your pay and give it to the FA that has to work that much harder".Would that be reasonable to both parties?

[FrodosPet]

159. What does the EEOC say about it?

http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/publications/fs-religion.cfm

Facts About Religious Discrimination

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from discriminating against individuals because of their religion (or lack of religious belief) in hiring, firing, or any other terms and conditions of employment. The law also prohibits job segregation based on religion, such as assigning an employee to a non-customer contact position because of actual or feared customer preference.

In addition, the Act requires employers to reasonably accommodate the religious beliefs and practices of applicants and employees, unless doing so would cause more than a minimal burden on the operation of the employer's business.A reasonable religious accommodation is any adjustment to the work environment that will allow the employee to practice his religion. Flexible scheduling, voluntary shift substitutions or swaps, job reassignments lateral transfers, and exceptions to dress or grooming rules are examples of accommodating an employee's religious beliefs.

Whether a particular accommodation would pose an undue hardship on the employer's business depends on the individual circumstances. For example, an accommodation may cause undue hardship if it is costly, compromises workplace safety, decreases workplace efficiency, infringes on the rights of other employees, or requires other employees to do more than their share of potentially hazardous or burdensome work. . Undue hardship also may be shown if the request for an accommodation violates others' job rights established through a collective bargaining agreement or seniority system.

~ snip ~

It seems to me "For example, an accommodation may cause undue hardship if it is costly, compromises workplace safety, decreases workplace efficiency, infringes on the rights of other employees, or requires other employees to do more than their share of potentially hazardous or burdensome work. . Undue hardship also may be shown if the request for an accommodation violates others' job rights established through a collective bargaining agreement or seniority system." is pretty clear.

[snooper2]

134. nobody is asking her to drink a fucking can of beer, just do your job lady

That simple...

What next, I'm going to go to Kroger and have some guy say he can't slice pork for me...Just wait here 30 minutes till I can find somebody to help you

How about some hottie wearing skimpy clothes and a taxi driver won't let her in because he is "offended" Fuck fundies, just because you believe in fairies doesn't mean you get to pick and choose which part of your job you do.

[MADem]

112. She can't do her job--she is required to serve on single FA flights and she can't do that.

This is not LBN--she was suspended over a week ago.

On dual FA flights, each FA is responsible for taking care of their own "class" of passenger. "Dual class service" would mean that the OTHER FA would have to leave their section to take care of hers, while she sat on her ass doing nothing. It's bull.

She can't do the job, she needs to go work at Burger King--of course, she'd complain about the bacon on the burgers there. Maybe she can find a vegan fast food joint to work at.

I believe this FA is looking for a payday. Her "invention" that she can't handle alcohol is bullshit. Most convenience stores I go to are OWNED by Muslims who have no problem selling beer and wine. The prohibition against consuming it is entirely separate from selling it. Islam doesn't demand that people be busybodies or nannies, except if you're a member of ISIS or living in KSA or Iran, these days.

Here's her job description:

http://www.expressjet.com/careers/flight-attendants/

Search our site
INVESTCONTACTMEDIAABOUTSAFETYPARTNERSCAREERSPASSENGERSHOME
HOME > CAREERS > FLIGHT ATTENDANTS
CAREERS
Take a look at our job descriptions, and then tell us how you can make the ExpressJet difference.
Flight Attendants


Flight Attendant Job Description
High-quality, personal and safe service is the key to being a great ExpressJet flight attendant.

Candidates should be excellent at multitasking, have outstanding people skills and be experts at working through all types of situations. Our flight attendants ensure safe and comfortable flights on our fleet of CRJ200 (one flight attendant), CRJ700 (two flight attendants with dual-class service), CRJ900 (two flight attendants with dual-class service), ERJ 135 (one flight attendant) and ERJ 145 (one flight attendant) aircraft. Flight attendant duties include, but are not limited to:

Participate in pre-flight briefings with fellow crew members.
Ensure the highest level of safety by inspecting safety equipment, announcing and demonstrating safety procedures and verifying passengers’ compliance with safety regulations throughout all stages of flight.
Make passengers feel comfortable by welcoming them aboard the aircraft, assisting with carry-on luggage, providing beverage and snack services, answering questions, providing timely information and accommodating special requests.
Provide care for passengers who require special assistance, including unaccompanied minors and passengers with disabilities.
Inspect aircraft cabins and order supplies in preparation for each flight.
Provide reassurance to passengers during flight delays, rough air, etc.
Complete all company required paperwork and reporting in a timely and accurate manner.
Direct and assist passengers in the event of an emergency.
To apply, locate your desired position on our Job Listings page. From there you’ll have access to the online application and an option to submit your resume.

[Fred Sanders]

117. "Muslims owning convenience stores have no problem selling beer and wine....", so....what? Is it because all those

Muslims are the same and have identical beliefs??

You make your opinion perfectly clear by that one statement.

[MADem]

119. Don't be obtuse. This woman is making shit up as she goes along.

She wants a payday and she's figured out how she might get one.

You're barking up the wrong tree when you challenge me about Islam, Fred.

What she needs is a decent imam, not one straight outta ISIS.

[Fred Sanders]

133. You are being strangely outraged over a minor legal dispute! And challenge.... you? Why?

[MADem]

135. Why are you talking about ME? What makes you do that? You do know it's rude, don't you?

That's your go-to when you don't have a response--you talk about the poster instead of the topic being discussed. It's a rude thing to do, a terribly lazy attempt at distraction-- and I notice it--and I'm calling you out for doing it. So, since you've introduced that RUDE tactic into the conversation, I'll ask you the very same question--WHY? Why, instead of discussing the topic, are you trying to make this about me and your falsely perceived outrage? Hmmmm? Trying to shift the focus of the conversation? Unable to articulate any points about this story that might be perceived as valid? What is it, Fred?

See how non-productive that line of attack is? You shouldn't DO it.

I am not "strangely outraged." I know Islam. This woman is fronting and making the religion look bad. She either has a bad imam or she is making shit up as she goes along. She has been doing this job for four years without batting an eye, but all of a sudden she's a "convert" and she's all fundy? If she's fundy, 'al-kool' is the least of her problems. Speaking with strange men, never mind TOUCHING them, is a huge bozo no-no. And she has to do that every day, every flight. It's part of her job description.

This lady is sick of her job, and she wants a payday. Expressjet Flight Attendants work on tiny aircraft, get paid in the dark and they work very hard, usually ALONE (with no one else around to hand out the booze). When they don't work alone, they are responsible for their own group of passengers--the duties are not shared by the cabin attendants. Their job duties are posted online--this is not rocket science.

There is no way she can be "reasonably" accommodated; one of her peers would have to do her work FOR her, and that places an UNREASONABLE burden upon the peer, who doesn't get extra pay for extra work; nor is the complaining flight attendant docked for failing to do a key part of her job--she either has to serve the al-kool or be shifted to a job where she doesn't have to do that any more....gate agent or baggage handler would work just fine. That's not what she wants, though--she wants a payday, the "severance" that Expressjets doesn't normally provide.

[yeoman6987]

4. Can't do the job hired to do, find other employment

If we don't get a handle on this, nobody will be working. Yes hyperbole, but we really need to pass some laws saying that jobs must be done or resign. Yes we have some religious Protection laws like possibly wearing the head covering (tried to spell it but to not avail).

[Fred Sanders]

18. Religious accommodation laws have been working fairly well for decades...it is the law.

Freedom of religion should be supported by reasonable accommodation in the workplace - it is in the Constitution and as the law interpreting the Constitution.

Could the airline have made a reasonable accommodation for the flight attendant by assigning her other tasks, serving the inflight meal or passing out snacks for instance, when alcohol is being served inflight - a rather minor and small task?

Of course they could!

Far different than a court order to a public official refusing to do a vital public function paid for by the public.

[whatthehey]

26. Who would then serve the alcohol on single attendant flights. 60% of this airline's?

[Igel]

58. There are two alternatives.

In agreeing to the accommodation, the airlines stipulated that wouldn't arise (or she'd still be exempt).

OR her attorney is making a claim that is not accurate.

It's a question that has ready alternatives and we honestly can't tell which one would apply. Either way, not our problem and nothing to be outraged about until we know more.

[tymorial]

28. Would you have been as even handed in your response if the woman was not muslim?

What if she was Mormon or belonged to another Christian denomination that prohibits alcohol consumption? Also, given the fact that this airline apparently flies short routes, a work around is not really possible because the plane is broken into two sections with each attendant responsible for drinks and snacks in their section. Based upon the map, I seriously doubt inflight meals are offered.

[DRoseDARs]

30. Wait, are you accusing FS of being anti-Christian?

You're reading his posts... without actually reading his posts.

[Fred Sanders]

31. Reasonable accommodation is reasonable accommodation, no matter the religion.....I guess the courts will sort it out.

Planes divided into sections for service means there is nothing that can be done about alcohol sales? The logistics are just too mind boggling?

Really? You're going with that??

[DRoseDARs]

37. One kid I hired had rods in his spine, couldn't lift weight beyond X amount...

...So I had to make a reasonable accommodation, worked out the complex logistics ...and just fucking did those tasks myself. And I did them without bitching, moaning OR whining about it. OMG SO MINDBOGGLING!! SUCH HORROR!! MUCH MISERY!!



This fucking thread. I can't even.

[MADem]

113. What about a plane with ONE FA? Like most of them?

She can't do her job. She needs to quit or get a gate agent job.

[MADem]

120. It's not "reasonable" to have to pay a second FA AND give up a

seat in a small aircraft so that someone other than her can serve the drinks.

There is no reasonable accommodation when there is ONLY ONE FLIGHT ATTENDANT.

She works on shitty little planes--not big ones. Expressjets have one or two flight attendants. One, mostly.

When they have two, they have one for first class and one for coach. Each FA takes care of their own sector.

There is no "reasonable" accommodation. She can be accommodated by working the gate instead.

[nichomachus]

40. But what if the meals contained pork?

Then, she could sit on her ass while everyone else did her work.

Serving alcohol is part of the job. Saying she doesn't have to do it is not a "reasonable" accommodation.

A reasonable accommodation would be saying she could wear a hijab with her uniform or she wouldn't have to work on certain holidays. But if it's an integral part of the job and she can't do it -- hit the bricks.

[Igel]

59. Did she have an accommodation for this?

If not, then it's a non-question. Is it part of the case? Then it's a pointless hypothetical.

It may be crucial for you, but not for this case, story or airline.

[NutmegYankee]

52. Reasonable accommodation requires minimal burden on the operations of the employer's business

Considering that most of their business is single flight attendant flights, this woman's unreasonable view on alcohol is more than minimally burdening scheduling of fellow co-workers and the airline.

This shit has to be stopped. There are already entire counties where women cannot get birth control because no pharmacist in the county will fill it.

Religious Discrimination & Reasonable Accommodation & Undue Hardship

An employer does not have to accommodate an employee's religious beliefs or practices if doing so would cause undue hardship to the employer. An accommodation may cause undue hardship if it is costly, compromises workplace safety, decreases workplace efficiency, infringes on the rights of other employees, or requires other employees to do more than their share of potentially hazardous or burdensome work.

[DRoseDARs]

55. Except the employer had already made the accommodation with her.

Then rescinded it when an anti-Muslim co-worker complained.

[TexasBushwhacker]

61. Perhaps they complained because the division of duties

wasn't equitable. It's fine if one attendant handles the alcohol while the Muslim attendant does something else. But when I've been on flights the attendant is handling a beverage cart, not just an alcohol cart. That's a pretty significant part of the job.

[DRoseDARs]

63. Their complaint specifically points out her "foreign writings" and her headscarf...

Rather blaring indicators of what the co-worker's complaint was REALLY about.

[NutmegYankee]

79. The complaint may have had other more reasonable arguments.

And those cannot be dismissed just because of that worker's potential bias. The complaint said the one attendant wasn’t doing her job. Perhaps those factors are more significant that you want to accept.

[DRoseDARs]

83. The problem is the employer rescinded the RA only after the complaint.

They opened themselves up to a discrimination lawsuit. Particularly since they had already enacted the RA and she agreed to it.

[NutmegYankee]

85. We don't know what's in the complaint.

And we only have one side in this.

[DRoseDARs]

86. So you're accusing her lawyer of lying when they mention specifics out of it?

Pretty clear they got a copy of that complaint, and are directly quoting from it, else the airline would say yeah, no, that's not in there.

[NutmegYankee]

87. Why not. Crazy clerk lady's lawyer is spinning like mad.

I'm sure her lawyer is spinning the best media case possible.

[DRoseDARs]

91. If that's the case, the airline could blast him out of the water.

Of course, they aren't going to comment publicly. But, with him/her saying those elements are in fact in the complaint... when they're not... would that not end the case before it's even in court?

[NutmegYankee]

95. It doesn't matter if those comments are in the complaint...

If other factors like workload on co-workers can be proven (also apparently in complaint), the suspension is still valid. I think it's an uphill case.

[Fred Sanders]

96. A motion for dismissal would have already been filed...which it has not.

[DRoseDARs]

100. Which is why I'm pretty confident the two specifics are in fact real.

And that maybe her case has a leg or two to stand on.

[NutmegYankee]

102. Fred, every lawyer will file a motion to dismiss, no matter what the odds.

It probably just hasn't been filed yet or published.

[Fred Sanders]

105. No. Every lawyer without a conscience and a client loaded with money, will. And will fail, almost

always.

[Xithras]

148. The fact that an RA is offered and accepted doesn't make it permanent.

There have been many cases where religious accommodations were offered to people, only to be rescinded when the employer later found a greater than expected impact on their business. It is entirely possible that the other employees complaint simply alerted the employer to a labor inequity that the employer was previously unaware of, which led to the accommodation being rescinded. There's nothing illegal about rescinding an RA.

It's also important to remember that it's discriminatory for employers to require other employees to perform a greater amount of labor to accommodate one employees religion, because in that case you're effectively penalizing the other employees for NOT belonging to that religion (which, according to the EEOC, ALSO qualifies as religious discrimination). When making religious accommodations, employers have to do it in a way that results in an equitable workplace for ALL employees of ALL faiths and nonfaiths. If the other employees complaint resulted in the realization that the attempt at creating an RA resulted in a workload imbalance based solely on the faith of one employee, the employer would have been legally required to rectify the situation.

[NutmegYankee]

77. The co-worker probably complained they were over-burdened.

Which is also a reason for denial of RA. In US law, it is only reasonable if it doesn't impact other workers. If they lose flexibility with their schedules or get overburdened, they have the right to say no also. That's what keeps getting lost in this religious bullshit - non-believers have rights too!

[DRoseDARs]

80. That might be true, but there's also the "foreign writings and her headscarf"...

...that the co-worker mentioned specifically in their complaint against her. That the employer rescinded the RA only after that raises the specter of discrimination here, which is what she is suing for.

[NutmegYankee]

84. Which means nothing if the company found she was subjecting others to more than minimal burden.

And I strongly want to see such cases dismissed. It is discrimination to be forced to take on additional tasks because of another person's views. It's one thing if a person doesn't eat certain things, or wants to wear certain clothing, but don't make others labor more.

[passiveporcupine]

116. what was rescinded?

Does anyone know? Just the alcohol serving part, or the headscarf too? I thought the headscarf issue was already settled in court. Maybe the suite is against the alcohol serving, and it just happens to use the complaint by the coworker which includes things that the airline did NOT rescind?

Does anyone know?

[FrodosPet]

160. When does an accommodation pose an “undue hardship”?

http://eeoc.gov/policy/docs/qanda_religion.html

~ snip ~

8. Does an employer have to grant every request for accommodation of a religious belief or practice?

No. Title VII requires employers to accommodate only those religious beliefs that are religious and “sincerely held,” and that can be accommodated without an undue hardship. Although there is usually no reason to question whether the practice at issue is religious or sincerely held, if the employer has a bona fide doubt about the basis for the accommodation request, it is entitled to make a limited inquiry into the facts and circumstances of the employee’s claim that the belief or practice at issue is religious and sincerely held, and gives rise to the need for the accommodation.

Factors that – either alone or in combination – might undermine an employee’s assertion that he sincerely holds the religious belief at issue include: whether the employee has behaved in a manner markedly inconsistent with the professed belief; whether the accommodation sought is a particularly desirable benefit that is likely to be sought for secular reasons; whether the timing of the request renders it suspect (e.g., it follows an earlier request by the employee for the same benefit for secular reasons); and whether the employer otherwise has reason to believe the accommodation is not sought for religious reasons.

However, none of these factors is dispositive. For example, although prior inconsistent conduct is relevant to the question of sincerity, an individual’s beliefs – or degree of adherence – may change over time, and therefore an employee’s newly adopted or inconsistently observed religious practice may nevertheless be sincerely held. An employer also should not assume that an employee is insincere simply because some of his or her practices deviate from the commonly followed tenets of his or her religion.

9. When does an accommodation pose an “undue hardship”?

An accommodation would pose an undue hardship if it –would cause more than de minimis cost on the operation of the employer’s business. Factors relevant to undue hardship may include the type of workplace, the nature of the employee’s duties, the identifiable cost of the accommodation in relation to the size and operating costs of the employer, and the number of employees who will in fact need a particular accommodation.

Costs to be considered include not only direct monetary costs but also the burden on the conduct of the employer’s business. For example, courts have found undue hardship where the accommodation diminishes efficiency in other jobs, infringes on other employees’ job rights or benefits, impairs workplace safety, or causes co-workers to carry the accommodated employee’s share of potentially hazardous or burdensome work. Whether the proposed accommodation conflicts with another law will also be considered.

To prove undue hardship, the employer will need to demonstrate how much cost or disruption a proposed accommodation would involve. An employer cannot rely on potential or hypothetical hardship when faced with a religious obligation that conflicts with scheduled work, but rather should rely on objective information. A mere assumption that many more people with the same religious practices as the individual being accommodated may also seek accommodation is not evidence of undue hardship.

If an employee’s proposed accommodation would pose an undue hardship, the employer should explore alternative accommodations.

10. Does an employer have to provide an accommodation that would violate a seniority system or collective bargaining agreement?

No. A proposed religious accommodation poses an undue hardship if it would deprive another employee of a job preference or other benefit guaranteed by a bona fide seniority system or collective bargaining agreement (CBA). Of course, the mere existence of a seniority system or CBA does not relieve the employer of the duty to attempt reasonable accommodation of its employees’ religious practices; the question is whether an accommodation can be provided without violating the seniority system or CBA. Often an employer can allow co-workers to volunteer to substitute or swap shifts as an accommodation to address a scheduling need without violating a seniority system or CBA.

~ snip ~

[Fred Sanders]

164. Like I said, law school is three years for a reason.... I am glad folks are understanding the

complexities a bit better and not just immediately hitting the Outrage Button as their argument.

Isn't the law majestic when seen working in detail to bring fairness and justice to all in a free and democratic society that values freedom of religion in the workplace, to be reasonably accommodated?

Just like disabilities are to be reasonably accommodated.

[FrodosPet]

167. There's the key phrase... "Reasonably Accommodated"

What she was requesting was NOT a "Reasonable Accommodation". It placed additional burden on coworkers, and thus violated the rights of others.

[madashelltoo]

5. When will the religious learn

Your relationship with God is personal, they are called your beliefs for a reason and you can't force others to do as you do? Don't drink, don't touch alcohol containers; don't work where you have to serve it.

[Skittles]

6. suspended for not doing her job

she needs to find a job where serving alcohol is not one of the required duties

[Statistical]

7. Seems too easy right.

I said this in one of the Kim Dumbass threads but what is next a muslim wanting to work at Smithfield meat packing plant and refusing to touch pork. You have a freedom to (among other things) not touch pork that doesn't give you the right to collect a paycheck for not touching pork (or serving alcohol or issuing marriage licenses, etc).

[Skittles]

17. I keep hearing about "reasonable accommodation"

Last edited Tue Sep 8, 2015, 03:53 PM - Edit history (1)

I think forcing others to do your job is not reasonable, not at all

[Fred Sanders]

20. Folks need a refresher course in Law 101 and Introductory Employment Law.

[crim son]

39. Yeah, maybe.

Or maybe other folks need to recognize that we're looking at different times and a potential trend that might paralyze the workplace. Time to consider new laws, methinks.

[Gormy Cuss]

146. Here's a handy link to EEOC guidance on this issue

http://www.eeoc.com/guidance/discrimination/religious-discrimination/

[Herman4747]

131. 2 "m"s in accommodation nt

[rocktivity]

149. I define "reasonable" accommodation as one that doesn't interfere

with performing the job duties of either yourself or anyone else.

I would have no problem with her wearing a headdress if it matched her uniform jacket and kept the bottom part tucked under her uniform shirt. But I would not supply her with a entirely new burka-styled uniform, as wearing the uniform is one her job duties. And I certainly wouldn't require her co-workers to perform her job duties under any circumstances.


rocktivity

[tymorial]

29. It is truly ridiculous.

Further, concerning the posts which attempt to defend her rights: I wonder if the reaction would be the same if the attendant were Mormon or belonged to another Christian denomination where alcohol prohibited.

[Fred Sanders]

33. Yes, the principal of law is exactly the same and the principle will be exactly applied, within reason.

Folks forget most Constitutional rights in a liberal democracy are meant to protect the rights of the minority, not the majority.

[smirkymonkey]

47. Absolutely, if you can't do your job because of religious restrictions, then you

need to find another job. I don't care what religion you are. I am getting pretty sick of the religious exceptionalism in this country. It is costing unnecessary time and money and frankly, I think most of these people are just looking for attention.

[sarge43]

8. It wasn't mentioned during her training that she would be serving booze?

Uh huh. Even Davis had a very slightly better argument.

[SoapBox]

34. She changed religions after she was already flying.

...she had that choice as well but it doesn't make it right that another Flight Attendant has to suck it up for her.

[sarge43]

45. Agree and if her faith is incompatible with job requirements, then she should have quit. n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

9. This airline has 5 types of aircraft, 3 of which use a single attendant, 2 of which use 2 attendants

The serving of drinks is a major part of this job, the worst part of the job and the most strenuous. Her request is that she be placed only on flights where someone else can do the bulk of the work for her.

So aside from that, if Muslims are so anti alcohol why does the Sultan of Brunei own the Polo Lounge? Why are hundreds of bars, clubs, restaurants and hotels that serves seas of booze owned by Muslims?

[DRoseDARs]

16. Why do only some Christians stone adulterers to death?

If Muslims are so anti-alcohol why does the Sultan of Brunei own the Polo Lounge?
If Christians are so Christiany, why don't all of them...?
If Jews are so Jewy, why don't all of them...?

You do understand that there are differing levels of religious observance, right?

[TexasBushwhacker]

10. I'm guessing there are Mormon flight attendants

as well as Southern Baptists and flight attendants of other faiths that are against drinking alcohol. But I know the faith if a convert can be strong and inflexible.

Religious accommodations should be made if they can be, but I look at this like disability rights. An employer has to make "reasonable accommodations" for a disabled person to do a job, but they still have to be able to do it. There are plenty of jobs a person who uses a wheelchair can do, but they can't be a delivery driver for UPS.

Just like Kim Davis, if a person finds their job requires them to do something they think is immoral, they can resign. They can even receive unemployment under those conditions.

[SoapBox]

35. In the past, there were "strict" Mormons that got hired and then

tried to say they couldn't serve alcohol, caffeine nor work on Sunday.

They all got fired.

[Fred Sanders]

36. Interesting....I would appreciate evidence of that...could be useful for a lawyer in court when

the airline is defending itself during the damages assessment phase of the trial.

[Fred Sanders]

41. Excellent point! Workplace accommodations are made for mental disabilities as well, I suppose

religious restrictions could be considered a form of mental disability. (said with tongue in cheek)

I am defending the terminated air flight attendant not because she is Muslim, Christian or Jewish, or Amish or Mormon, I am defending the well established principle of reasonable accommodation for reasonable and genuinely held religious beliefs.....agree with the law or not, it is the law.

[TexasBushwhacker]

46. Yes, but the reasonable accommodation is you can

perform the duties of your job. I guess the airline will argue that serving alcohol is one of the primary duties as a flight attendant. Would she also refuse to serve a meal with pork?

[DRoseDARs]

50. I don't think the words "reasonable accommodation" mean what you think they mean.

The law certainly doesn't agree with you.

[Fred Sanders]

88. There is a reason law school is 3 years specialized education, after a primary degree.

[DRoseDARs]

93. I never had law school, just real world experience.

I have a simpleton's understanding of the law. Stated plainly to me, the law says: Don't be a dick. Like I've said, I've hired people and have had to make the occasional reasonable accommodation for either their religious observance or a physical disability. Don't need law school to tell me I can't be an asshole about it, that I have to try to work something out for them that they're comfortable with that still gets me the work I need out of them.

[Fred Sanders]

94. You have the correct understanding of employment law and what the legal principle is, and what "relgious accommodation" means,

in legal terms, not internet couch counsel's understanding.

Employment law is complex, common terms used in a legal context have different legal meanings, and it is not semantics, it is detailed legal principle being applied.

After three years law school, employment law lawyers usually need a few years more education and experience to get a handle on all the complexities of employment and labor law.

[FrodosPet]

129. "that still gets me the work I need out of them."

The airline needs someone to serve alcohol. That is one of the primary job requirements, not a secondary task. Adding that much extra labor to another flight attendant is unreasonable.

[MisterP]

114. "reasonable accommodation" is indeed the watchword--it's often tossed out the window

in places like France or Quebec

the anthros would say that serving beer is much a cultural practice as not serving it, against the idea that "culture is what OTHER peoples have, our way is just neutral common sense"

[question everything]

11. She should have never taken this job

Some years back, Muslim taxi drivers refused to take passengers carrying alcohol..

And other time, Muslim cash registered at Target refused to check pork products.

Hey, in this country we keep religious beliefs to our selves. So, yes, trying to integrate your religious beliefs could limit your job prospects or... land you in jail for contempt of court.

[Skittles]

19. she converted to Islam after she was hired for this position

still, since she can no longer fulfill all the duties the job requires, she should find another career

[Fred Sanders]

21. Serving alcohol on occasion inflight is certainly a vital duty she objects to doing ...so she should be fired??

Are folks seriously attempting to equate this private industry labor dispute to a public official refusing to do a vital public duty and service?

After a court order of contempt for not doing so?

Seriously?

[yeoman6987]

32. Yes both should be fired

Unfortunately one is elected so trickier. The other has been fired thankfully.

[christx30]

124. What do you think of a pharmacist that

refuses to dispense birth control or abortifacients? Either we give accommodations to everyone, or we give them to no one.

[rocktivity]

12. She should be grateful she hasn't been fired.

Last edited Sat Dec 5, 2015, 12:07 PM - Edit history (3)

What if she's the only attendant available for a one-attendant flight?

It amounts to forcing her religious views upon others, just like Kim Davis.

Maybe she can be transferred to another department, like the ground crew.


rocktivity

ON EDIT: She wasn't a Muslim when she was hired. And she didn't find out she wasn't supposed to serve liquor until two months ago:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1201352

[smirkymonkey]

51. What is going to happen is that employers are going to stop hiring the religious

to avoid this bullshit later on down the line. It may be illegal to ask in an interview, but in some cases it's pretty obvious and the extremely religious are only hurting their own people. I see resumes come through all the time where people list the Christian groups they are affiliated with (most of these people are from the South and Midwest, where they think it will be an asset), but we are in the Northeast where it is not particularly seen as a positive thing and could possibly be seen as a negative if this kind of crap continues.

It's very hard to prove discrimination in hiring practices. Employers can always say that other candidates were just more qualified. These people are just messing things up for themselves.

[CharlotteVale]

13. Funny she has no problem working for a company making $$ from alcohol.

[rollin74]

24. she should either do her job, find another line of work or be fired

serving alcoholic beverages is a BIG part of being a flight attendant

if she doesn't want to do it, she shouldn't be a flight attendant. No one should be able to refuse to do their job and expect others to pick up the slack.

[SoapBox]

38. She converted to Islam after she was already flying...

But that was her decision.

And now she wants special accommodations to be made for her AND is claiming (or that group is claiming) that it's all about discrimination.

Personally I hope they fire her butt.

Might I suggest she move to the Middle East to continue her career.

[dhol82]

115. and, the really strange part of that is that

the carriers like Etihad, etc. serve alcohol. Go figure.

http://maphappy.org/2012/07/wine-the-ultimate-list-of-airlines-that-serve-free-alcohol/

Hope she doesn't get an international gig with Emirates.

[mercuryblues]

42. It's not just serving

If she is refusing to handle alcohol, she is also refusing to collect the trash, to avoid touching a plastic cup that contained alcohol. She is refusing to collect payment for alcohol from passengers, she is refusing to do inventory and restocking the supplies. How about cleaning up the plane after passengers disembark? empty cups may have contained alcohol, so the other FA gets that job.

Yeah, I would complain if I was working my ass off while she sits and reads.

So basically the only thing she will do on the service end is hand out a bag of pretzels.

[Fred Sanders]

43. See post 27....get informed BEFORE the outrage?! Or not, as you please.

[mercuryblues]

67. read you post

and guess what, I don't care if her lawyer says the person complaining is Islamophobic. She is not doing her job and others are picking up her slack while she sits and reads. I would feel the same way if she was reading a Steven King novel. So your righteous indignation is wasted on me.

[DRoseDARs]

71. The EMPLOYER made the call and felt they could reasonably accommodate her.

And she agreed to what they offered. So far, so good. Then an anti-Muslim co-worker complained, and the company rescinded the accommodation. It became discrimination.

[Fred Sanders]

92. You are raining down logic and law on deaf ears....anyone wondering why the RW and their media

are NOT attacking this Muslim flight attendant who only wanted her private business employer, as previously agreed to, to continue to accommodate her reasonable religious belief - without issue or complaint from anyone, passenger or other employee, only then to have management suddenly rescind the accommodation after a bizarre complaint to management from a Christisn fundamentalist?

What was management thinking, that they would be subject to some kind of Christian crusade if this reasonable accommodation became public knowledge?

Cowards.

Inquiring minds want to know about why the silence as well as why the noise.

[DRoseDARs]

97. Borrowing a page from others in-thread: If she'd been a Christian...

We can guess the atheists would still be arguing what they already are, and that's fine as they're generally consistent, but I wonder how many of those who have a faith would be singing a slightly different tune?

For the record, I am of faith, but in the corporeal world I am bound not by faith but by law and science. That she has all the appearance of having been discriminated against because she is a Muslim bothers me greatly. Not because I share her faith, which I don't, but because she has equal right to protection under the law that I do.

[Fred Sanders]

98. 100% a ditto on that!

[DRoseDARs]

101. I'm just glad the Advil finally kicked in. This fucking thread...

I know I said I can't even, but I did even. Way longer than I should have. And my head paid for that.

[DRoseDARs]

44. Alcohol /= Pork. It's serving/consuming alcohol that's banned, not touching it.

Are you really making the argument that there's no trash collection in Muslim countries where there are differing levels of religious observance?

[mercuryblues]

60. No I am saying

she is refusing to touch alcohol based on her interpretation of religion. Not entire Muslim countries. I frankly could give a rat's ass how other countries collect their trash, so you can toss that strawman in the bin. There is a lot more involved with alcohol than just serving it.

[DRoseDARs]

65. She refused to serve alcohol. The employer accommodated that.

She wasn't taken off other duties, else that would have been mentioned. She was being accommodated on the act of serving alcohol to passengers. Then an anti-Muslim co-worker complained and the employer rescinded the accommodation, which is what prompted the lawsuit.

[mercuryblues]

70. so you are

saying she is willing to pick up empty mini bottles that still have a few drops of liquor in them? She is willing to take full mini bottles and restock the supply. She is willing to handle the money transaction involving the sale? If she is willing to do all that her religious conviction of not handling alcohol isn't that deeply held.

[DRoseDARs]

73. And again, the employer made the call to accommodate and she agreed to their offer.

Then they rescinded it upon the complaint of an anti-Muslim co-worked. It became discrimination.

[mercuryblues]

81. so your opinion

on this would be the same if a born again Christian or Southern Baptist refused to do their job based on their religious beliefs.

I am sick of people forcing their religious beliefs onto others.

A female that is raped has to make sure she does not go to a religiously affiliated hospital to get full care. The same with a woman who is having a crisis in her pregnancy-stay away from catholic hospitals. They will let you die before they perform a life saving abortion. They will also refuse to tie your tubes.

Need BCP, make sure your local pharmacist will fill your prescription.

want marriage equality? make sure the clerk in your town doesn't have a religious exemption.

taxi drivers refusing to take passengers because they have alcohol in their luggage

Cashiers unwilling to ring up pork and liquor

when does it end?

[DRoseDARs]

89. As an employer, I've made RAs for religious requests and physical disabilities.

There's a reason they're called reasonable accommodations. Under the law, the employer makes a reasonable attempt to accommodate the needs of an employee. The airline did. She accepted their accommodation. Then they rescinded it after a complaint oozing with anti-Muslim sentiment was filed by another employee. It became discrimination.

[mercuryblues]

81. so your opinion

on this would be the same if a born again Christian or Southern Baptist refused to do their job based on their religious beliefs.

I am sick of people forcing their religious beliefs onto others.

A female that is raped has to make sure she does not go to a religiously affiliated hospital to get full care. The same with a woman who is having a crisis in her pregnancy-stay away from catholic hospitals. They will let you die before they perform a life saving abortion. They will also refuse to tie your tubes.

Need BCP, make sure your local pharmacist will fill your prescription.

want marriage equality? make sure the clerk in your town doesn't have a religious exemption.

taxi drivers refusing to take passengers because they have alcohol in their luggage

Cashiers unwilling to ring up pork and liquor

when does it end?

[smirkymonkey]

150. +1000

[msongs]

48. sorry, I can't serve christians, women without head covering, or go into airports with bars nt

[DRoseDARs]

49. Unlawful discrimination, unlawful discrimination, legal personal choice.

"I can't serve Christians." /= "I can't serve alcohol."

One is very unlawful, the other the employer is legally required make a reasonable effort to accommodate... as this employer initially DID, until an anti-Muslim employee complained.

[former9thward]

53. I don't know how universal this is followed in Islam.

I have been served alcohol in Cairo, Damascus and Amman, Jordan as well as other places in Islamic countries. Also the Qur'an mentions there will be "rivers of wine" in Heaven ( Sura XLVII Verse 15).

[DRoseDARs]

62. All Muslims are alike... /heavy sarcasm

This thread has become all about hating Muslims based on narrow stereotypes, but masking that hate in "But what if she were a...?" or "What if instead of alcohol it was...?" as if either point would change the matter. The law is clear, the employer followed the law and accommodated her, she ACCEPTED that accommodation... and then the employer rescinded the accommodation when an anti-Muslim co-worker complained. THAT'S why she's suing.

[former9thward]

64. To get religious accommodation you have to prove that it is an accepted belief.

You can't say "This is my interpretation of my religion". What you believe does not have to be followed by 100% of the people in your religion because nothing is. But it can't just be your singular belief.

[DRoseDARs]

68. You're arguing that a general Islamic prohibition on alcohol doesn't exist?

That, because #NotAllMuslims strictly adhere to that prohibition, she should be denied her request? Even though the employer already agreed to it and only rescinded it when an anti-Muslim co-worker complained?

[former9thward]

78. Where did I say that?

This case is about serving not drinking alcohol. I related my personal experiences including in restaurants where there was a prayer rug laying nearby. Is there a general prohibition on serving? I don't know. Also in the OP link there is nothing about the co-worker being "anti-Muslim". You are making a bunch of assumptions.

[madville]

54. Offer her a transfer to another department?

Maybe baggage handling or the ticket counter? If she won't accept that reasonable accommodation then the airline could possibly be free to take appropriate disciplinary action if she refuses to perform the duties of her present position.

[TexasBushwhacker]

56. That could be a win/win

I wonder if that was considered by her or the airline.

[DRoseDARs]

57. Derp, she ACCEPTED the accommodation offered by the employer.

The employer had already decided prior that it wasn't an issue to accommodate her. The employer rescinded it when an anti-Muslim co-worker complained.

[madville]

66. That's her attorney's version

The airline did not comment.

I just don't believe in religious accommodations at work when they interfere with the defined duties of the position. Doesn't matter if it's a pharmacist refusing to dispense birth control, a county official refusing to issue marriage licenses or this story or whatever.

[DRoseDARs]

69. The cat's already out of the bag on this.

The co-worker that complained about her getting accommodation specifically pointed out the "foreign writings" in a book she carried and her headscarf. This is about her being a Muslim, and the airline chose to side with the anti-Muslim co-worker after having already agreed to make in their estimation a reasonable accommodation for her that she also agreed to.

[madville]

72. Remember, that's according to her lawyer

That's not proven, just claimed by the client and attorney who are now likely seeking monetary damages.

[DRoseDARs]

75. They mention specific elements within the complaint of the co-worker.

Not really something they just made up...

[Nye Bevan]

106. Might not work, because of the possibility of the baggage containing alcohol (nt)

[Attorney in Texas]

74. SOMEBODY QUICK! ALERT MIKE HUCKABEE!!!

[Fred Sanders]

90. Also where is Ted Cruz? Clearly religious accommodation has gone too far!! The RW quiet is deafening.

Because to attack the flight attendant, even though she is a member of the preferred religion to demonized of the xenophobes of the GOP, to do so would be to expose their own hypocrisy....in two ways!

[christx30]

110. The RW take on it is:

Last edited Mon Sep 7, 2015, 11:08 PM - Edit history (1)

"Why would you put Kim Davis in jail for sticking to her faith, and give this Muslim accommodation for her's?"
They feel muslims get benefit of the doubt in cases like this, but Christians don't.
Mostly it's a date for our side, to be consistent. Are we going to tell this woman to do her job or quit? Or are we going to give the Muslim a break when the Christian didn't get one? Could we have done any kind of accommodation?

[Fred Sanders]

118. Pretty insane, hypocritical, illogical and unable to make intellectual distinctions, as the RW always is.

[valerief]

76. I think there's an opening for a county clerk in Kentucky. She might be interested in that.

They hire bigots who refuse to do their jobs.

[IronLionZion]

99. I think Paleo flight attendants should refuse to serve peanuts

and vegans should refuse to serve meat

and people are most definitely NOT Celiac should always refuse to serve any gluten

and of course a person who hates big oil should just refuse to fuel up the plan and not tell anyone until after it takes off



Go ahead, flame away

[Fred Sanders]

107. Not worthy....so...no. But thanks for the opportunity!

[itsrobert]

111. If she is only regulated to flights that have more than one flight attendant

And let's say these flights with 2 or more flight attendants are in demand by the flight attendants because they are better routes for layovers, increase per diem, etc. Than the other flight attendants do have a right to complain because it is more than just serving drinks when on the same flight as Charee Stanley. Forcing other attendants to take the crappier, less per per diem flights is unreasonable.

[happyslug]

121. Given the problem Airlines have had with Alcohol WHY are they permitting alcohol at all?

Sorry, to sound like a prohibitionist, but given the tight accommodations in ANY Airplane, why are they serving alcohol? Yes, I know most people who drink do NOT cause problems, but some do and given the NATURE of air travel, do you want them on your plane drinking? Keeping such people off planes is NOT always a realistic option, given that many trips must be done by plane due to the distance involved, but since you can NOT smoke on planes, why are people permitted to DRINK on planes?

It is already illegal to bring your own alcohol on board a plane, why not go the next step and ban it completely:

You can carry on up to five liters of alcohol, but the bottles MUST be sealed and NOT opened during the flight:

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ash/ash_programs/hazmat/media/materialscarriedbypassengersandcrew.pdf

http://www.delta.com/content/www/en_US/traveling-with-us/baggage/before-your-trip/restricted-items.html

Now, Air Rage is rare, one study reported the rate at one for every 138,308 passengers:

1 in every 138,308 airline passengers is involved in a passenger misconduct incident.1 A second investigation concluded that one serious on-board incident occurs for every 2 million passengers carried.

In the United States alone, however, 650 million people fly each year and that number is expected to increase. Even small proportions of such a large population should not be ignored

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1708-8305.2009.00339.x/pdf

On the other hand, given the nature of flight and that Airplanes are "Common Carriers" as that term is used in the law, airlines can NOT refuse any passenger to fly (The Government can restrict who can fly but NOT the airline itself) AND the airline is 100% liable for any harm incurred by any passenger on their flight (Thus Airlines have incentives to UNDER REPORT such incidents, much like how Hotels and Motels are known to under report robberies and other harm to their paying guests for both are subject to similar laws, laws of strict liability for any harm to anyone using their services).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hospitality_law

http://www.inn-security.com/resources/innkeeper_statutes_manual.pdf

1906 book on liability of Innkeeper, the law in the book is mostly still exists, except where changed by Statute in the various states (most of those changes are in the above insurance manual):

https://archive.org/stream/cu31924059769798/cu31924059769798_djvu.txt

I bring up innkeeper law for it is a constant problem that crimes and other criminal activities are under reported in Hotels and Motels due to the historical nature of the law that made such "inns" liable for what happened to their guests. The same rule applies to any Common Carriers, be they modern taxis, obsolete Stage Coaches, trains or planes. The tendency is to report only what the airlines think is required by the FAA to report and nothing more. If the airline can down grade the problem to something that does NOT have to be reported, they will.

Thus even if the reported occurrence of one for every 138,308 passengers is true, that can be one incident in 277 flights (A Boring 747 carries about 500 passengers, one carried over 1000 passengers, thus 138,308 divided by 500 is less then 277 flights). If we assume the crew of that plane flew five trips a week for 50 week, two weeks off for vacation, that comes to 250 flight. Thus a crew of a 747 will have to face a "serious problem" with a passenger just less then once a year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_747#Improved_747_versions

Please note, most crews fly up to three trips a day, on smaller planes then a 747, but you have this problem about once a year given the level of traffic.

Thus do you want alcohol to be a factor? Remember this is a PLANE flying in the air, it just can not pull over to the side of the road and tell someone to get out. Sorry, I am one of those people who have dealt with drunks and as far as I am concern, unless you can get away from them (and you can NOT on a plane), they should NOT be permitted to have any alcohol. If they want to drink once off the plane, I have no objections, but like smoking, drinking is something that should be banned while people are contained in something they themselves can NOT get out of.

[Angleae]

125. Because it makes the airlines a shitload of money.

It's all about the benjamins.

[erpowers]

170. Cruise Ships Also

I realize cruise ships are different from planes, but cruise ships also use alcohol to make money. I watched a show about cruising and the narrator said cruise lines do not make a profit from selling cabins on cruises. They make their profit by selling alcohol during the cruises. The people working for the cruise line know just how much alcohol has to be sold in order for the company to make a profit off the cruises.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

138. "but since you can NOT smoke of planes, why are people permitted to DRINK on planes?"

Um, because there is no such thing as second-hand alcohol?

[happyslug]

139. So when a plane crashes or have to land early due to a drunk, that is NOT a problem?

Remember you can NOT get off a plane once it is on the air, and that is when both drinking and problems with drunks occur. If someone on my plane is causing problems due to drinking, I can NOT just exit the plane to avoid that person and the affects he or she is having on my flight. I can handle medical emergencies, but drinking should NOT be a factor in such emergencies.

I am sorry, second hand smoke has NEVER caused a plane to crash or divert to another airport. Alcohol has been involved in cases in both crashes and diversions, thus as someone who has never smoked, or has lived within someone who smoked, I find drunks less appealing then someone who is smoking, thus given a choice I prefer to run the risk of second hand smoke then the problem associated with an alcoholic.

Now the choice between second hand smoke and alcoholics is a bad choice, BOTH should be banned, for people on the same plane can NOT avoid associating with any smokers or alcoholics if either decides to smoke or drink, avoiding such people is impossible in an airplane and thus BOTH should be banned.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

141. That's up to the airlines, isn't it?

Some people can't even fly unless they have a few drinks. Plus they make a killing on the beer, wine and booze. I don't see it ending soon.

[happyslug]

144. If they need a few drinks to fly, they should NOT be flying

When I have run across someone who says he or she needs a few drinks to so something, you are talking about an alcoholic who is the type that will cause problems. Given that history, if they need a few drinks to get on a plane, I do not want to be on that same plane. As to the airlines, unless the FAA makes it a rule, the Airlines will NOT do it (that is why the FAA made it a rule NOT to permit smoking, the Airlines refused to do it themselves).

I am sorry, I should not have to ask around for an airline that forbids drinking, when drinking has been a problem, a problem I want to avoid. I should NOT be forced to have to deal with a problem I make an effort to avoid. I do not stop people from drinking, they can do so if they want, but I also have the right to avoid such people and activities when I want to avoid them. Those two rights come into conflict when it comes to Alcohol on planes and in such cases my right to avoid drunks should overcome the right of someone else to get drunk. If they need that drink, go to a bar not a plane.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

145. I'll have them contact you next time they fly, for a lesson in slug-flying.

You have no idea what it's like to have the fear of flying. And you need to fly for your job. I suppose you'll say they should quit the job they've worked for all their life because you might be on the same flight and would start harrumphing in the aisles. You are not being in any way diplomatic and I don't think anyone will be coming to you for advice on this matter.

[FrodosPet]

154. Actually, yes there is

It's a job hazard in my profession.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

163. That begs the question- what do you do?

What does second-hand liquor mean in that context?

[FrodosPet]

165. I am a night shift cab driver

Specialist in getting extremely intoxicated people home safely.

The pay sux, and many people disrespect my profession, but I feel good that I am making a positive contribution to society by keeping at least some drunks off the road.

Plus there is the ego thing about having one of the most dangerous jobs in the world in one of the most dangerous cities in the world.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

166. My brother's a cabbie, but in the not so dangerous Madison, WI.

So, second-hand alcohol is alcohol that's gone through one last fermentation process, before being "tapped" into the back of your cab?

[FrodosPet]

169. Exactly

Fortunately, it is a rare thing. Since 2007, I have only had to go out of service 3 times and wash off the outside of the cab twice. You learn when and how to pull to the side of the road quickly. One quick reminder of the $70 cleaning fee and most people are really good about getting out of the car in time.

[rocktivity]

122. This story puts a slightly different spin on things

Last edited Sun Jun 16, 2019, 01:56 PM - Edit history (3)

First Coast News.com: Stanley, 40, began working for ExpressJet nearly three years ago. She later converted to Islam and only learned earlier this year that her faith prohibits her both from serving alcohol and consuming it. She approached a supervisor on June 1...Lena Masri, an attorney with the Michigan chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said...(Stanley) was told to work out an arrangement with other flight attendants.

Well, there's the screwup: management left it to up Stanley's coworkers to accommodate her voluntarily rather than issue a specific directive -- there was no formal accommodation from the airline! On the other hand, what could possibly go wrong?

"We know that this arrangement has worked beautifully and without incident and that it hasn't caused any undue burden on the airline," Masri said...(But) a co-worker filed a complaint on Aug. 2, saying Stanley was not fulfilling her duties. The complaint, which Masri characterized as "Islamophobic," also said Stanley had a book with "foreign writings" and wore a head scarf.

That's what could possibly go wrong -- co-workers deciding that having to do her work was a discriminatory and undue burden upon them. I hope the plaintiff was informed by management that Stanley's headdress was allowed, and that any employee can read anything they want as long at it's not on company time. But there's a very practical reason why Stanley should have been fired -- what is the airline supposed to do if she's the only attendant available to work a one-attendant flight?


rocktivity

[Marrah_G]

126. It's her job. No one is asking her to drink the alcohol.

What's next?

[CBGLuthier]

127. I wonder how Air Emirates gets around this

Because they sure do serve alcohol on those flights. I would find it really hard to believe that all the FAs are non muslim.

[riderinthestorm]

137. Qatar Air, Kuwait Air, UAE Express - their Muslim FAs serve booze

this woman has thousands of examples of Muslim FAs who serve it.

If she were really fundie, she'd be making a bigger stink about prayer accommodations which are truly an Islamic pillar.

She just doesn't want to deal with the worst part of of this job - the drunks, the drunken gropers, the asshole drunks that have to be cut off and get into a verbal brawl etc. Just say it's your religion and foist the shittiest part of the job onto someone else. Extra bonus, she never has to do the hard work of being a solo FA since she can't ever be scheduled to work alone (which make up 3/5ths of the schedule for ExpressJet).

Now it's ka-Ching! Since I'm sure ExpressJet will simply settle.

There's no downside for her here.

Ugh.

[YOHABLO]

128. She needs to find a job that fits her religious beliefs.

[romanic]

130. Get another job then.

If your religion gets in the way of you fufilling tasks assigned to you, then find another job that won't violate your faith. End of story.

[liberal N proud]

132. She took the job, she needs to fulfill the duties of the job

This shit of using religion to deny services to others is total bullshit.

I saw something on Facebook the other day that said something like this:

I can't eat pork so I am going to get a job where I can prevent you from eating pork as well.

[24601]

136. The same standards apply as in the Kentucky case: She has a Constitutional right to refuse to serve

alcohol; however, there is no Constitutional right to be a flight attendant and the statutes of employment law govern.

Her job responsibilities and rights are as articulated in her employment contract. If the article is accurate and her employer agreed to a reasonable accommodation on this point, she likely will win.

[rocktivity]

140. Her supervisor told her to "work out something" with her co-workers

Last edited Sat Jun 18, 2016, 07:52 PM - Edit history (4)

That's not making an accommodation. Since nothing was ever formally articulated to her coworkers from their superiors, one of them refused and complained -- rightfully.

Yes, she can win the case, but only because the airline didn't actually make an accommodation.


rocktivity

[24601]

143. Her attorney characterizes it as her employer did agree. That's why we have juries, to decide the

the facts - and the judge will apply the law.

Any decent employment attorney would take her case and will argue that after agreeing to the accommodation, the employer then failed to ensure other employees lived up to their commitment.

The airline's attorney will argue that all they agreed to was that she could ask a fellow employee to help.

A jury will decide if the airline, as the employer with the power in this situation, acted in sufficient good faith.

Torts 101 - I predict she will win - either by a jury decision, or because the airline settles out of court. Express Jet has more to lose in bad PR than they stand to win in not paying her wages and hiring a replacement. They are a sub-carrier to several major carriers who don't want the controversy and will pressure Express jet to make it go away.

[ProfessorGAC]

168. Given The Absence of Specifics. . .

. . .i don't know that i can buy that. If an employer says "OK, see if you can work something out with the others on your flights." a lawyer could construe that as the airline agreeing. But, that could also be interpreted as having no disagreement as long as she could work out something on her own.

Guess what i'm saying is, the airline may have agreed to let her see what she could do, and not stop those attempts or conversations.

That doesn't necessarily mean they agreed that she wouldn't have to do that part of the job.

[bigwillq]

142. Do the job or find a new one (nt)

[alarimer]

147. I get that she can't drink it, but why force passengers to adhere to her religious nonsense?

Especially on those flights where no one else is working. This means scheduling someone else for those flights and I'm not sure that's a reasonable accommodation. A reasonable accommodation is one that doesn't seriously effect operations. If I owned a retail establishment that was open 7 days a week and had a Jewish employee who wanted every Saturday off, and a Christian employee that wanted every Sunday off, I could accommodate both of those people easily enough. But it would be much more difficult if I had a lot of Christian employees who all wanted Sundays off. I cannot be expected to grant them all the day off to accommodate their religious preferences.

So we have to determine what is considered reasonable. What is reasonable to an employer may not seem reasonable to other workers. And what is reasonable to one employer would be impossible to another. For airlines, it is my understanding that the most senior employees (in this case flight attendants) get the most favorable routes and schedules. It is my guess that the single-FA flights are NOT among those, being of shorter duration and maybe to smaller towns and cities. So how is it fair that senior flight attendants (who normally would have the better routes) give up their privileges to accommodate a less-senior FA (assuming they are not at the same levels)? I don't think that would be reasonable.

And then there is the issue of the passengers. I get that she doesn't drink alcohol. But is there some prohibition on handling it? Or serving it to others, who may not share your beliefs? What right do you have to force your beliefs on them? They are not guests in your home. They are paying passengers and part of the job entails serving alcohol. So long as that is a legal activity, it always will.

And it isn't discrimination not to be able to accommodate a such a request if it means that the business cannot easily make a religious accommodation. What if they need her at the last minute for a flight in which she would be the only FA? Say someone called in sick or whatever. Then do they cancel the flight because she can't do it? I don't think that's reasonable either.

[FrodosPet]

162. "Facts About Religious Discrimination" from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027153282

[TwilightGardener]

158. Perfectly OK with me. Trying to stick her coworkers with extra work, with religion

as an excuse, is what it sounds like to me.

[ButterflyBlood]

161. so a flight attendant version of Kim Davis?

Yep, can her.