Comments on: Discrimination law roundup

By: Bill H

Bill H — Sun, 16 Oct 2016 04:55:59 +0000

In reply to gitarcarver. Thanks for pointing me in the correct direction Gitarcarver. That makes this even more interesting. I'd still like to see her spanked (in a legal sense!) for throwing such an idiotic tantrum. I wonder how airlines like Emirates covers this.

By: gitarcarver

gitarcarver — Sat, 15 Oct 2016 23:26:03 +0000

Actually, the woman had worked for the airline for a year before converting to Islam. She did not seek a job where she could claim discrimination, but rather she took the job when the idea of serving alcohol didn’t matter to her.

According to the Washington Post, when she asked for other flight attendants to serve alcohol in her place, the airline agreed. All was honky dory until another employee complained that the Muslim attendant wasn’t doing the job that she, as a non-Muslim, was required to do.

The airline agreed with the second employee. As they say: “game on.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/09/08/muslim-flight-attendant-suspended-for-refusing-to-serve-alcohol-files-federal-complaint/

Frankly, this case highlights the problem that for a company, there is no safe haven when there are competing complaints of discrimination. If the Muslim attendant wins the case, the company is out costs, pay and a penalty. If the non-Muslim wins, the company is out costs, pay and a penalty.

In the end, the business is caught and can only wait for an arbitrary decision by someone who has never worked in their industry (or most likely any industry) and has no idea how regulations and decisions affect day to day operations of any company. The only people that are not protected from being discriminated against are owners of businesses.

By: Bill H

Bill H — Sat, 15 Oct 2016 16:10:34 +0000

In reply to gasman. That's just it, Gasman. They specifically sought that job knowing full well that alcohol service was a part of it. The attendant in question was looking to pick a fight and cash in on the basis of religious discrimination. It's unfortunate that the airline fell for that trap. Equally bad, now that's a job avenue you know will be restricted for Muslims because they can't be trusted to not pull this stunt.

By: gasman

gasman — Thu, 13 Oct 2016 17:12:21 +0000

“Muslim flight attendant for ExpressJet suspended, wouldn’t serve alcohol”
There are many many jobs in the airline industry that do not involve service of alcohol. And the airline industry is but a small part of the economy (http://airlines.org/data/, http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes532031.htm), with flight attendant much less than 1% of total US employment.

Law places a burden on employers to make minimal accommodation for employees.
Why not ask employees to also have a minimal burden. 99%+ of jobs are not flight attendants. Perhaps this person should have sought a job for which her personal scruples did not conflict with basic job description.