Muslim Flight Attendant Suspended For Not Serving Alcohol,Cites Religious Belief

[NotreDame]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/09/07/muslim-flight-attendant-suspended/71852754/

According to the information provided at the link, the airline initially accommodated the Muslim flight attendant by granting her an exemption from serving alcoholic beverages. However, the company subsequently revoked the accommodation after another employee filed a complaint.

Should the airline be permitted to engage in this conduct? Is the airline impermissibly infringing upon her religious beliefs? Does she or should she have a religious freedom interest to work at the airline as a flight attendant although she has a religious objection to serving alcohol?

I am supposing she will file a Civil Rights complaint. See below.

http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/wysk/workplace_religious_accommodation.cfm

I do not have sufficient facts at the moment to assess her Civil Rights complaint, assuming she indeed does the complaint. The central query will be whether to permit the flight attendant to not serve alcohol would pose an "undue hardship" for the employer. At the moment, however, the fact the airline did initially accommodate her certainly weakens a claim the accommodation she seeks is an "undue hardship."

What I am equally interested in is whether those advocating for the breadth of religious freedom and exemptions at this website agree or disagree with the airline/Muslim flight attendant?

 

[NightHawkeye]

Seems that the airline's mistake was making accommodation for her at all.

No good deed goes unpunished ...

 

[KitKatMatt]

If a private company wants to accommodate an employee's religious beliefs, all the power to them.

However, if you're in a position where your job duties clash with your religious beliefs, you might need to look for another job.

I wonder why they didn't look into this further when an employee complained, though, since they had already agreed to accommodations? Instead of just suspending her.

 

[JustOneWay]

Seems that the airline's mistake was making accommodation for her at all.

I disagree because this is incomplete. They made the accommodation, then reversed the accommodation and suspended.

 

[NotreDame]

If a private company wants to accommodate an employee's religious beliefs, all the power to them.

However, if you're in a position where your job duties clash with your religious beliefs, you might need to look for another job.

I wonder why they didn't look into this further when an employee complained, though, since they had already agreed to accommodations? Instead of just suspending her.

Well philosophically the debate is whether an accommodation should be made? If an accommodation should be made, under what circumstances?

I think the answer is yes, there should be accommodations made by employees to employers' religious beliefs/practices. In answering the second question, one condition would be the accommodation can reasonably be granted by the employer and this would take into consideration costs, alternative positions/duties to be performed, exchanging positions amongst employees, etcetera.

Legally, there is already a statute regulating employers, employees, and accommodating the religious beliefs of employees. The fact the company provided an accommodation before does weaken any claim by the airline the accommodation is an "undue hardship."

 

[JustOneWay]

What I am equally interested in is whether those advocating for the breadth of religious freedom and exemptions at this website agree or disagree with the airline/Muslim flight attendant?

I am of the belief that the private company has the right to suspend/fire or transfer those who refuse assigned tasks based on religious beliefs.

Would you consider this situation on the same level as a pharmacist who denies a customer birth control?

 

[NightHawkeye]

I disagree because this is incomplete. They made the accommodation, then reversed the accommodation and suspended.

They apparently violated their own procedures and possibly even federal law in making the original accommodation ... which they were later forced to reverse.

The airline knew that serving alcohol was a bona fide job requirement but, out of kindness apparently, the airline was willing to overlook that bona fide job requirement ... until they got called on it.

 

[JustOneWay]

They apparently violated their own procedures and possibly even federal law in making the original accommodation ... which they were later forced to reverse.

The airline knew that serving alcohol was a bona fide job requirement but, out of kindness apparently, the airline was willing to overlook that bona fide job requirement ... until they got called on it.

There is nothing wrong with a company choosing to not require an employee to perform a task as long as others will perform those tasks.

 

[NightHawkeye]

There is nothing wrong with a company choosing to not require an employee to perform a task as long as others will perform those tasks.

Look. She had been working for the airline for several years and serving alcohol. She converted to Islam and decided not to perform certain job duties.

The airline initially attempted to accommodate but those accommodations were unsuccessful ... and she filed a lawsuit.

Personally, I doubt there's anything the airline could have done to avoid a lawsuit, though I suspect their best hope would have been to cut it short as soon as she decided she could no longer perform her job functions.

 

[NotreDame]

I am of the belief that the private company has the right to suspend/fire or transfer those who refuse assigned tasks based on religious beliefs.

Would you consider this situation on the same level as a pharmacist who denies a customer birth control?

Ideally, I favor liberty and freedom but at the same time I also realize people need to earn a living, eat, pay rent, take care of their family, etcetera. The law makes the correct balance by observing there are certain situations in which the employee does not have to choose between their religious beliefs/practices and providing for their family and earn a living without imposing a significant or substantial burden to the employee, indeed in some situations no burden at all to the employee.

I understand people do not have a right to be employed or a right to employment and the employee/employer relationship has the inherent understanding the employee agrees to perform certain tasks as part of their employment. However, the statute does not abolish this inherent characteristic of employment or the relationship between employer/employee but instead asks of employers to make accommodations when and where the employer reasonably can as opposed to choosing the alternative of telling the employee to hit the street.

 

[NotreDame]

They apparently violated their own procedures and possibly even federal law in making the original accommodation ... which they were later forced to reverse.

The airline knew that serving alcohol was a bona fide job requirement but, out of kindness apparently, the airline was willing to overlook that bona fide job requirement ... until they got called on it.

Can you inform me as to what possible federal law the airline violated by initially accommodating the employee?

 

[NightHawkeye]

Can you inform me as to what possible federal law the airline violated by initially accommodating the employee?

I don't know that they did. It was just a thought. It seems clear that they violated their own policies ... as well as the job description for flight attendants though.

 

[Vylo]

Don't take a job that serves alcohol if you object to it.

 

[NotreDame]

Don't take a job that serves alcohol if you object to it.

We aren't discussing a bartender but a flight attendant. Employment as a flight attendant does not necessarily imply or include serving alcohol.

 

[Vylo]

We aren't discussing a bartender but a flight attendant. Employment as a flight attendant does not necessarily imply or include serving alcohol.

It always has when I have flown.

Sometimes your job has you do things vaguely connected with things you disagree with. You can quit or you can just do your job. No one is forcing her to drink.

 

[NotreDame]

It always has when I have flown.

Sometimes your job has you do things vaguely connected with things you disagree with. You can quit or you can just do your job. No one is forcing her to drink.

Yet, your flying experience isn't the entirety of what is offered during flights from flight attendants or the airline. Airlines are known to not offer liquor or alcohol for short flights and a flight attendant on such flights isn't expected to serve something they aren't already offering.

As I stated previously, your presumption being a flight attendant has as its job serving alcohol or liquor isn't accurate. We aren't discussing bartenders.