Wire service report
What happens when an employee’s freedom of religion crosses paths with a company’s interests? A recent article in The Conference Board Review looks to answer this question. In “Workers’ Rites,” TCB Review explores how expression of religion in the workplace often challenges businesses to find appropriate solutions to employees’ requests.
“Obviously, you can’t fire someone just because her faith differs from yours,” writes associate editor Vadim Liberman. “But what happens when you face situations that aren’t so black and white-when the beliefs and practices of customers and co-workers come into play, not to mention the intricacies of employment law?” As religion increasingly collides with corporate policies and practices, companies are asking what is and isn’t permissible behavior – for workers and for themselves.
Last year, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission received 2,541 claims of religious discrimination in the workplace-almost 50 percent more than a decade ago. And according to the New York-based Tanenbaum Center for Interreligious Understanding, 66 percent of employees report “evidence of religious bias at work.”
So what’s a company to do when it finds itself in a thorny predicament? To find out, the article examines numerous real-life scenarios of corporations struggling with how to balance an employee’s religious beliefs with their own goals. Each case was presented to diversity consultants, employment attorneys, and representatives from religious organizations for their recommendations in order to show what companies did right, did wrong, or what they didn’t do at all. For example:
What if . . . you operate a restaurant chain whose dress code forbids visible tattoos, but one worker refuses to abide by the code because doing so would cover markings that his religion demands be kept exposed?
What if . . . you run a tech-support company, and a technician refuses to provide help to a client that manufactures violent computer-software games? A devout Christian, she claims that servicing the customer would violate her faith. You explain that no other accounts have available openings, but she still objects.
What if . . . it’s customary for your salespeople to go for drinks with clients, but one of your workers refuses to imbibe? Doing so, he says, contravenes his Mormon faith. But you believe his abstinence impedes his ability to sell effectively.
What if . . . you have a contract agreement with a union that stipulates that all your workers must become members of the union, but one recently hired employee refuses to join? He says doing so would violate his religious beliefs.
What if . . . a group of Christian employees objects to your company’s portion of diversity training dealing with gays and lesbians? To protest, they silently read the Bible when homosexuality comes up during a training session.
Each of the above was an actual court case, and the article outlines how each case uncomfortably twisted its way to a conclusion.
“If nothing else, these examples illustrate what to do-or, rather, not to do-in order to avoid lawsuits,” says Liberman. “But accommodating a worker’s faith is about more than just steering clear of a judge. It’s also a means to retain good talent. There’s no sense in perpetuating problems with a productive employee if you can reasonably accommodate his religious convictions.”
In the end, just remember: “religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehensible to others in order to merit protection,” according to the law. As more workers assert their religious rights at work, that very well may be corporate America’s new golden rule.
Source: The Conference Board
