Religion in the Workplace

Case Study #1: Religion in the Workplace

In this case where Habib sued the company for religious bias, the company should have won the case. In the first place Habib didn’t state that cleaning the men’s restroom was against his religion. Therefore, Foreman Leo Carter did not know that cleaning the restroom was a task not allowed in his Habib’s religion. Secondly, Habib only stayed quiet when Foreman Leo mentioned that everyone would have to cooperate one time in cleaning the men’s restroom. Habib did not speak out voicing his opinions or restrictions in doing this task, so Leo could not have known. Everyone else agreed so why couldn’t he? Habib’s only argument for not cleaning the restroom was that the task was not in his job description and that it was beneath his position. Would Habib spoken out the day that Leo told them that they each needed to clean the restroom one day, maybe they could have compromised and talked about a resolution then. But because he decided to use the religion issue after suing for being fired due to insubordination, I don’t think it’s a valid lawsuit. Maybe Leo took it to the extreme when deciding to fire Habib. He could have written up Habib instead of deciding to fire him, to avoid any lawsuits. Cleaning the restroom is something Habib could have done without harming himself or society, so he should have done it.

According to the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection procedures, courts do not require employers to hire additional employees just to cover for another employee who needs a religious accommodation. Because one of the guidelines which is identified as a mean of accommodating religious practices that prohibit working, is voluntary substitutes and change of job assignments, some bargaining agreements include a provision that each employee must join a union for pay the union a sum equivalent to dues. Meaning if Habib was against complying with volunteering to clean the men’s restroom and refusing to a one day’s...