This is insanity
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-10-2015, 08:28 AM
RE: This is insanity
Something just isn't right about this. There should be no religious exemptions period. If you don't like the job requirements, don't work there. Keep your religion at home, or church or mosque or wherever. I've seen it at the police departments and security companies I work. The Jews and Muslims don't have to shave, but the rest of us (atheists, christians) can get fired if we're not clean shaven. They should just make the policy that nobody has to shave anymore instead of giving one group privileges over other groups. It's called "uniform" for a reason.

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2015, 09:50 AM
RE: This is insanity
I'm missing something here. Making a reasonable exception to accommodate a religious issue is not that big a deal. The two drivers here were hired to drive trucks, which they were happy to do. All they asked is they not be assigned to drive trucks that had alcohol. It's not like they took a job at InBev, where transporting alcohol is fundamental to the job. The company could easily redo the schedule, and it sounds like switches were frequent.

So, what's the big deal? Why the outrage? Just because we all don't believe in god doesn't mean others don't. The request was reasonable. The law says it has to therefore be accommodated. And, for the life of me, I don't get why its a problem.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BnW's post
29-10-2015, 09:56 AM
RE: This is insanity
(29-10-2015 09:50 AM)BnW Wrote:  I'm missing something here. Making a reasonable exception to accommodate a religious issue is not that big a deal. The two drivers here were hired to drive trucks, which they were happy to do. All they asked is they not be assigned to drive trucks that had alcohol. It's not like they took a job at InBev, where transporting alcohol is fundamental to the job. The company could easily redo the schedule, and it sounds like switches were frequent.

So, what's the big deal? Why the outrage? Just because we all don't believe in god doesn't mean others don't. The request was reasonable. The law says it has to therefore be accommodated. And, for the life of me, I don't get why its a problem.

Fox news. Drinking Beverage

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2015, 09:58 AM
RE: This is insanity
That's my theory as well.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2015, 09:58 AM
RE: This is insanity
(29-10-2015 09:50 AM)BnW Wrote:  I'm missing something here. Making a reasonable exception to accommodate a religious issue is not that big a deal. The two drivers here were hired to drive trucks, which they were happy to do. All they asked is they not be assigned to drive trucks that had alcohol. It's not like they took a job at InBev, where transporting alcohol is fundamental to the job. The company could easily redo the schedule, and it sounds like switches were frequent.

So, what's the big deal? Why the outrage? Just because we all don't believe in god doesn't mean others don't. The request was reasonable. The law says it has to therefore be accommodated. And, for the life of me, I don't get why its a problem.

Yeah there is a growing number of these stories every half year or so, the religious exemption of a job to (make someone else do it) and I don't have a problem letting them make someone else do it because many of these scenarios can easily be handled that way. But really these businesses would be better off loosening up that way too.

It's just like some story from last year in England with a grocery store Muslim employee not wanting to ring up alcohol during Ramadan or whatever the specifics were and told the person to go to the self checkout lane but got fired for it. I think the customer is just being a self indulgent snob at that point to be bothered by the scenario.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2015, 10:00 AM
RE: This is insanity
(29-10-2015 09:58 AM)BnW Wrote:  That's my theory as well.

No need to theorize. It explicitly says it in the article.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2015, 10:09 AM
RE: This is insanity
(29-10-2015 07:09 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(29-10-2015 02:27 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  Juries are only as fucked up as the people that they're comprised of.

So you get some real idiots from time to time..

The jury was only there to determine damages. The judge had already made the ruling.

Also, each jury member has to be approved by both lawyers. At least that's how it's been every time I've had jury duty.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2015, 10:10 AM
RE: This is insanity
The key is how reasonable the request is. In the 80s there was a case where firemen asked for exceptions to the no beard rule. The rule was a safety issue about masks fitting properly. The city argued that beards could result in smoke inhalation and put the lives of the individual and their colleagues in danger.

Since the no beards rule was not arbitrary, but was necessary to do the job, the court held the city and fire department could enforce the no beard rule.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2015, 10:22 AM
RE: This is insanity
(29-10-2015 09:50 AM)BnW Wrote:  I'm missing something here. Making a reasonable exception to accommodate a religious issue is not that big a deal. The two drivers here were hired to drive trucks, which they were happy to do. All they asked is they not be assigned to drive trucks that had alcohol. It's not like they took a job at InBev, where transporting alcohol is fundamental to the job. The company could easily redo the schedule, and it sounds like switches were frequent.

So, what's the big deal? Why the outrage? Just because we all don't believe in god doesn't mean others don't. The request was reasonable. The law says it has to therefore be accommodated. And, for the life of me, I don't get why its a problem.

I'd have to know more to decide how unreasonable I thought it was.
Was there another driver and shipment that they could swap with at the time?
Was it promised when they were hired that they'd always be able to swap assignments?
Was it clear to the employer when they were hired that they would refuse to drive some shipments?
How often are drivers unable to switch assignments for non-religious reasons and are they allowed to refuse?

I have no problem with them wanting to switch but I can see situations where it just might not be possible and still keep a schedule. It is reasonable to accommodate them whenever possible but it is unreasonable for them to expect to never have to accommodate the needs of their employer.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes unfogged's post
29-10-2015, 10:23 AM (This post was last modified: 29-10-2015 10:40 AM by Lord Dark Helmet.)
RE: This is insanity
(29-10-2015 10:10 AM)BnW Wrote:  The key is how reasonable the request is. In the 80s there was a case where firemen asked for exceptions to the no beard rule. The rule was a safety issue about masks fitting properly. The city argued that beards could result in smoke inhalation and put the lives of the individual and their colleagues in danger.

Since the no beards rule was not arbitrary, but was necessary to do the job, the court held the city and fire department could enforce the no beard rule.

But do you think its OK for a company, or let's say a job that doesn't require a fitted mask to prevent smoke inhalation to let one group of people grow a beard, but not another group? Because I can tell you right now, if I came to work with a beard I would get written up and sent home, and fired if I did it a second time. Yet my coworker, who is Jewish gets to grow a beard. It just doesn't sit right with me.

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: