Date: 14.2.2017 / Article Rating: 5 / Votes: 509 #Essay on demand

Recent Posts

Home >> Uncategorized >> Essay on demand

Essay on demand

Oct/Sat/2017 | Uncategorized

Essay on Demand - 1485 Words | Cram

Essay on demand

High Quality Custom Essay Writing Service -
Economics Essay on Demand and Supply - 1934 Words |…

A View From The Bridge Essay Help. A View From The Bridge Essay Help. Essay! A View From The Bridge Essay Help. A View From The Bridge Essay Help. A View From The Bridge Essay Help. The cost-effective price means no quality compromise! We all have walked miles in student’s shoes and we do realize your needs. Childs Book! Our service is interested in providing help in essay writing for different students, and each client is equally important to us.

The service we have created presents an on demand, easy-to-use platform to buy essay online and to receive the exact essay you need. Our site presents a vast choice of the options. With us you are provided with a chance to take active part in writing your essay. The objective of our service is satisfying the on the, needs of the on demand, clients, which means that your preferences, comments, and instruction will be carefully followed. You’re always running out of of view on the lottery, time especially when you are at college.

Colleges and universities can load you with the tons of essays, and sometimes it is hard to understand where to essay on demand, start from. Frank Cesario! Students often face situations when they have a solid theoretical background, but encounter problems with the text structuring. Or sometimes, the approaching finals are always a stressing period which can influence the process and quality of essay, your essay. In order to childs report, conduct a successful study, the concentration and efforts have to be maximized. Our team consists of people who are into dealing with extreme situations and on demand, challenges head on. Working on the verge of the opportunities is our pleasure. Advantage In Cambodia! The writers are not afraid of: Time constraints Levels of complexity Essay types The volume of research. Why should I buy college essays from your site?

College time is priceless. On Demand! However, some teachers seem to be merciless: the amount and scrupulosity of the in cambodia essay, instructions provided for essay writing is overwhelming. Every teacher has his own understanding of the final assignment and knows what he/she wishes to on demand, get. That is cesario resume why the degree of instructions fulfillment directly affects the mark and, consequently, may influence your academic future. On Demand! You don’t have to worry about it with our site when buying essays online!

Our writing team’s strengths are extreme attentiveness and mindfulness. No detail will be missed. We share the same objectives with our clients – to childs book, prepare the best essay possible. For this purpose, it is very important for our clients to on demand, provide the complete and utter information concerning your essay. We hope for our win-win collaboration each time you buy essays online cheap! Buying essay from our site usually looks as follows: Each instruction field must be thoroughly filled, so our writers get the full picture of the essay you need Attach the files if necessary You may contact us 24 / 7 and inform about any clarifications or additional details The choice of the resume copy file, author is in essay, your hands. You can continue working with the cesario resume, chosen writer, your preferences will be saved and taken into account You are free to ask for a draft of your essay and stay involved in writing process and monitor the progress Despite the professionalism of essay on demand, our writers, each essay is carefully checked by frank resume the Quality Assurance Department to make sure you get the best paper Anti-plagiarism is the core principle: we make sure the essay is 100 percent unique the plagiarism possibility is excluded You receive your essay Receive an A-stamped paper! Why we offer to buy our essays online cheap? Our writers look at each essay through the essay on demand, prism of knowledge, solid research background, argumentation, and critical approach. The philosophy of our company outlines the highest quality, student satisfaction and exceeded expectations and put these attributes before the financial benefit.

We are the best choice in essay emergency! Our writers can be challenged with the urgency up to several hours, and you won’t be disappointed. We approach writing your essays in a special way, because we are used to think different. The authors are not only frank cesario resume savants in their field; they are also professional writers, who can provide perfectly structured text. On Demand! Your essay will be different from the other soulless works. It will showcase the real thinking process and will have the sparkle that will be definitely evaluated by your teacher. Our writers are professionals, and each essay is treated equally seriously. The efforts used for the college essay, high school essay, or dissertation are the same. Advantage Of Tourism In Cambodia Essay! If you lack time or cannot write your essay for any other reason – our service is to stand by!

All the papers you get at are meant for on demand, research purposes only. Childs Book Report! The papers are not supposed to be submitted for academic credit. should be there! Terms conditions Privacy policy Referral program. Please read these Terms and Conditions (“Terms” and/or “Terms and Conditions”) carefully before using the website (“Website”). Your access to and use of Website are conditioned on your full acceptance and essay, compliance with these Terms and Conditions and this Website Privacy Policy, which are published at monomyth essays, and which are incorporated herein by reference (“Privacy Policy”). Essay On Demand! These Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy are applied to all visitors, users and others who access or use this Website. By accessing or using this Website, you agree to monomyth essays, be bound by essay these Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy. If you disagree with these Terms and Conditions and/or Privacy Policy or any part of them, you must not use this Website.

Capitalized terms defined in these Terms and childs book report, Conditions shall have no other meaning but set forward in this section. Essay! The following terminology is applied to resume, these Terms and Conditions, Privacy Policy and Refund and Revision Policy: “Client”, “You” and “Your” refers to you, the person accessing this Website and accepting these Terms and Conditions. “We”, “Us” and “Ourselves” refers to website. Any use of the above terminology or other words in the singular, plural, capitalization and/or he/she or they, are taken as interchangeable and therefore as referring to same. By using our Services, you represent and warrant that (a) all registration information you submit to is essay on demand truthful and accurate; (b) you will maintain the accuracy of such information; (c) you are 18 years of age or older and/or have full legal capacity to enter into advantage of tourism in cambodia essay, legally binding relations; and (d) your use of the essay on demand, Services does not violate any applicable law, regulation, and/or your college/university/school rules. Your profile may be deleted and Services provided to you may be terminated without warning, if we believe that you are less than 18 years of age and/or do not have full legal capacity to enter into legally binding relations. Subjected to full compliance with these Terms and Conditions, shall provide academic writing services as described more fully on point of view essay lottery, the Website (“Services”). Services may include, but not be limited to, providing our Clients with dissertations, research papers, book reports, term papers, and on demand, other types of assignments written by team (“Paper”) which are intended for copy, research/reference purposes and for essay, your personal use only.

Services may include editing, proofreading, paraphrasing, or formatting existing papers of our Clients. Please note that rewriting an existing paper that contains 40% or more plagiarized content may qualify as providing you with a custom Paper and shall be charged for accordingly. Please note that Services may be provided only to the users who submit an appropriate order form at the Website and may charge fees for such Services. The Services are provided according to the provisions of monomyth essays, these Terms and Conditions and the specific commercial provisions and policies (including Privacy Policy, Refund Policy, etc.) as detailed on the Website, and essay on demand, these provisions and of view on the, policies may be amended or changed from time to time. The format of the Papers we provide: 12 point Times New Roman; Bibliography on on demand, a separate page; Approximately 250 words per page; One inch margin top, bottom, left, right; Title and Reference pages are free of charge. In case Client needs a single-spaced Paper they are to pay a double fee.

The standard Paper formatting includes a Title page , main content of the chaplain resume, Paper, and a Reference page. Note that you pay only for the main content of the Paper, while a Title page and a Reference page are provided free of charge. reserves the right to use any relevant materials available, such as books, journals, newspapers, interviews, online publications, etc., unless the essay, Client indicates some specific sources to point of view essay on the, be used. PLACING AN ORDER. When placing your order, you must provide accurate and complete information. You are solely responsible for any possible consequences and misunderstandings, in case you provide us with inaccurate and/or incorrect and/or unfaithful information. Please be advised that you will be asked to on demand, give final confirmation to the instructions you provide in order details. Your Paper instructions should be confirmed in your Order Tracking Area within 3 hours after placing your order (and within 1 hour for orders with urgency less than 24 hours). Orders without instructions will not be worked on and may be delayed and you accept sole responsibility for such delay. guarantees that the delivered Paper will meet only monomyth essays confirmed requirements. You must not change the instructions once you have confirmed them. Any alterations to confirmed instructions are considered as additional order, thereby requiring additional payment.

All payments are due upon receipt. Essay On Demand! If the payment is not received or payment method is declined, the file, Client forfeits of on demand, Services. Book Report! All fees are exclusive of all taxes and/or levies, and/or duties imposed by taxing authorities, and you shall be responsible for payment of all such taxes and/or levies, and/or duties. You agree to pay any such taxes that might be applicable to on demand, your use of the Services and monomyth essays, payments made by you under these Terms. On Demand! If at any time you contact your bank or credit card company and decline or otherwise reject the lottery, charge of essay on demand, any payment, this act will be considered as a breach of your obligation hereunder and your use of the Services will be automatically terminated. Use of monomyth essays, stolen credit card and/or any credit card fraud is considered to be a serious crime. closely cooperates with our payment provider to prevent and fight online fraud. In case of any online fraud, appropriate state authorities will be contacted immediately. Essay On Demand! By doing a chargeback, you agree to give up all your rights to the Paper automatically. At the same time, you authorize to publish the completed Paper and start the authorship procedure that will allow us to report, determine if you have used any parts of the Paper. The procedure may include contacting your school officials and/or posting your full details along with the completed Paper online. reserves the right to change its prices at any time in its sole discretion and such changes or modifications shall be posted online at the Website and essay, become effective immediately without need for further notice to any Client and/or user. Advantage! We care about our Clients and are always looking for ways to offer them the best value for money.

One method we use is a discount system., at its sole discretion, shall have the right to provide our Clients with discount programs as described more fully and published on the Website. According to on demand, our loyalty program, you earn back 10% of your total bill in resume copy file, Points (1 currency unit (inter alia USD/ EUR/ GBP etc.) = 1 Point) after you make your first order. Your Points are accumulated on your Credit Balance. “Credit Balance” is an account for Points of a Client which can be used for future purchases on the Website exclusively. You can use your Points for your next purchases on the Website exclusively. Your Points cannot be refunded. The discount may be obtained by the use of the promo code. The amount of Points added to the Credit Balance is essay on demand calculated on of view on the, the basis of the order price excluding the applied discount (if any). Later, 5% of every next order (not including credits) is added to your Credit Balance. Essay On Demand! will issue a refund to monomyth essays, you only according to these Terms. offers a 14-day money back period for Papers less than 20 pages and a 30-day period for Papers more than 20 pages (”Refund Period”). Refund Period begins on the date of essay on demand, Client`s order deadline and expires on the last day of the cesario resume, Refund Period.

In case you are not satisfied with any of the Services, you can submit a refund request according to these Terms within the essay on demand, Refund Period. Once the Refund Period elapses, will not refund any amounts paid. If the order is not completed and/or the Paper is not downloaded or delivered in report, its complete form by or to you, the full refund is issued at any time. On Demand! In the cesario, event of order cancellation, the funds will be debited back only to essay, the account of the resume file, initial payment within 5-7 business days from the time of essay, cancellation request. In other case assesses refund requests on of tourism, a case-by-case basis as there are usually unique reasons as to why a refund request is made. Essay! Please note that if you request a refund, we may require documented proof that the quality of your order is low (e.g., scan copy of your instructor’s feedback, plagiarism report, etc.). Should you feel it necessary to make a refund request, we will immediately forward your order to our Quality Assurance Department.

After comparing their findings with the reasons for dissatisfaction, the necessary corrective actions will be taken. Any refund request must be made within the Refund Period. In case reimburses the money because of resume copy file, mistakes or some irrelevance to on demand, the initial instructions, our Quality Assurance Department, at its sole discretion, evaluates the quality of the Paper and refunds an amount comparable to chaplain resume, the percentage of incorrect content in the Paper and on demand, mistakes present in monomyth essays, it. provides various methods of contact (i.e. email, telephone, message board, and live chat) to facilitate communication between you, us and on demand, the writer assigned to chaplain resume, complete an on demand, order. Using any of these methods, our Customer Support Center is available to file, you at any time and will respond to any refund request or other issue promptly. However, if such a request is not received using any of the aforementioned methods within the essay, Refund Period, will not be obliged to honor or consider the above said request. Should the monomyth essays, Paper delivery be delayed due to unexpected circumstances, from the side of, we may provide compensation for the breach of the order deadline in the form of a credit or a discount to be used towards your next order with us. Please be informed that delivery time deviation is not a subject to refund. Any revision request or complaint in essay, regards to a Paper that has provided must be made within the revision period (“Revision Period”). offers a 14-day Revision Period for Papers less than 20 pages and a 30-day period for Papers more than 20 pages. Revision Period begins on book, the date of Client`s order deadline and expires on the last day of the Revision Period. Essay! After that point, no revision and/or complaint will be accepted. recognizes that orders vary in size and monomyth essays, complexity; as a result, dissertation, thesis and/or other sufficiently large assignment may be granted 30-day Revision Period. Sufficiency in the size of the essay on demand, Paper will be determined by in its sole discretion.

In case a request for revision is not submitted within the Revision Period, tacitly accepts that the Client is satisfied with the Paper and requires no further actions to be taken in regards to the Paper unless extra payment is frank provided or a new order is placed. Upon receiving your completed assignment you are entitled to a free revision should the Paper fail to meet your instructions or defined the requirements in any way. When this is the case, you are entitled to request as many revisions as may be required to make the Paper consistent and compliant with your instructions. During the essay on demand, Revision Period the request for revision may be made at any time. All revisions must be based on the original order instructions. Chaplain Resume! If at the time of the revision request you provide new, additional, or differing instructions, this will be interpreted as an on demand, application for new Paper and thus, will require an additional payment.

Furthermore, should you request a revision after the Revision Period, it will also be considered as a new order requiring an additional payment. We may require you to supply us with personal identifying information, and we may also legally consult other sources to obtain information about you. Book Report! By accepting these Terms and essay on demand, Conditions, you authorize us to make any inquiries we consider necessary to chaplain resume, validate the information that you provide us with. On Demand! We may do this directly or by lottery verifying your information against third party databases; or through other sources. Essentially, verification procedure involves, inter alia, confirming that the order is authentic and that the on demand, cardholder is aware of charges by placing a phone call to them, and in certain cases by requesting some additional documents to be submitted for verification to our Risk Department. In order to monomyth essays, ensure timely delivery of your order, this procedure must be completed quickly and without delay. Therefore, it is vital to provide accurate and valid phone numbers. Failure to verify an essay on demand, order may result in order cancellation or the point of view lottery, order being placed on hold. Essay! You consent to chaplain resume, our processing your personal information for the purposes of on demand, providing the frank cesario, Services, including for verification purposes as set out essay, herein.

You also consent to the use of such data for communicating with you, for statutory and of tourism, accounting purposes. You acknowledge that you have read and consented to's Privacy Policy. LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY. will not be liable to you in essay on demand, relation to the contents of, the use of, or otherwise in connection with, this Website: for failure to learn the material covered by the Paper; and. for your final grade; and. for the outcome or consequences of monomyth essays, submission the Paper to essay on demand, any academic institution; and. excludes all liability for damages arising out of or in frank cesario resume, connection with your use of essay on demand, this Website. The latter includes, without limitation, damage caused to your computer, computer software, systems and programs and the data thereon, or any other direct or indirect, consequential and incidental damages. The Paper provided to you by frank resume remains our property and is the on demand, subject to copyright and book report, other intellectual property rights under local and international laws conventions. The Paper is intended for your personal use only and essay on demand, it may not be used, copied, reproduced, distributed, transmitted, broadcast, displayed, sold, licensed, or otherwise exploited for any other purposes without our prior written consent. You agree not to engage in the use, copying, or distribution of of tourism, Papers other than expressly permitted herein. Essay! We post Clients` testimonials on our Website which may contain personal information (first name or initials). Hereby by accessing or using this Website, you provide us with your consent to post your first name/initials along with your testimonial on our Website. Monomyth Essays! We ensure our posting these testimonials does not interfere with your confidentiality.

If you wish to request the on demand, removal of advantage of tourism in cambodia essay, your testimonial, you may contact us at [emailprotected] NOTIFICATION OF CHANGES. reserves the right to change these Terms and on demand, Conditions at any time and your continued use of the point essay lottery, Website will signify your acceptance of any adjustment, improvements and/or alterations to these Terms and on demand, Conditions. You are, therefore, advised to re-read these Terms and Conditions on a regular basis. This web site is advantage of tourism in cambodia essay owned and operated by Viatta Business Ltd. HEXO+ Self-Flying Camera Drone, with a suggested retail price of $1,249.00 USD («Main prize»). FreePage (single use) SMS inform (single use) Plagiarism Report (single use) 50$ to your bonus balance which you can use in 365 days 100$ to essay on demand, your bonus balance which you can use in 365 days.

2. Chaplain Resume! Promotional Period. The promotion begins on 7.18.2017, at 9:00 am and ends on 7.28.2017 at 10:00 pm. This Privacy Policy (“Policy”) describes how information about You is collected, used and disclosed and essay on demand, provides other important privacy information, describes when and how we may change this Policy, and tells You how to contact us with any questions or comments. We collect information about You and computer(s) You use when You use our Services or otherwise interact with us. “Personal Information” means information that we directly associate with a specific person or entity (for example: name; addresses; telephone numbers; email address; payment information; device location etc.). “Client”, “User”, “You” and “Your” refers to you, the person accessing this Website and childs book report, accepting these Privacy Policy. Any use of the on demand, above terminology or other words in the singular, plural, capitalization and/or he/she or they, are taken as interchangeable and therefore as referring to same. Resume! HOW INFORMATION ABOUT YOU IS COLLECTED. We collect information about You in three primary ways: Information You Provide. We collect information that You provide to us when You apply for and use and/or purchase our Services or otherwise communicate with us. For example, some of the ways You may provide information to us include: When You purchase our Services, the payment system will require your personal, contact, billing and essay on demand, credit information. When You establish or modify Your user account online, We may collect user identification information, passwords, and/or security question responses that You will use for future sign-on.

When You interact with our Customer Service representatives, enter information on our Website, submit survey responses, or pay for Services, we may also collect Personal Information and other information. We may monitor and record phone calls, e-mails, live chats, or other communications between You and our Customer Service representatives or other employees or representatives. Information We Collect Automatically. We automatically collect a variety of point of view essay lottery, information associated with Your use of our Services. Each time You visit the Website, Personal Information is automatically gathered. Essay On Demand! In general, this information does not identify You personally. Examples of automatically collected personal information include, but are not limited to: IP address, Collection Date, Publisher Name, Connection Speed, Day of Week Time of Day (hour), Language settings, Country, City (relating to IP address, if available). For example, some of the ways we may automatically collect information include: Cookies and similar technologies. A “cookie” is a small text file that a web site can place on Your computer's hard drive in order, for example, to resume, collect information about on demand Your activities on the Website.

The cookie transmits this information back to the Website's computer, which, generally speaking, is the only computer that can read it. We need to use cookies on the Website to enhance the monomyth essays, user experience and avoid multiple logins or password authentication requests. We may use, or we may engage third-parties to use on our behalf, cookies or similar web tags (small data text files placed on your computer or device) or similar technologies to identify Your computer or device and record Your preferences and essay, other data so that our Website can personalize Your visit(s), see which areas and childs, features of on demand, our Website are popular, and monomyth essays, improve our Website and Your experience. Depending upon Your computer, You may be able to set Your browser(s) to reject cookies or delete cookies, but that may result in the loss of essay, some functionality on the Website. We may also use web beacons (small graphic images on a web page or an HTML e-mail) to monitor interaction with our websites or e-mails. Web beacons are generally invisible because they are very small (only 1-by-1 pixel) and the same color as the background of the resume, web page or e-mail message. Web Browsing Activity. When accessing our Website, We automatically collect certain information about Your computer and essay on demand, Your visit, such as your IP address, browser type, date and point essay on the, time, the web page You visited before visiting our Website, Your activities and purchases on on demand, our Website, and point of view on the lottery, other analytical information associated with the Website.

Information From Other Sources. We may also obtain information about You from on demand other sources. For example, We may receive credit information from on the third-party sources before initiating Your service. We may also purchase or obtain Personal Information (for example, e-mail lists, postal mail lists, demographic and marketing data) from others. HOW WE USE INFORMATION WE COLLECT ABOUT YOU.

We use the information We collect for a variety of business purposes, such as: To provide and bill for Services You purchase; To deliver and confirm Services You obtain from us; To verify Your identity and maintain a record of essay on demand, Your transactions and interactions with us; To provide customer services to You; To create, modify, improve, enhance, remove or fix our Services and their performance; To identify and suggest products or services that might interest You; To make internal business decisions about current and future Service offerings; To provide You customized user experiences, including personalized Services offerings; To protect our rights, interests, safety and property and that of our customers, service providers and other third parties; and. Frank Cesario Resume! To comply with law or as required for legal purposes. We may use Personal Information for investigations or prevention of fraud or network abuse. We may use information we collect to contact You about our and/or third-party products, services, and offers that We believe You may find of interest. We may contact You by telephone, postal mail, e-mail, or other methods. On Demand! You may see advertisements when You visit our Website. We may help advertisers better reach our customers by providing certain customer information, including geographic information, language preferences or demographic information obtained from other companies.

This information is chaplain resume used by essay on demand advertisers to determine which ads may be more relevant to You. However, we do not share Personal Information outside of our corporate family for advertising purposes without Your consent. WHEN WE SHARE INFORMATION COLLECTED ABOUT YOU. We do not sell, license, rent, or otherwise provide Your Personal Information to unaffiliated third-parties (parties outside our corporate family) without Your consent. We may, however, disclose Your information to unaffiliated third-parties as follows: With Your Consent. We may disclose Personal Information about frank cesario resume You to third-parties with Your consent.

We may obtain Your consent in writing; online, through “click-through” agreements; when You accept the terms of essay on demand, disclosures for certain Services; orally, when You interact with our customer service representatives. We encourage You not to share Your password. If You provide Your user account password and/or security question responses to third parties they will have access to Your Personal Information when they access Your user account with Your account password. To Our Service Providers. Monomyth Essays! We may disclose information to third-party vendors and partners who complete transactions or perform services on our behalf (for example, credit/debit card processing, billing, customer service, auditing, and marketing). In a Business Transfer. Essay! We may sell, disclose, or transfer information about You as part of monomyth essays, a corporate business transaction, such as a merger or acquisition, joint venture, corporate reorganization, financing, or sale of on demand, company assets, or in the unlikely event of insolvency, bankruptcy, or receivership, in which such information could be transferred to third-parties as a business asset in the transaction.

For Legal Process Protection. We may disclose Personal Information, and other information about You, or Your communications, where we have a good faith belief that access, use, preservation or disclosure of such information is reasonably necessary: to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, legal process or enforceable governmental request; to enforce or apply agreements, or initiate, render, bill, and chaplain resume, collect for essay on demand, services and products (including to chaplain resume, collection agencies in order to essay on demand, obtain payment for frank, our products and services); to protect our rights or interests, or property or safety or that of others; in connection with claims, disputes, or litigation – in court or elsewhere; to facilitate or verify the appropriate calculation of taxes, fees, or other obligations; or. in essay on demand, an emergency situation. We may provide information that does not identify You personally to third-parties for marketing, advertising or other purposes. HOW WE STORE AND PROTECT THE INFORMATION COLLECTED ABOUT YOU. Protecting Your Information. We use a variety of point of view, physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards to protect Personal Information from unauthorized access, use, or disclosure while it is under our control. Unfortunately, no data transmission over the internet can be guaranteed to essay, be completely secure. As a result, although we will utilize such measures, we do not guarantee You against the loss, misuse, or alteration of monomyth essays, Personal Information under our control, and You provide Personal Information to us at essay on demand, Your own risk. You should always take care with how You handle and disclose your Personal Information and should avoid sending Personal Information through insecure e-mail, social networks or other internet channels. Retention and Disposal. We retain information only for as long as we have a business or tax need or as applicable laws, regulations and/or government orders allow.

When we dispose of Personal Information, we use reasonable procedures designed to erase or render it unreadable (for example, shredding documents and wiping electronic media). PRIVACY POLICY UPDATES. How We Communicate Changes to This Policy. We may update this Policy at any time to provide updates to resume file, or clarification of our practices. If we make changes we may provide You with additional notice (such as adding a statement to the homepage of our Website or sending You a notification). You should refer to this Policy often for the latest information and essay, the effective date of any changes. This web site is owned and advantage of tourism in cambodia, operated by Viatta Business Ltd . Essay On Demand! A Partner is an individual who refers customers. A Referral is an individual who requests a service via the referral link given by a Partner. Monomyth Essays! With the first order, a Referral acquires a 15% discount on the order, while a Partner receives $50 to the Referral Balance.

With further purchases, a Partner earns 5% of the Referral’s total order price. All money earned with the Referral Program is stored on your Referral Balance. A Partner can transfer the money to the Bonus Balance and use it to purchase a service. It is essay possible to transfer the advantage, sum to the Partner’s PayPal account (no less than $20).

Buy Essay Papers Here -
Essay on Demand and Law of Demand

Omar Khadr, Oh Canada – an on demand anthology. Revised January 12, 2012 (extended bios below list of contributions) Maher Arar, human rights activist, publisher of Prism-Magazine (essay)“Omar Khadr: America’s Injustice Canada’s Shame” Craig Kielburger, child labour activist and co-founder of “Free the Children” foundation (essay) “The Day I Met Omar” George Elliott Clarke, poet, novelist, librettist, scholar “Re: That Gunfight at on the lottery, the O.K. Corral” (long poem) Luc Cote and Patricio Henriquez, writers, directors, cinematographers, producers of “ YOU DON’T LIKE THE TRUTH – 4 days inside Guantanamo” , a documentary based on security camera footage from the essay, Guantanamo Bay prison (excerpt from screenplay) LGen the Hon. Romeo A. Frank Cesario? Dallaire, Senator, excerpts from “How to Unmake a Child Soldier.” Gail Davidson, Executive Director, Lawyer’s Rights Watch Canada, (essay) “Torture as Foreign Policy: The Omar Khadr Decision” Nathalie des Rosiers, General Counsel, Canadian Civil Liberties Association “Pray or Play For Them: The Rights of Canadians Abroad” (essay) Robert Diab, lawyer, PhD student, instructor at on demand, Capilano University (author of Guantanamo North:Terrorism and the Administration of Justice in Canada) Alnoor Gova, broadcaster and PhD student, UBC (essay) “Reading Khadr: Making sense of Canada’s reluctance to do the right thing” Shadia Drury, CRC in Social Justice, U of Regina (essay) “Omar Khadr and the Perils of Multiculturalism” Kim Echlin, novelist, essayist, film producer (essay) “Extreme Loneliness” Dennis Edney, former lawyer for Omar Khadr (speech/essay) “The Politics of Fear” Charles Foran (essay) “Our Kids” Deborah Gorham History, Carleton University “Omar Khadr, Canadian Child Soldier” (essay) Patricio Henriquez , who with Luc Cote was writer, director, cinematographer and resume copy file producer of “YOU DON’T LIKE THE TRUTH – 4 days inside Guantanamo”, a documentary based on security camera footage from the Guantanamo Bay prison “Some Images of the Unseen” (Henriquez, essay) and extended excerpts from the film screenplay by essay on demand Luc Cote and Patricio Henriquez Yasmin Jiwani, Communication Studies, Concordia University. Author of Discourses of Denial: Mediations of Race, Gender and Violence . (essay) “Ensnared in the Carceral Net” Hasnain Khan , graduate student, University of Toronto (essay) Andy Knight John McCoy, Political Science, University of Alberta (essay) “Omar Khadr: Child Soldiers and Family Ties under International Law” Sheema Khan, columnist and author of Of Hockey Hijabs (essay) “Politics Over Principles: The Case of Omar Khadr” Audrey Macklin, Law, University of Toronto (essay) “The Rule of Law, The Rule of Men, The Rule of Force” (on Human Rights Watch witnessing at Guantanamo Bay) Marina Nemat, author of chaplain resume, Prisoner of Tehran (essay) “Hoping for Omar Khadr” Gar Pardy served in Canada’s foreign service from essay on demand 1967 to 2003. Actively engaged in the travails of the Khadr family from 1995 to 2003. (essay) “The Long Way Home: the Saga of resume, Omar Khadr” Sheila Pratt, “A Legal Portrait of Omar Khadr’s Edmonton Lawyers” Sherene Razack, Sociology Equity Studies in essay Education, OISE, University of Toronto.

Author of Casting Out: The Evacuation of Muslims from advantage of tourism essay Law and essay on demand Politics. “Afterword.” Rick Salutin, author and columnist (essay) “Omar Khadr as Canadian Icon” Heather Spears, poet and artist (drawings) Judith Thompson, playwright, “Nail Biter” (one-act drama) Lola Lemire Tostevin, poet and novelist, (poem) “ Delta Force” Janice Williamson, English and Film Studies, University of Alberta (introduction) “Introduction: The Story So Far” Richard J. Wilson, Professor of Law and founding director of the International Human Rights Law Clinic at American University’s Washington College of Law, “War Stories: A Reflection on Defending an Alleged Enemy Combatant Detained in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba“ Grace Li Xiu Woo, lawyer, legal scholar, member of Lawyer Rights Watch Canada. “The Omar Khadr Case: how the Supreme Court of Canada Undermined the chaplain resume, Convention on the Rights of the Child.” Jasmin Zine, Sociology, Wilfred Laurier U (essay) on Muslim youth and Omar Khadr Rachel Zolf, poet, Dept. of English, U of essay on demand, Calgary (poem) “Child Soldier (for Omar Khadr)” Maher Arar, a telecommunications engineer, is a passionate advocate of human rights. He recently founded Prism (, an online not-for-profit magazine that focuses on advantage of tourism essay, national security related issues. A victim of “extraordinary rendition” in 2002, he was detained in the US and deported to Syria where he was imprisoned and tortured for essay on demand, over a year. In January 2007, a lengthy Canadian commission of inquiry cleared him of any links to of view essay on the lottery, terrorism. On Demand? The Government of Canada offered an official apology and awarded compensation for the “terrible ordeal” he and his family suffered. The Syrian government has declared that Arar is “completely innocent.” In spite of this, the US government has not exonerated him and he and his family remain on a watch list. Time Magazine chose Maher as the 2004 “Canadian Newsmaker of the Year” and three years later, they named him one of 100 most influential people in resume copy the world. The Globe and Mail called him “The Nation Builder” in 2006. Maher contributes to various publications including The Globe and Mail , The Guardian and The Huffington Post on issues of national and human security . George Elliott Clarke is the inaugural E.J.

Pratt Professor of Canadian Literature at the University of Toronto. A poet, playwright, screenwriter, novelist, and essay on demand essayist, his scholarship and his writing have won him numerous awards, including a Trudeau Foundation Fellowship, a Governor General’s Award for Poetry, plus appointments to the Order of Canada and the Order of Nova Scotia, and seven honorary doctorates. Luc Cote has been directing and producing films for the past 35 years. He’s traveled extensively around the cesario resume, world, making social documentaries that capture the human spirit. He has co-directed over 30 documentaries including the award winning Turning Sixteen and Crash Landing . He collaborated with Patricio Henriquez in writing directing, filming and producing YOU DON’T LIKE THE TRUTH – 4 days inside Guantanamo , a documentary based on security camera footage from the Guantanamo Bay prison. The Honourable Romeo A. Dallaire is a Canadian Senator who had a distinguished career in the Canadian Forces achieving the rank of Lieutenant-General. In 1994, General Dallaire commanded the United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda (UNAMIR). His book on his experiences in Rwanda, entitled Shake Hands with the Devil: The Failure of Humanity in Rwanda , was awarded the Governor General’s Literary Award for Non-Fiction. Essay? Since his retirement from the military, Senator Dallaire has worked to bring an understanding of cesario, post-traumatic stress disorder to essay on demand, the general public. He has published and advocated on behalf of conflict resolution and worked to eradicate the use of children as weapons of war – the subject of his most recent book They Fight Like Soldiers, They Die Like Children.

Gail Davidson, a lawyer, is the Executive Director of Lawyer’s Rights Watch Canada, an organization she founded in 2001. She also co-founded Lawyers Against the War (LAW), an international committee of monomyth essays, jurists residing in 10 countries who oppose war against Iraq and promote adherence to essay on demand, international law. She publishes articles about international humanitarian law. Nathalie des Rosiers is General Counsel, Canadian Civil Liberties Association She was previously Dean of the Faculty of Law – Civil Law Section of the University of Ottawa from 2004 to 2008 and President of the Law Commission of Canada from 2000 to 2004. From 1987 to 2000, she was a member of the University of Western Ontario’s Faculty of Law. She served as law clerk to point of view on the, Supreme Court of Canada Justice Julien Chouinard from 1982 to 1983 and then worked in private practice until 1987. She is the past President of the Canadian Federation of Social Sciences and Humanities and has been active in essay other organizations. Robert Diab, a lawyer is an instructor at Capilano and the author of Guantanamo North: Terrorism and the Administration of copy file, Justice in Canada.

Shadia Drury is a Canada Research Chair in essay on demand Social Justice, a Member of the Royal Society of Canada, and Professor in the Departments of cesario, Political Science and on demand Philosophy at the University of Regina. She is a political theorist whose work focuses mainly on the American right and the intersection between religion and copy file politics. Her books include: Aquinas and Modernity: The Lost Promise of Natural Law (2008), The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss: Updated Edition (2005) Terror and Civilization: Christianity, Politics, and the Western Psyche (2004), Leo Strauss and essay on demand the American Right (1998), and Alexandre Kojeve: The Roots of Postmodern (1994). Childs Report? She is also an enthusiastic essayist whose articles can be found on the op-ed pages of Free Inquiry . Kim Echlin is a novelist, essayist, and teacher, and has written and essay produced television documentaries. Her doctoral thesis was on Ojibway story-telling and she has published a translation from the cesario, Sumerian of the INANNA myth. Her most recent novel The Disappeared is set in Cambodia and Montreal and was published in nineteen countries. On Demand? It won the Barnes and Noble Best Novel Award in the United States and was nominated for a Giller in Canada. Her most recent nonfiction work on witness, human rights and literature is monomyth essays called Tell Others and will be published by Hamish Hamilton, Penguin in 2012. Dennis Edney, originally from Scotland, is an Edmonton-based lawyer.

He and Edmonton lawyer Nate Whitling began defending Omar Khadr on a pro bono basis in 2002. In 2011, nine months after the conclusion of the military tribunal, Omar Khadr released them. Edney has appeared at all levels of court, including the Supreme Court of Canada and the United States Supreme Court. He received the 2008 National Pro Bono Award that acknowledged how his long-term commitment to “an unpopular case [is] a testament to the finest traditions of the legal profession…. Essay? [It] increased access to justice for one individual…[and] impacted human rights the world over.” In 2009, the Lieutenant Governor of British Columbia awarded him the file, Human Rights Medal. Presently a Bencher of the Law Society of Alberta, he lectures extensively throughout North America on legal issues including the essay on demand, rule of law as it relates to the war on terror. Charles Foran has published ten books, including four novels, and writes regularly for magazines, radio, and newspapers in advantage essay Canada and elsewhere. He taught in China, Hong Kong, and Canada. Essay? His work has won various awards: most recently his biography Mordecai: The Life Times won the Charles Taylor Award and the Governor General’s Award.

He is the current President of PEN Canada. Deborah Gorham is Distinguished Research Professor of History at Carleton University. Of View On The Lottery? She has published numerous articles and books on social history, childhood, education, women intellectuals and activists, and peace, including Vera Britain: A Feminist Life , (1996, 2000). Essay On Demand? She is now working on a biography of Marion Dewar. Alnoor Gova, a PhD candidate in the Faculty of Education at monomyth essays, UBC-CCFI, studies Canadian politics in the areas of citizenship, multiculturalism, immigration, national security, race, and law. He was commissioned in 2007–08 to conduct a study on racial profiling. Essay? A producer/host on Vancouver Co-op Radio CFRO, he also writes political poetry and essays. Patricio Henriquez was a director for Chilean television, who settled in Montreal after the coup d’etat against president Salvador Allende in monomyth essays 1973. His work focuses on social injustice around the world and have won over 40 national and international awards. From 1980 to 1993, he worked on dozens of stories for Quebec’s benchmark international news magazine, Nord-Sud. Essay On Demand? In 1998, he completed the highly acclaimed The Last Stand of Salvador Allende, a film on the last day in the life of the Chilean president.

The following year, he completed Images of a dictatorship, a unique look at life in Chile under Pinochet, another multiple national and international award winner. Since 2000, Patricio has directed and produced several films in the Extremis collection including a film on monomyth essays, a gay community in Mexico, as well as a highly publicized episode on on demand, the death penalty, and resume file one on a handful of essay, soldiers who dared to defy military orders and discipline on ethical and moral grounds. In 2008, Patricio completed Under the Hood , A Voyage into the World of copy file, Torture , a feature-length documentary. He collaborated with Luc Cote on writing directing, filming and producing YOU DON’T LIKE THE TRUTH – 4 days inside Guantanamo. Hasnain Khan graduated with a BA Honours in Political Science and English at the University of Alberta. He is completing an MA in Political Economy of International Development at the University of Toronto. Sheema Khan is the author of the nonfiction collection Of Hockey Hijab. Since 2002, she has been a monthly columnist for The Globe and Mail, writing on issues related to Islam and Muslims. In addition, she has spoken at numerous NGO conferences and government agencies on issues of security, civil rights, and Muslim cultural practice. She holds an essay on demand A.M. in Physics, and chaplain resume a PhD in Chemical Physics, both from Harvard University, along with patents in drug delivery technology. She has served on the Board of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (2004–2008), and is the founder of the Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-CAN) and its former chair (2000–2005).

She testified as an expert witness on Muslims in Canada before the Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials in essay Relation to Maher Arar (Arar Commission) and has appeared before a number of parliamentary committees. She is currently a patent agent in Ottawa. Yasmin Jiwani is an Associate Professor in the Department of chaplain resume, Communication Studies at Concordia University, Montreal. Her doctorate in Communication Studies, from Simon Fraser University, examined issues of essay, race and frank representation in Canadian television news. Her recent publications include: Discourses of Denial: Mediations of Race, Gender and Violence , as well as an on demand edited collection Girlhood, Redefining the Limits . Her work has appeared in Social Justice , Violence Against Women , Canadian Journal of Communication , Journal of Popular Film Television , The International Journal of Media and Cultural Politics, The Review of Education, Pedagogy and Cultural Studies , and in numerous anthologies. Her research interests include mediations of monomyth essays, race, gender and violence in the context of war stories, reporting of sexual violence and femicide in the press, and representations of essay, women of colour in popular and mainstream media. Craig Kielburger is a child labour activist and co-founder of “Free the Children” foundation and “Me to We.” He began researching child labour at twelve years of age and since then has built over 650 schools and implemented projects in 45 countries. Childs Book? He has won many awards including the Nelson Mandela Human Rights Award and the Office of the Order of Canada.

W. Essay On Demand? Andy Knight is resume Chair of the Department of Political Science and Professor of international relations at the University of Alberta. He is on demand a fellow of the Royal Society of Canada and has written and frank resume edited several books and essay essays on book, aspects of multilateralism, global governance, peace and the United Nations. His most recent books include: Global Politics (Oxford University Press 2010), with Tom Keating, and the Routledge Handbook of the essay, Responsibility to Protect (Routledge 2012), with Frazer Egerton. Audrey Macklin is a professor at the Faculty of Law. She holds law degrees from Yale and resume copy Toronto, and on demand a bachelor of monomyth essays, science degree from Alberta. After graduating from Toronto, she served as law clerk to Mme Justice Bertha Wilson at the Supreme Court of Canada. Professor Macklin’s teaching areas include criminal law, administrative law, and immigration and on demand refugee law. Her research and writing interests include transnational migration, citizenship, forced migration, feminist and cultural analysis, and human rights. Monomyth Essays? She has published on these subjects in journals and collections of essays such as The Security of Freedom: Essays on Canada’s Anti-Terrorism Bill and Engendering Forced Migration . Monia Mazigh speaks Arabic, French, and English fluently and holds a Ph.D. in finance from McGill University. Dr.

Mazigh worked at the University of Ottawa and taught at Thompson Rivers University in Kamloops, British Columbia. In 2004, she ran in the federal election, gaining the most votes for her riding in the history of the NDP. She was catapulted onto the public stage in 2002 when her husband Maher Arar was deported to Syria where he was tortured and held without charge for over a year. During that time, Dr. Mazigh campaigned vigorously for on demand, her husband’s release and later fought to re-establish his reputation and sought reparations which were won along with an apology after a lengthy inquiry in January 2007. Her 2008 memoir Hope and Despair documents her ordeal after her husband’s arrest and her successful campaign to clear his name. Her first novel Mirroirs et mirages (2011) is frank cesario resume published in French and explores the lives of four Muslim women. She lives with her two children and her husband in Ottawa.

John McCoy is a PhD candidate and essay on demand Sessional Lecturer in Political Science at the University of Alberta. His primary areas of research include multiculturalism, race and racism and citizenship. His dissertation examines the role of ‘xeno-racism’ or “fear of the stranger” in shaping the contemporary state approache to multiculturalism. Marina Nemat is a nonfiction writer and human rights activist. Point Of View On The? A native of Tehran, she was arrested at essay, the age of sixteen and spent more than two years in Evin, an Iranian political prison where she was tortured and childs book report came very close to essay on demand, execution. She emigrated to Canada in 1991 and resume published her memoir Prisoner of Tehran in 2007 – a finalist in essay many literary awards, it has been published in 28 other countries. She received the inaugural Human Dignity Award from the European Parliament and the prestigious Grinzane Prize in chaplain resume Italy. Her second book, After Tehran: A Life Reclaimed , was published in 2010.

Gar Pardy worked initially with the Meteorological Service of Canada in Gander, Goose Bay and Frobisher Bay (now Iqaluit). He joined the essay, Canadian foreign service in 1967 and served in India, Kenya, and Washington, D.C. Monomyth Essays? He was ambassador to essay, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama. In 1992, he became Director General of the Canadian Consular Service. Chaplain Resume? From 1996 until his retirement in 2003, he assisted various members of the Khadr family. He now comments on public and foreign policy issues from Ottawa and his articles appear regularly in The Ottawa Citizen, The Globe and Mail, Embassy-Canada’s Foreign Policy Newsweekly and the on-line Prism Magazine . He is a regular contributor to the CBC, CTV and Global television networks. Sheila Pratt has been analyzing and essay on demand commenting on politics as a columnist, feature writer, and television commentator. Former managing editor of The Edmonton Journal , she is co-author of Running on Empty: Alberta After the frank cesario resume, Boom.

She is a regular contributor to Alberta Views magazine. Sherene Razack is on demand professor of Sociology and Equity Studies in Education, the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto. Her research and teaching interests lie in the area of race and gender issues in cesario the law. Her most recent book is entitled Casting Out: The Eviction of on demand, Muslims From Western Law and Politics . She has also published Dark Threats and White Knights: The Somalia Affair, Peacekeeping and the New Imperialism , an edited collection Race, Space and childs book the Law: Unmapping A White Settler Society , Looking White People in on demand the Eye: Gender, Race, and Culture in of tourism Courtrooms and Classrooms and Canadian Feminism and the Law: The Women’s Legal and Education Fund and essay on demand the Pursuit of Equality. Rick Salutin is an award-winning writer and columnist for The Toronto Star . Heather Spears is a Canadian writer and artist who has lived in of view essay Denmark since 1962. She has held over essay on demand, 75 solo exhibitions and published 11 collections of poetry and 3 novels of speculative fiction. Frank Cesario Resume? She has published The Creative Eye on essay on demand, visual perception and 3 books of drawings. Her latest collection of poetry is I can still draw (2007).

Her writing has won a number of literary prizes including a Governor General’s Award. She specializes in drawing children, in particular premature and other threatened infants, and advantage of tourism in cambodia she travels widely to on demand, draw in hospitals in the Middle East, Europe, and America. Judith Thompson, a professor of drama at chaplain resume, the University of Guelph, is one of Canada’s most esteemed playwrights for essay, stage and radio as well as a dedicated teacher. Her plays have been produced around the world and she has also written for film and television. An officer of the Order of Canada, she was awarded two Governor General’s Awards, an Amnesty International Freedom of Expression Award, and the Chalmers Award. The Walter Carsen Prize for Excellence in the Performing Arts citation describes her as “a Canadian visionary, whose often disturbing work never leaves audiences unmoved.” In 2008, she won the chaplain resume, American Susan Smith Blackburn Prize that celebrates outstanding plays in English by Women. Lola Lemire Tostevin is a bilingual writer who was born into a Franco-Ontarian family. She has published seven collections of poetry, three novels and a collection of literary criticism. An eighth collection of poems, Singed Wings will appear in 2012. She is presently working on a book of short fictions.

Janice Williamson, Professor of English and Film Studies at the University of Alberta, teaches Canadian literature, cultural studies, and creative writing. Her edited books include Sounding Differences: Seventeen Canadian Women Writers and Up and Doing: Canadian Women and Peace (with Deborah Gorham.) She has also written books and short works of prose and poetry in innovative forms including Crybaby! and Tell Tale Signs .She writes on Canadian writing and cultural studies, trauma, peace studies, adoption and mothering. She has won national poetry and essay on demand magazine awards. Richard J. Wilson is Professor of Law and resume copy founding director of the International Human Rights Law Clinic at American University’s Washington College of Law. He has lived or consulted in several Latin American countries and has lectured or consulted in on demand the United States, Eastern and Western Europe, and Asia. He has authored articles and co-edited books and authors in international law and frank cesario human rights.

His scholarly interests include the globalization of public interest law, the death penalty and international law, the role of the essay on demand, defense in international war crimes trials, and monomyth essays clinical legal education in developing or transitional countries. Grace Li Xiu Woo LL.B., LL.M., LL.D. is a legal historian and a member of Lawyers Rights Watch Canada. Her study of judicial reasoning in essay Ghost Dancing with Colonialism: Decolonization and Indigenous Rights at the Supreme Court of Canada (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2011) challenges many received assumptions about Canada’s constitution and the rights of the First Nations. Resume? Her current research focus is on paradigm change and the impact of inter-cultural misunderstanding on judicial reasoning, education and governmental practice. Jasmin Zine is an Associate Professor in Sociology and the Muslim Studies Option at Wilfred Laurier University.

She teaches courses in the areas of essay on demand, critical race, gender, ethnic and postcolonial studies, education, and Muslim cultural politics in monomyth essays Canada. Her Canada-wide study of Muslim youth and the politics of essay on demand, empire, citizenship and belonging post 9/11 was funded by SSHRC. She participated in point essay lottery an expert working group to develop educational guidelines for combating discrimination against Muslims – part of an inter-governmental initiative spearheaded by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the Council of Europe. In 2008, she published Canadian Islamic Schools: Unraveling the Politics of essay, Faith, Gender, Knowledge and advantage Identity.

Write My Paper -
Video On Demand Essay Research Paper Video

Everything You Need to Know about Careers in Banking Consulting! In collaboration with student societies at Oxford, The Careers Service is hosting two key events ahead of the onslaught of employer presentations, workshops and fairs to help you navigate careers in ‘the city’. On Tuesday 10 October we’ll be hosting ‘Careers in Consulting: Everything You Need to Know’ from 14.00 to 16.30 at Exams Schools. On Demand. Hear from 3 very different firms (Strategy, Oliver Wyman and CIL Consulting) to learn what a week in the life of a consultant is like and gain key advice to chaplain resume be on top of your game for essay competitive applications. Then on Wednesday 11 October from 14.00 to frank cesario 16.30 at Exams Schools join us for ‘Careers in Banking: Everything You Need to essay Know’ where you’ll hear from a range of advantage firms including HSBC, BNY Mellon, Jefferies and Schroders. They will be giving vital tips on how to find your dream job in finance and illustrating what their day-to-day roles involve. These events are being closely supported by on demand, a number of Oxford societies including the Finance Society, the Oxford Student Foundation and point of view essay on the, The Oxford Strategy Group.

No need to book, spaces are allocated on a ‘first-come, first served’ basis. Career Workshops for Researchers in Michaelmas. Positive steps in essay career development come from meeting others and learning. Researchers at Oxford can come to any of chaplain resume our events, but we also have bespoke opportunities for essay on demand research Masters students, Research Assistants, DPhils and Post-Docs. These are listed below for Michaelmas Term. Also look out for Careers Days, invited speakers and skills sessions run by your department, division or post-doc network. For appointments with Rachel Bray or another Careers Adviser of your choice at the Careers Service on Banbury Road, please book through CareerConnect. Rachel Bray also offers regular appointments for scientists at the JR and Old Road Campus, bookable by phoning reception on 01865 274646.

Bookings for workshops/events should be through CareerConnect and if you have any queries please email For: Research Assistants and Masters Students When: Thursday 5 October, 9.00 – 12.30 Where: The Careers Service Booking: This event must be booked. To reserve a place please go to CareerConnect. In this workshop we will look closely at the value of doing a doctorate in today’s employment market and for ourselves as people. We will consider our personal motivations for point of view on the lottery this route, the challenges we may need to essay on demand overcome to secure a place and how to thrive as a PhD student. There will also be opportunity to point essay on the reflect on essay alternative pathways towards professional satisfaction. Monomyth Essays. Pointers towards further advice and support available here at Oxford and more broadly will be given. This event must be booked. To reserve a place please go to on demand CareerConnect. Alternatively, book a place at advantage essay, our lunchtime seminar on this topic on Monday 23 October.

Career Management for essay on demand Research Staff and DPhils. Looking to manage your career more effectively? This workshop has been designed specifically for copy file University Research Staff at all levels and at any stage in their career, who want to step back and spend a few productive hours focusing on identifying their ideal job and future possible career paths within, or beyond, academia. An interactive mix of short individual exercises and small informal group discussions will help you to build a clearer picture of the essay on demand key factors relating to your career and resume copy file, personal circumstances and to explore career pathways. The session will cover: reflections on essay on demand where your career is right now; creating your ideal job; job satisfaction and career motivations; identifying your values and transferable skills; how to identify possible career pathways and move forward effectively. You will be encouraged to draw your insights together to begin a realistic personal career plan and to copy file consider your next steps. Researchers@ Oxford Careers Fair. Research students and staff planning to attend this fair are invited to book this pre-fair event. Depending on essay the number of frank bookings, this could be a workshop or one-on-one careers advice to discuss CVs, Cover Letters, Interviews, job search and essay on demand, networking, or strategies to get the most out of the fair. Further information on the fair can be found on the Oxford Careers Fair page. The fair booklet for this year will be uploaded approximately a week before the event.

Researchers@ Finance Careers Fair. When: Tuesday 17 October, 13.30 – 14.30 Where: Lecture Room 2, Christ Church College (then to Fair in Town Hall) Booking: To reserve a place please go to CareerConnect. Research students and staff planning to attend this fair are invited to book this pre-fair event. Depending on resume the number of essay bookings, this could be a workshop or one-on-one careers advice to discuss CVs, Cover Letters, Interviews, job search and networking, or strategies to copy file get the most out of the fair. Further information on the fair can be found on our Fairs page. The fair booklet for this year will be uploaded approximately a week before the event. Researchers@ Management Consulting Careers Fair. When: Wednesday 18 October, 13.30 – 14.30 Where: Lecture Room 2, Christ Church College (then to Fair in Town Hall) Booking: To reserve a place please go to CareerConnect. Further information on essay the fair can be found on frank resume our Fairs page. The fair booklet for on demand this year will be uploaded approximately a week before the resume event. Kickstart for Research Staff and their Partners/Newcomers.

When: Friday 20 October, 13.00 – 16.00 Where: Careers Service Booking: To reserve a place Researchers should book through CareerConnect. Partners of newcomers should call Careers Service reception on 01865 274646. A special careers workshop for those looking to return to work after a long career gap or for a new direction, whether through re-location, other circumstances or choice. We will cover job search strategies, document optimisation, networking and interview technique but we will also be exploring ideas and essay, case studies on how to get into the market and freshen up your skills and CV. Even if you are a few years from getting back to work, come along! There are things you can be doing now to make that transition much easier when it comes. Open to anyone considering applying for a PhD.

In this session we’ll cover the steps you might take to discover whether a PhD is the right course of action for you, and discuss how to choose the best institution and programme for you. We’ll also briefly talk about the application process and funding. Researchers@ Careers in Computing Fair. When: Tuesday 24th October, 14.00 – 15.00 Where: Department of Computer Science, Robert Hooke Building Booking: To reserve a place please go to CareerConnect. Research students and staff planning to attend the above fairs are invited to book at the relevant pre-fair event. Depending on the number of bookings, this could be a workshop or one-on-one careers advice to of tourism discuss CVs, Cover Letters, Interviews, job search and networking, or strategies to essay on demand get the most out of the fair. Further information on the fair can be found on our Fairs page. The fair booklet for frank this year will be uploaded approximately a week before the event. Researchers@ Arts, Media and Marketing Careers Fair. Research students and staff planning to attend the above fairs are invited to on demand book at point of view essay on the lottery, the relevant pre-fair event. Depending on the number of bookings, this could be a workshop or one-on-one careers advice to discuss CVs, Cover Letters, Interviews, job search and networking, or strategies to get the most out of the fair.

Further information on the fair can be found on our Fairs page. The fair booklet for this year will be uploaded approximately a week before the event. Researchers@ Science, Engineering and Technology Careers Fair. Research students and staff planning to attend the above fairs are invited to book at on demand, the relevant pre-fair event. Depending on of tourism essay the number of bookings, this could be a workshop or one-on-one careers advice to discuss CVs, Cover Letters, Interviews, job search and essay, networking, or strategies to get the most out of the fair. Further information on the fair can be found on childs report our Fairs page. The fair booklet for essay on demand this year will be uploaded approximately a week before the event.

Researchers@ Teaching and Education Fair. Research students and staff planning to advantage of tourism in cambodia attend the above fairs are invited to essay on demand book at the relevant pre-fair event. Depending on the number of bookings, this could be a workshop or one-on-one careers advice to discuss CVs, Cover Letters, Interviews, job search and networking, or strategies to get the most out of the fair. Further information on the fair can be found on our Fairs page. Chaplain Resume. The fair booklet for this year will be uploaded approximately a week before the event. Researchers@ Internship Fair. Research students and staff planning to attend the above fairs are invited to book at the relevant pre-fair event. Depending on the number of essay bookings, this could be a workshop or one-on-one careers advice to discuss CVs, Cover Letters, Interviews, job search and networking, or strategies to get the most out of the fair. Further information on the fair can be found on our Fairs page. The fair booklet for this year will be uploaded approximately a week before the event.

CV and Cover Letter Skills for Research Staff. This intensive workshop on point of view on the lottery producing effective CVs and Cover Letters is specifically for doctoral students and research staff, whether you are considering an academic or non-academic career, or are undecided. Using a mix of individual and informal small group exercises, we will. understand and recognise the characteristics of effective CVs and cover letters critique the strengths and weaknesses of their own and colleagues’ current CVs evaluate example CVs and essay, cover letters to point of view essay build their knowledge of different types and styles. Insight into Academia Seminar: Myths and Realities Panel. When: Tuesday 7 November, 13.00 – 14.00 Where: Careers Service Booking: You do not need to book a place at this event but popular events may fill early so arrive in good time.

Are you considering an academic career? We will hear from a small panel of early- to mid-career academics about their day-to-day roles, how they manage a work-life balance, and opportunities for progression. This is a chance to ask questions and generate discussion on on demand many aspects of being an academic. Academic Application and of view on the lottery, Interview Skills for essay on demand Research Staff and DPhils. Are you a DPhil Student or Research Staff member planning to essay apply for academic jobs?

Do you want advice on how to prepare academic applications and to improve your interview skills? This workshop, designed specifically for University of Oxford researchers pursuing academic applications, is for you. This interactive course will equip you with the skills to maximise your chances of on demand getting academic employment. Emphasis will be given to understanding the resume processes which universities use to select staff and the importance of tailoring CVs, applications, research and essay, teaching statements accordingly. We will discuss and practice the skills required for effective performance at interview; preparation, self-presentation and how to deal with typical academic interview questions.

Follow up one-to-one career discussions can additionally be used to review intended applications and to resume file prepare for particular interviews. Career Options for essay on demand Mathematicians ( leading into Jobs for Mathematicians Careers Fair ) When: Tuesday 21 November, 15.15 – 16.00 Where: Mathematical Institute Booking: To reserve a place please go to CareerConnect. Erica Tyson from the Institute of cesario Mathematics and on demand, its Applications will outline the breadth of essay career options that opens up for people with outstanding skills in mathematics. On Demand. It’s not only the financial and advantage of tourism in cambodia, academic or teaching world that is hungry for this important skillset. On Demand. Increasingly, commercial, government and book report, not-for-profit sector players of all kinds are keen to employ highly numerate, analytical and creative thinkers to on demand understand and predict trends, plan and develop strategy and deliver smarter and more efficient solutions. You do not need to childs book book a place at essay, this event but please bear in mind that spaces will be allocated on a first-come, first served basis and popular events may fill early so arrive in good time.

DPhils and research staff are very welcome to this talk and to stay for chaplain resume the Maths Careers Fair. Dr Rachel Bray, Careers Adviser, will be available for half an essay hour after the talk to discuss any questions that arise. Further information on the fair can be found on our Fairs page. The fair booklet for this year will be uploaded approximately a week before the event. Interview Presentation Skills for Research Staff and DPhils. New job or direction in mind? Do you want to monomyth essays brush up on the practicalities of preparing for essay interviews and presentations? This workshop, designed for University Research Staff and final year DPhils, is for you. A highly interactive session, it will equip you with the skills to play the ‘recruitment game’ to best effect.

We will discuss and practice the of view essay on the skills required for effective performance at interview; preparation, self-presentation and how to deal with typical interview questions. The workshop will cover the skills required for both academic and non-academic interviews, with particular focus on the latter. Follow up one-to-one career discussions can then be used to essay review intended applications and to monomyth essays prepare for particular interviews. Insight into Academia Conversation: Gender, Age and essay on demand, Progression in Academia. This ‘conversation’ around gender, age and progression in of view lottery academia will be an informal group discussion (facilitated by a careers adviser), with two guest contributors (two early- to mid – career academics) who will share their experiences with you. We welcome individuals from across the essay university with a mutual interest in the topic.

The careers adviser present is an experienced group facilitator, who’ll support the discussion with advice, strategies and childs report, resources, as well as offering suggestions for topics of essay discussion. Meeting people is a really useful way to cesario learn more about your mutual goals: it’s the equivalent of attending a tutorial or class discussion, and often attendees choose to keep in touch with fellow participants for further mutual support. Too Late to Change Direction? Career Transitions for Researchers. In this workshop we will explore our understanding of the essay pros and cons of staying in academic research, whether and childs book, how we can move to another sector (or combine aspects of academia with another role) and what we feel we might be risking in making this move.

In small groups, we will then. become familiar with an on demand evidence-informed framework for assessing a potential career move, think about how to use this in our current roles, develop some practical strategies to assist decision-making. This one day workshop, for DPhil students and point, research staff who identify themselves as female, is an opportunity for you to explore your values, create tangible goals, practice presenting your achievements positively and build assertiveness and networking strategies. There will also be a guest speaker who will share their work / life story and answer any questions you have. Coffee and tea will be available from 9am and the workshop will start promptly at 9.30am. Lunch will be included. This programme is just for essay on demand women, but note that we plan to run a mixed programme in chaplain resume Trinity Term for a mixed group of men and women.

Tier 1 Graduate Entrepreneur Visa Endorsement – apply now! If you have an idea for a business, have a venture currently in development, or are piloting a new concept, you may be eligible to apply for our endorsement under the essay on demand Tier 1 (Graduate Entrepreneur) visa scheme, which allows non-EEA nationals who are graduates or post-doctoral researchers to reside in the UK in order to develop their business. Previously endorsed businesses have included: Social enterprises and not-for-profits Technology start-ups Funding generation and investment organisations Digital education tools Energy research. The University of Oxford can endorse up to thirty applicants per year. Calls for applications are held four times a year: once in monomyth essays each term, and once during the Long Vacation. The next deadline for applications is Thursday 30 November 2017 at essay on demand, 12 noon . Applications are now open, and you can apply by email to, or via Symplicity (for Said Business School students), or via CareerConnect (for all other students/alum) using the following vacancy IDs: for Students: CareerConnect opportunity ID dnk94 for Alumni: CareerConnect opportunity ID 3v86d. You can find more information and details of point of view how to apply on our visa page or on CareerConnect.

Alternatively you can email All applications must be submitted through CareerConnect or emailed to essay by Thursday 30 November 2017 at 12 noon. Win a $1000 scholarship for coming up with a morale-boosting idea. VelvetJobs, a US outsourcing and placement service, are offering a $1000 scholarship for students studying in the USA or overseas. The “Employee Morale Scholarship” aims to get students thinking about their own potential future management position and childs book report, how their decisions can affect employee morale. The piece should include a headline of the morale boosting idea and at least 500 words on how to effectively deploy the strategy. Students of essay on demand any nationality can enter, as long as they are enrolled in full time education and over advantage of tourism in cambodia essay the age of 18.

Closing date is 16 December 2017, and scholarship funds will be released for Hilary term 2018.

Essay Writer for All Kinds of Papers -
Essay on Demand Forecasting: Top 8 Essays | Products |…

Accent + Diction = Mark Twain's Dialect. Big Idea: Th' wo'ds used an' th' way in which they're pronounced make up th' dialeck of a region, as enny fool kin plainly see. We open class today with a welcome to essay, Be Electrific Day, Thomas Alva Edison's birthday, and advantage essay, I also share Edison's notable quote, Genius is one per essay, cent inspiration and ninety-nine per cent perspiration, hoping students will grow to feel the same way about essay lottery their work in American Literature. As always, the on demand, Daily Holiday serves to draw students in, building student ownership and a sense of community in chaplain resume the class. Too Much Time? A Look at essay, Putting Emphasis on Biography. In order to prepare for monomyth essays our look at Mark Twain's The Notorious Jumping Frog of Calaveras County, I ask for students to on demand, take a few moments and, in their notes, write everything they know about Twain, either prior knowledge or from the biography reading they completed over the weekend. Students then share their ideas to the class. Resume! I ask a volunteer to write the list of ideas on essay the board, allowing me to circulate the room looking for string examples on their notes, and encouraging students to share. By sharing their notes, students demonstrate their ability to cite strong and thorough textual evidence. Once a list of biographical details is chaplain resume compiled, I ask students to share what conclusions they can come to about Twain, as an author, drawing inferences from the reading (CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RI.9-10.1).

We review author's biography in essay order to provide context for Twain's writing, and to provide students practice with identifying the main idea in non-fiction texts. In Cambodia! This is practice for the unit exam, on which students will be asked to make these connections between literary and non-fiction texts on the unit exam, drawing evidence from literary and informational texts to support analysis and reflection (CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.9-10.9). What Is Dialect? Defining and Decoding. Mark Twain, while noted as a humorist (see above), is also well-known for his use of essay, dialect in his writing. Given that transcribing informal speech patterns can often result in numerous irregular spellings, words shortened with apostrophes, and chaplain resume, slang terms, creating a difficult text for students to decode.

Because of this difficulty, I provide students with an exercise in translating dialect. To begin, I ask them to translate the definition of dialect given in their textbook: a distinct form of a language as it is spoken in one geographical area or by a particular social or ethnic group.” We break that definition down, ultimately into: How people speak. I share with students that, for essay on demand the more mathematical among them, dialect can be looked at as an monomyth essays, equation: accent (the way words are pronounced) + diction (the words used) = dialect. On Demand! From there, we look at the introduction to the character, Jim Smiley in the story, which is also the first item on the dialect guide: There was a feller here once by advantage of tourism, the name of Jim Smiley, in the winter of '49 or may be it was the essay, spring of '50 I don't recollect exactly, somehow, though what makes me think it was one or the of view on the lottery, other is because I remember the big flume wasn't finished when he first came to the camp; but any way, he was the essay, curiosest man about always betting on monomyth essays any thing that turned up you ever see, if he could get any body to on demand, bet on childs the other side; and if he couldn't, he'd change sides. Essay! I ask students what the meaning of curiousest is here, especially looking of anyone identifies curious. We look to the rest of the passage, and ask if curious makes sense for someone who is doing unusual gambling behavior, and resume file, I guide students to strange as the meaning here. I also ask students to explain betting on anything that turned up (any opportunity) you ever see (possible, you can think of, etc.). In order to determine the meaning of dialectic words and phrases as they are used in the text, including figurative and connotative meanings (CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RL.9-10.4), students are identifying Twain's use of figures of speech and figurative language, especially hyperbole, idiom, and simile (CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.9-10.5a). Being able to understand Twain's use of dialect not only provides greater understanding of the story itself, but also greater understanding of Twain's humor and a richer experience in on demand reading. I encourage students to tackle these dialectic expressions on their own in order to avoid violating one of the cardinal rules of comedy, Don't explain the joke. Additionally, I encourage students to take on difficult texts on essay their own, as they can often discover a personal connection I may not have addressed if I had simply addressed it to the whole class.

Additionally, students should feel a sense of essay, accomplishment decoding difficult texts, one that provides momentum as we move forward. Understanding The Frame Story: An Introduction to Jumping Frog. As You Wish. Of Tourism In Cambodia Essay! A Reflection on The Princess Bride's Frame. In order to provide students with a deeper understanding of the on demand, structure of Twain's Jumping Frog, I explain what a frame story is: one narrator starting the story, then handing the story off to another narrator who tells the main narrative. We brainstorm examples, including those where the narrator remains the same and the frame serves as flashback (The Catcher in frank cesario the Rye, A Separate Peace), as well as those where a different narrator takes over (The Scarlet Letter, The Canterbury Tales). On Demand! To model the frame, I show students the monomyth essays, first five minutes of The Princess Bride, in which the Grandfather begins telling the story to the Grandson, slowly turning the narration over to the perspective of the characters. Essay! These scenes demonstrate the structure of a frame story, with one clearly modern (well, 1980s) story giving way to a classical fairy tale setting. The transition helps student see how the frame narrator gives way the main narrative.

For students to analyze how Twain introduces his narrators and structures each story in order to in cambodia, create humor and a Regional setting (CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RL.9-10.5), I read the first four paragraphs of The Notorious Jumping Frog of Calaveras County to the students. In order to provide them with a relatable moment, I ask if they've ever had a friend play a prank on them, because that's what the unnamed narrator from the East is having done to him. I also ask if, upon finding out they were travelling somewhere, has every had a friend say, Say hello to my (sister, aunt, grandmother, third-grade-crush, etc.) if you see her. This is effectively what the scenario the narrator finds himself in, as well. We then refer back to the passage they decoded earlier (see above), and draw conclusions about the characters from their descriptions: the unnamed narrator is somewhat gullible, he's not at home in a mining camp; Simon Wheeler is not a book smart man, he firmly believes in on demand craftiness as a means to success.

Two-Minute Warning: Wrap-Up Reminders, Homework. With two minutes remaining, I remind students of the homework posted on the board: read Notorious Jumping Frog of Calaveras County and copy, complete the dialect activity, due in on demand two days, to provide time for students to resume, address dialect struggles and story structure.

Write My Research Paper for Me -
Essay on demand pdf 0 73 Кб

compliance resume SUBJECT: EEOC COMPLIANCE MANUAL. PURPOSE: This transmittal covers the issuance of Section 12 of the new Compliance Manual on “Religious Discrimination.” The section provides guidance and instructions for investigating and analyzing charges alleging discrimination based on religion. EFFECTIVE DATE: Upon receipt. DISTRIBUTION: EEOC Compliance Manual holders.

OBSOLETE DATA: This Section of the essay on demand Compliance Manual replaces Section 628: Religious Accommodation , EEOC Compliance Manual, Volume II and its Appendices: Appendix A, Policy Statement on Ansonia Board of Education v. Philbrook and advantage of tourism essay Religious Accommodation ; Appendix B, Policy Guidance On ‘New Age’ Training Programs Which Conflict With Employees’ Religious Beliefs ; and essay on demand Appendix C, Religious Objections to Unionism . It also replaces the copy file following policy documents: Religious Organizations that Pay Women Less than Men in Accordance with Religious Beliefs ; Religious Organization Exemption Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended ; and Policy Statement on Goldman v. Weinberger (Accommodation of the Wearing of Religious Dress) . The Commission’s Guidelines on Discrimination Because of essay on demand, Religion, 29 C.F.R. Part 1605, remain in effect. SECTION 12: RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION. SECTION 12: RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION. This Section of the Compliance Manual focuses on religious discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII). [2] Title VII protects workers from employment discrimination based on frank, their race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or protected activity. Solely with respect to religion, Title VII also requires reasonable accommodation of essay on demand, employees’ [3] sincerely held religious beliefs, observances, and practices when requested, unless accommodation would impose an undue hardship on business operations. Monomyth Essays! [4] Undue hardship under Title VII is defined as “more than de minimis ” cost or burden -- a substantially lower standard for employers to satisfy than the “undue hardship” defense under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which is defined instead as “significant difficulty or expense.” [5] The prohibition on discrimination and the requirement of reasonable accommodation apply whether the religious views in question are mainstream or non-traditional, and even if not recognized by any organized religion. These protections also extend to those who profess no religious beliefs. Essay! [6] Questions about frank religion in the workplace have increased as religious pluralism has increased.

In a 2001 survey of on demand, human resource professionals conducted by the Society for Human Resource Management and the Tanenbaum Center for Interreligious Understanding, 36% of human resource professionals who responded reported an point of view lottery increase in the religious diversity of their employees in the preceding five years. [7] Further, the number of religious discrimination charges filed with EEOC has more than doubled from 1992 to 2007, although the total number of such charges remains relatively small compared to charges filed on other bases. On Demand! [8] Many employers seek legal guidance in managing the issues that arise as religious diversity in the American workplace continues to increase. [9] This Section of the Compliance Manual is chaplain resume, designed to be a practical resource for essay on demand, employers, employees, practitioners, and EEOC enforcement staff on Title VII’s prohibition against religious discrimination. The Section defines religious discrimination, discusses typical scenarios in which religious discrimination may arise, and provides guidance to employers on how to resume balance the essay needs of individuals in a diverse religious climate. [10] The Section is organized by legal topic, as follows: I - Coverage issues , including the monomyth essays definition of “religion” and “sincerely held,” the religious organization exception, and the ministerial exception. II - Disparate treatment analysis of employment decisions based on religion, including recruitment, hiring, promotion, discipline, and on demand compensation, as well as differential treatment with respect to religious expression; customer preference; security requirements; and bona fide occupational qualifications. III - Harassment analysis , including religious belief or practice as a condition of employment or advancement, hostile work environment, and employer liability issues.

IV - Reasonable accommodation analysis , including notice of the conflict between religion and work, scope of the essay accommodation requirement and undue hardship defense, and on demand common methods of copy file, accommodation. V - Related forms of discrimination , including discrimination based on national origin, race, or color, as well as retaliation. Some charges of religious discrimination may raise multiple claims, for example requiring analysis under disparate treatment, harassment, and denial of reasonable accommodation theories of liability. In addition, there are some instances where Title VII religious discrimination cases implicate federal constitutional provisions. [11] For example, a government employer may contend that granting a requested religious accommodation would pose an undue hardship because it would constitute government endorsement of religion in violation of the essay Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. [12] A private sector employer may contend that its own First Amendment rights under the Free Exercise or Free Speech Clauses would be violated if it is compelled by Title VII to grant a particular accommodation. [13] In addition, government employees often raise claims under the First Amendment parallel to their Title VII accommodation claims. Cesario! [14] Defining the exact parameters of the essay First Amendment is beyond the chaplain resume scope of this document. However, these First Amendment issues are referenced throughout this document in order to illustrate how they often arise in on demand, Title VII cases. [15] Title VII prohibits covered employers, employment agencies, and unions [16] from: (1) treating applicants or employees differently (disparate treatment) based on their religious beliefs or practices or lack thereof in any aspect of employment, including recruitment, hiring, assignments, discipline, promotion, and book benefits; (2) subjecting employees to on demand harassment because of their religious beliefs or practices or lack thereof or because of the religious practices or beliefs of people with whom they associate ( e.g. Monomyth Essays! , relatives, friends, etc.); (3) denying a requested reasonable accommodation of an applicant’s or employee’s sincerely held religious beliefs or practices or lack thereof if an accommodation will not impose an undue hardship on the conduct of the business; [17] and, (4) retaliating against an applicant or employee who has engaged in protected activity, including participation ( e.g. , filing an EEO charge or testifying as a witness in someone else’s EEO matter), or opposition relating to alleged religious discrimination ( e.g. , complaining to human resources department about alleged religious discrimination). Although more than one of these theories of liability may apply in a particular case, they are discussed in on demand, separate parts of this manual for ease of advantage essay, use.

Charges involving religion may give rise to claims for disparate treatment, harassment, denial of reasonable accommodation, and/or retaliation. On Demand! Therefore, these charges should be investigated and analyzed under all four theories of liability to the extent applicable, even if the charging party only raises one claim. Overview: Religion is very broadly defined under Title VII. Point Of View Lottery! Religious beliefs, practices, and observances include those that are theistic [18] in nature, as well as non-theistic “moral or ethical beliefs as to what is right and wrong which are sincerely held with the strength of essay, traditional religious views.” Religious beliefs can include unique views held by a few or even one individual; however, mere personal preferences are not religious beliefs. Childs Book! Title VII requires employers to accommodate religious beliefs, practices, and observances if the beliefs are “sincerely held” and on demand the reasonable accommodation poses no undue hardship on the employer. Title VII defines “religion” to include “all aspects of religious observance and practice as well as belief.” [19] Religion includes not only traditional, organized religions such as Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, and of view on the lottery Buddhism, but also religious beliefs that are new, uncommon, not part of a formal church or sect, only subscribed to by a small number of people, or that seem illogical or unreasonable to others. [20] Further, a person’s religious beliefs “need not be confined in either source or content to traditional or parochial concepts of religion.” [21] A belief is “religious” for Title VII purposes if it is on demand, “‘religious’ in the person’s own scheme of things,” [22] i.e. , it is “a sincere and meaningful belief that occupies in the life of its possessor a place parallel to that filled by God.” [23] An employee’s belief or practice can be “religious” under Title VII even if the employee is affiliated with a religious group that does not espouse or recognize that individual’s belief or practice, or if few or no other people adhere to it. [24]

Religious beliefs include theistic beliefs as well as non-theistic “moral or ethical beliefs as to what is right and wrong which are sincerely held with the resume copy strength of traditional religious views.” [25] Although courts generally resolve doubts about particular beliefs in favor of finding that they are religious, [26] beliefs are not protected merely because they are strongly held. Rather, religion typically concerns “ultimate ideas” about “life, purpose, and death.” [27] Social, political, or economic philosophies, as well as mere personal preferences, are not “religious” beliefs protected by on demand, Title VII. [28] Religious observances or practices include, for example, attending worship services, praying, wearing religious garb or symbols, displaying religious objects, adhering to certain dietary rules, proselytizing or other forms of religious expression, or refraining from certain activities. Determining whether a practice is resume, religious turns not on the nature of the activity, but on on demand, the employee’s motivation. The same practice might be engaged in by one person for childs report, religious reasons and by another person for purely secular reasons.

Whether or not the practice is “religious” is essay on demand, therefore a situational, case-by-case inquiry. [29] For example, one employee might observe certain dietary restrictions for religious reasons while another employee adheres to the very same dietary restrictions but for secular ( e.g. , health or environmental) reasons. [30] In that instance, the same practice might in one case be subject to reasonable accommodation under Title VII because an employee engages in the practice for religious reasons, and in chaplain resume, another case might not be subject to reasonable accommodation because the practice is on demand, engaged in for secular reasons. The following examples illustrate these concepts: Employment Decisions Based on “Religion” An otherwise qualified applicant is not hired because he is point, a self-described evangelical Christian. A qualified non-Jewish employee is denied promotion because the supervisor wishes to give a preference based on religion to a fellow Jewish employee. An employer terminates an employee based on his disclosure to the employer that he has recently converted to the Baha’i Faith. Essay On Demand! Each of these is an chaplain resume example of an employment decision based on the religious affiliation of the applicant or employee, and therefore is based on “religion” within the meaning of Title VII.

Religious Practice versus Secular Practice. A Seventh-day Adventist employee follows a vegetarian diet because she believes it is religiously prescribed by the scriptural passage “[b]ut flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat,” (Genesis 9:4). Her vegetarianism is a religious practice, even though not all Seventh-day Adventists share this belief or follow this practice, and even though many individuals adhere to a vegetarian diet for purely secular reasons. Types of Religious Practice or Observance. A Catholic employee requests a schedule change so that he can attend church services on essay, Good Friday. A Muslim employee requests an exception to the company’s dress and grooming code allowing her to frank resume wear her headscarf, or a Hindu employee requests an exception allowing her to wear her bindi (religious forehead marking). An atheist asks to on demand be excused from the religious invocation offered at resume file, the beginning of on demand, staff meetings. An adherent to monomyth essays Native American spiritual beliefs seeks unpaid leave to attend a ritual ceremony. An employee who identifies as Christian but is essay on demand, not affiliated with a particular sect or denomination requests accommodation of his religious belief that working on his Sabbath is prohibited.

Each of chaplain resume, these accommodation requests relates to a “religious” belief or practice within the meaning of Title VII. Essay On Demand! By contrast, a request for a schedule change to help set up decorations or prepare food for book report, a church event, for instance, typically does not involve a “religious” belief or practice within the meaning of Title VII. [31] Supervisor Considers Belief Illogical. Morgana asks for time off on October 31 to essay on demand attend the “Samhain Sabbat,” the New Year observance of Wicca, her religion. Her supervisor refuses, saying that Wicca is essay, not a “real” religion but an on demand “illogical conglomeration” of “various aspects of the occult, such as faith healing, self?hypnosis, tarot card reading, and spell casting, which are not religious practices.” The supervisor’s refusal to accommodate her on the ground that he believes her religion is illogical violates Title VII unless the employer can show her request would impose an chaplain resume undue hardship.

The law applies to on demand religious beliefs even though others may find them “incorrect” or “incomprehensible.” [32] Unique Belief Can Be Religious. Edward practices the Kemetic religion, based on ancient Egyptian faith, and affiliates himself with a tribe numbering fewer than ten members.He states that he believes in various deities, and follows the faith’s concept of Ma’at, a guiding principle regarding truth and order that represents physical and childs book moral balance in essay, the universe. During a religious ceremony he received small tattoos encircling his wrist, written in the Coptic language, which express his servitude to Ra, the Egyptian god of the sun. In Cambodia Essay! When his employer asks him to cover the tattoos, he explains that it is a sin to cover them intentionally because doing so would signify a rejection of Ra. These can be religious beliefs and practices even if no one else or few other people subscribe to them. [33] Personal Preference That is Not a Religious Belief. Sylvia wears several tattoos and has recently had her nose and eyebrows pierced. A newly hired manager implements a dress code that requires that employees have no visible piercings or tattoos. Sylvia says that her tattoos and piercings are religious because they reflect her belief in body art as self-expression and should be accommodated.

However, the evidence demonstrates that her tattoos and piercings are not related to essay any religious belief system. For example, they do not function as a symbol of any religious belief, and do not relate to monomyth essays any “ultimate concerns” such as life, purpose, death, humanity’s place in the universe, or right and wrong, and they are not part of essay on demand, a moral or ethical belief system. Therefore, her belief is a personal preference that is not religious in resume copy file, nature. [34] Title VII requires employers to accommodate only those religious beliefs that are “sincerely held.” [35] Therefore, whether or not a religious belief is “sincerely held” by an applicant or employee is only relevant to religious accommodation, not to claims of disparate treatment or harassment because of religion. In those claims, it is the motivation of the discriminating official, not the actual beliefs of the essay individual alleging discrimination, that are typically relevant in of tourism in cambodia, determining if the discrimination that occurred was because of religion. A detailed discussion of reasonable accommodation of sincerely held religious beliefs appears in essay on demand, § IV, but the meaning of file, “sincerely held” is addressed here. Like the “religious” nature of a belief or practice, the on demand “sincerity” of an employee’s stated religious belief is usually not in dispute. Nevertheless, there are some circumstances in which an of tourism employer may assert as a defense that it was not required to provide accommodation because the employee’s asserted religious belief was not sincerely held.

Factors that either alone or in combination might undermine an employee’s assertion that he sincerely holds the religious belief at issue include: whether the employee has behaved in a manner markedly inconsistent with the on demand professed belief; [36] whether the accommodation sought is point of view on the lottery, a particularly desirable benefit that is likely to be sought for secular reasons; whether the timing of the essay on demand request renders it suspect ( e.g. , it follows an frank cesario resume earlier request by the employee for the same benefit for secular reasons); and whether the employer otherwise has reason to believe the accommodation is not sought for on demand, religious reasons. Chaplain Resume! However, none of these factors is dispositive. For example, although prior inconsistent conduct is essay, relevant to the question of point of view on the lottery, sincerity, an individual’s beliefs or degree of adherence may change over essay, time, and therefore an employee’s newly adopted or inconsistently observed religious practice may nevertheless be sincerely held. [37] An employer also should not assume that an employee is insincere simply because some of his or her practices deviate from the commonly followed tenets of frank cesario resume, his or her religion. [38] 3. Employer Inquiries into Religious Nature or Sincerity of Belief. Because the definition of religion is on demand, broad and protects beliefs and practices with which the employer may be unfamiliar, the employer should ordinarily assume that an advantage in cambodia employee’s request for religious accommodation is essay on demand, based on a sincerely-held religious belief. If, however, an employee requests religious accommodation, and cesario an employer has an objective basis for questioning either the religious nature or the sincerity of essay, a particular belief or practice, the employer would be justified in seeking additional supporting information. Childs Book! See infra § IV-A-2. If the Respondent (R) disputes that the essay on demand Charging Party’s (“CP’s”) belief is “religious,” consider the of tourism following: Begin with the essay CP’s statements. What religious belief or practice does the CP claim to have? In some cases, the CP’s credible testimony regarding his belief or practice will be sufficient to demonstrate that it is religious.

In other cases, however, the investigator may need to ask follow-up questions about the nature and tenets of the asserted religious beliefs, and/or any associated practices, rituals, clergy, observances, etc., in monomyth essays, order to identify a specific religious belief or practice or determine if one is at essay, issue. Since religious beliefs can be unique to an individual, evidence from childs others is on demand, not always necessary. However, if the CP believes such evidence will support his or her claim, the investigator should seek evidence such as oral statements, affidavits, or other documents from CP’s religious leader(s) if applicable, or others whom CP identifies as knowledgeable regarding the report religious belief or practice in question. Remember, where an alleged religious practice or belief is at essay on demand, issue, a case-by-case analysis is point essay on the lottery, required. Investigators should not make assumptions about a religious practice or belief. In some cases, to essay on demand determine whether CP’s asserted practice or belief is “religious” as defined under Title VII, the book report investigator’s general knowledge will be insufficient, and additional objective information will have to be obtained, while nevertheless recognizing the intensely personal characteristics of adherence to a religious belief. If the Respondent disputes that CP’s belief is “sincerely held,” the following evidence may be relevant:

Oral statements, an affidavit, or other documents from CP describing his or her beliefs and practices, including information regarding when CP embraced the essay on demand belief or practice, as well as when, where, and how CP has adhered to the belief or practice; and/or, Oral statements, affidavits, or other documents from potential witnesses identified by CP or R as having knowledge of whether CP adheres or does not adhere to the belief or practice at issue ( e.g ., CP’s religious leader (if applicable), fellow adherents (if applicable), family, friends, neighbors, managers, or co-workers who may have observed his past adherence or lack thereof, or discussed it with him). Overview: Title VII jurisdictional rules apply to all religious discrimination claims under the statute. Chaplain Resume! However, specially-defined “religious organizations” and “religious educational institutions” are exempt from certain religious discrimination provisions, and on demand a “ministerial exception” bars Title VII claims by employees who serve in clergy roles. Title VII’s prohibitions apply to employers, employment agencies, and childs report unions, [39] subject to the statute’s jurisdictional requirements.

See EEOC Compliance Manual, “Threshold Issues,” Essay! Those covered entities must carry out their activities in a nondiscriminatory manner and provide reasonable accommodation unless doing so would impose an resume undue hardship. [40] Unions also can be liable if they knowingly acquiesce in essay on demand, employment discrimination against their members, join or tolerate employers’ discriminatory practices, or discriminatorily refuse to resume file represent employees’ interests. [41] Under Title VII, religious organizations are permitted to give employment preference to members of their own religion. [42] The exception applies only to those institutions whose “purpose and character are primarily religious.” [43] That determination is to be based on “[a]ll significant religious and essay secular characteristics.” [44] Although no one factor is dispositive, significant factors to consider that would indicate whether an resume file entity is religious include: Do its articles of incorporation state a religious purpose? Are its day-to-day operations religious ( e.g. , are the services the entity performs, the product it produces, or the educational curriculum it provides directed toward propagation of the religion)? Is it not-for-profit? Is it affiliated with or supported by a church or other religious organization? [45] This exception is not limited to religious activities of the organization. [46] However, it only allows religious organizations to prefer to employ individuals who share their religion. [47] The exception does not allow religious organizations otherwise to discriminate in on demand, employment on protected bases other than religion, such as race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability. Resume Copy File! [48] Thus, a religious organization is not permitted to engage in racially discriminatory hiring by asserting that a tenet of its religious beliefs is not associating with people of other races. Similarly, a religious organization is not permitted to essay deny fringe benefits to married women but not to married men by frank cesario resume, asserting a religiously based view that only men can be the head of a household. Sex Discrimination Not Excused.

Justina works at Tots Day Care Center. Tots is run by a religious organization that believes that, while women may work outside of the home if they are single or have their husband’s permission, men should be the heads of their households and the primary providers for their families. Believing that men shoulder a greater financial responsibility than women, the organization pays female teachers less than male teachers. Essay On Demand! The organization’s practice of unequal pay based on sex constitutes unlawful discrimination. [49] Courts have held, based on First Amendment constitutional considerations, that clergy members cannot bring claims under the monomyth essays federal employment discrimination laws, including Title VII, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the on demand Equal Pay Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act, because “[t]he relationship between an organized church and point essay lottery its ministers is its lifeblood.” [50] This “ministerial exception” comes not from the essay text of the statutes, but from the First Amendment principle that governmental regulation of church administration, including the book report appointment of clergy, impedes the free exercise of on demand, religion and resume copy file constitutes impermissible government entanglement with church authority. [51] Thus, courts will not ordinarily consider whether a church’s employment decision concerning one of its ministers was based on discriminatory grounds, although some courts have allowed ministers to bring sexual harassment claims. [52] The ministerial exception applies only to those employees who perform essentially religious functions, namely those whose primary duties consist of engaging in church governance, supervising a religious order, or conducting religious ritual, worship, or instruction. [53] The exception is not limited to on demand ordained clergy, [54] and has been applied by courts to others involved in clergy-like roles who conduct services or provide pastoral counseling. However, the exception does not necessarily apply to point of view essay on the everyone with a title typically conferred upon clergy ( e.g. , minister). [55] In short, in each case it is necessary to essay make a factual determination of whether the function of the position is one to which the exception applies. Title VII’s prohibition against disparate treatment based on religion generally functions like its prohibition against disparate treatment based on race, color, sex, or national origin.

Disparate treatment violates the chaplain resume statute whether motivated by bias against or preference toward an on demand applicant or employee due to his religious beliefs, practices, or observances or lack thereof. Thus, for example, except to the extent permitted by the religious organization and ministerial exceptions, an employer may not refuse to recruit, hire, or promote individuals of a certain religion, may not impose stricter promotion requirements for persons of a certain religion, and may not impose more or different work requirements on an employee because of that employee’s religious beliefs or practices. [56] The following sub-sections address work scenarios that may lead to childs book report claims of religious discrimination. 1. Recruitment, Hiring, and Promotion. Employers that are not religious organizations may neither recruit individuals of a particular religion nor adopt recruitment practices, such as word-of-mouth recruitment, that have the purpose or effect of discriminating based on religion. Title VII permits employers that are not religious organizations to on demand hire and employ employees on monomyth essays, the basis of religion only if religion is essay on demand, “a bona fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the normal operation of that particular business or enterprise.” [57]

For example, an employer may not refuse to hire an chaplain resume applicant simply because he does not share the employer’s religious beliefs, and on demand conversely may not select one applicant over another based on of view lottery, a preference for employees of a particular religion. [58] Similarly, employment agencies may not comply with requests from employers to on demand engage in discriminatory recruitment or referral practices, for cesario, example by screening out applicants who have names often associated with a particular religion ( e.g., Mohammed). Moreover, an employer may not exclude an applicant from hire merely because he or she may need a reasonable accommodation that could be provided absent undue hardship. [59] Charles, the president of a company that owns several gas stations, needs managers for the new convenience stores he has decided to add to the stations. Essay! He posts a job announcement at the Hindu Temple he attends and asks other members of the temple to refer only resume Hindu friends or family members who may be interested in the position. He does no other recruitment. By limiting his recruitment to Hindus, Charles is engaging in unlawful discrimination. Mary is a human resources officer who is filling a vacant administrative position at her company. During the application process, she performs an Internet search on essay, the candidates and learns that one applicant, Jonathan, has written an childs report article for the local chapter of the Ethical Society setting forth his view that religion has been historically divisive and on demand explaining why he subscribes to no religious beliefs or practices.

Although Mary believes he is the chaplain resume most qualified candidate, she does not hire him because she knows that many current company employees are observant Christians like her, and she believes they would be more comfortable working with someone like-minded. By not hiring Jonathan because of his lack of religious identification, the on demand company violated Title VII. Darpak, who practices Buddhism, holds a Ph.D. degree in engineering and applied for a managerial position at the research firm where he has worked for ten years. He was rejected in favor of a non-Buddhist candidate who was less qualified. The company vice president who made the promotion decision advised Darpak that he was not selected because “we decided to go in a different direction.” However, the childs book report vice president confided to co-workers at a social function that he did not select Darpak because he thought a Christian manager could make better personal connections with the firm’s clients, many of whom are Christian. The vice president’s statement, combined with the lack of any legitimate non-discriminatory reason for selecting the on demand less qualified candidate, as well as the evidence that Darpak was the best qualified candidate for the position, suggests that the monomyth essays proffered reason was a pretext for discrimination against Darpak because of his religious views. [60] Title VII also prohibits employers from disciplining or discharging employees because of their religion. [61] Joanne, a retail store clerk, is on demand, frequently 10-15 minutes late for monomyth essays, her shift on several days per essay week when she attends Mass at a Catholic Church across town. Her manager, Donald, has never disciplined her for childs, this tardiness, and instead filled in for essay on demand, her at the cash register until she arrived, stating that he understood her situation. On the other hand, Yusef, a newly hired clerk who is Muslim, is disciplined by Donald for of view, arriving 10 minutes late for his shift even though Donald knows it is due to on demand his attendance at services at the local Mosque.

While Donald can require all similarly situated employees to be punctual, he is engaging in monomyth essays, disparate treatment based on religion by disciplining only on demand Yusef and not Joanne absent a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for treating them differently. A charge alleging the above facts might also present a claim for denial of childs book report, reasonable accommodation. While the employer may require employees to be punctual, it may have to accommodate an essay employee who seeks leave or a schedule change to cesario resolve the conflict between religious services and a work schedule, unless the accommodation would pose an undue hardship. Essay On Demand! [62] 3. Compensation and Other Terms, Conditions, or Privileges of Employment. Title VII prohibits discrimination on monomyth essays, a protected basis “with respect to on demand . Monomyth Essays! . . compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment,” for example, setting or adjusting wages, granting benefits, and/or providing leave in a discriminatory fashion. [63] Wages and Benefits. Janet, who practices Native American spirituality, is essay on demand, a newly hired social worker for an agency. As a benefit to frank resume its employees, the agency provides tuition reimbursement for essay on demand, professional continuing education courses offered by selected providers. Report! Janet applied for tuition reimbursement for an approved course that was within permitted cost limit. Essay On Demand! Janet’s supervisor denied her request for essay, tuition reimbursement, stating that since Janet believes in “voodoo” she “won’t make a very good caseworker.” By refusing, because of Janet’s religious beliefs, to provide the tuition reimbursement to essay on demand which Janet was otherwise entitled as a benefit of her employment, Janet’s supervisor has discriminated against Janet on the basis of religion. Title VII’s prohibition on disparate treatment based on religious beliefs also can apply to disparate treatment of religious expression in the workplace. [64]

Eve is a secretary who displays a Bible on her desk at work. Xavier, a secretary in the same workplace, begins displaying a Quran on his desk at of tourism, work. Their supervisor allows Eve to on demand retain the Bible but directs Xavier to put the Quran out of view because, he states, co-workers “will think you are making a political statement, and with everything going on in the world right now we don’t need that around here.” This differential treatment of similarly situated employees with respect to the display of a religious item at childs, work constitutes disparate treatment based on religion in violation of Title VII. [65] Charges involving religious expression may present claims not only of disparate treatment, but also of harassment and/or denial of reasonable accommodation. Investigation of claims of essay on demand, harassment and denial of reasonable accommodation are addressed respectively in §§ III and chaplain resume IV of essay, this document. As discussed in greater detail in those sections, Title VII requires employers to copy accommodate expression that is on demand, based on in cambodia essay, a sincerely held religious practice or belief, unless it threatens to constitute harassment or otherwise poses an essay undue hardship on the conduct of the business. Essay Lottery! Thus, for on demand, example, an employer can restrict religious expression where it would cause customers or co-workers reasonably to perceive the advantage essay materials to express the employer’s own message, or where the item or message in on demand, question is harassing or otherwise disruptive. Of Tourism Essay! [66] For further discussion of how to analyze when accommodation of religious expression would pose an undue hardship, refer to essay the sections on Harassment at § III-C and Accommodation at § IV-C-6. If an employer takes an action based on the discriminatory preferences of book report, others, including co-workers or clients, the essay on demand employer is unlawfully discriminating. Employment Decision Based on Customer Preference. Harinder, who wears a turban as part of his Sikh religion, is hired to work at the counter in childs report, a coffee shop. On Demand! A few weeks after Harinder begins working, the manager notices that the point on the work crew from the construction site near the shop no longer comes in for coffee in the mornings.

When he inquires, the crew complains that Harinder, whom they mistakenly believe is Muslim, makes them uncomfortable in light of the September 11 th attacks. Essay On Demand! The manager tells Harinder that he has to advantage essay let him go because the customers’ discomfort is understandable. The manager has subjected Harinder to unlawful religious discrimination by taking an adverse action based on customers’ preference not to have a cashier of Harinder’s perceived religion. Essay On Demand! Harinder’s termination based on customer preference would violate Title VII regardless of whether he was Muslim, Sikh, or any other religion. In general, an employer may adopt security requirements for frank, its employees or applicants, provided they are adopted for essay on demand, nondiscriminatory reasons and resume are applied in a nondiscriminatory manner. For example, an employer may not require Muslim applicants to undergo a background investigation or more extensive security procedures because of on demand, their religion while not imposing the monomyth essays same requirements on essay on demand, similarly situated applicants who are non-Muslim, unless such job requirements are imposed by federal statute or Executive Order in of tourism essay, the interest of essay on demand, national security. [67]

D. Bona Fide Occupational Qualification. Title VII permits employers to hire and employ employees on the basis of religion if religion is “a bona fide occupational qualification [“BFOQ”] reasonably necessary to the normal operation of that particular business or enterprise.” [68] Religious organizations do not typically need to rely on this BFOQ defense, however, because the “religious organization” exception in advantage of tourism in cambodia, Title VII permits them to prefer their co-religionists. On Demand! See supra § I-C. It is monomyth essays, well settled that for essay, employers that are not religious organizations and therefore seek to essay rely on the BFOQ defense to justify a religious preference, the defense is on demand, a narrow one and can rarely be successfully invoked. [69] Employers can reduce the risk of discriminatory employment decisions by chaplain resume, establishing written objective criteria for evaluating candidates for hire or promotion and on demand applying those criteria consistently to all candidates. In conducting job interviews, employers can ensure nondiscriminatory treatment by asking the monomyth essays same questions of on demand, all applicants for a particular job or category of job and inquiring about matters directly related to the position in monomyth essays, question. Employers can reduce the risk of religious discrimination claims by carefully and timely recording the accurate business reasons for disciplinary or performance?related actions and sharing these reasons with the affected employees. When management decisions require the exercise of subjective judgment, employers can reduce the risk of discriminatory decisions by providing training to inexperienced managers and encouraging them to consult with more experienced managers or human resources personnel when addressing difficult issues.

If an employer is confronted with customer biases, e.g., an adverse reaction to being served by an employee due to religious garb, the employer should consider engaging with and educating the customers regarding any misperceptions they may have and/or the equal employment opportunity laws. Overview: Religious harassment is analyzed and proved in the same manner as harassment on other Title VII bases, e.g., race, color, sex, or national origin. [70] However, the facts of religious harassment cases may present unique considerations, especially where the essay alleged harassment is based on another employee’s religious practices a situation that may require an employer to reconcile its dual obligations to file take prompt remedial action in response to alleged harassment and to accommodate certain employee religious expression. Religious harassment in essay on demand, violation of Title VII occurs when employees are: (1) required or coerced to abandon, alter, or adopt a religious practice as a condition of employment (this type of “quid pro chaplain resume, quo” harassment may also give rise to a disparate treatment or denial of accommodation claim in essay, some circumstances), [71] or (2) subjected to unwelcome statements or conduct that is based on religion and is so severe or pervasive that the individual being harassed reasonably finds the work environment to be hostile or abusive, and chaplain resume there is a basis for holding the employer liable. Essay! [72] 1. Religious Coercion That Constitutes a Tangible Employment Action. Title VII is violated when an employer or supervisor explicitly or implicitly coerces an employee to abandon, alter, or adopt a religious practice as a condition of receiving a job benefit or avoiding an adverse action. [73] Religious Conformance Required for Promotion. Wamiq was raised as a Muslim but no longer practices Islam. His supervisor, Arif, is a very devout Muslim who tries to monomyth essays persuade Wamiq not to essay abandon Islam and childs advises him to follow the teachings of the Quran. Arif also says that if Wamiq expects to advance in essay, the company, he should join Arif and advantage of tourism other Muslims for weekly prayer sessions in Arif’s office. Essay On Demand! Notwithstanding this pressure to conform his religious practices in monomyth essays, order to be promoted, Wamiq refused to attend the weekly prayer sessions, and was subsequently denied the promotion for which he applies even though he was the most qualified. Arif’s conduct indicates that the promotion would have been granted if Wamiq had participated in the prayer sessions and had become an essay on demand observant Muslim.

Absent contrary evidence, the employer will be liable for harassment for conditioning Wamiq’s promotion on his adherence to Arif’s views of appropriate religious practice. Resume File! [74] This would also be actionable as disparate treatment based on religion. In addition, if the prayer sessions were made mandatory and Wamiq had asked to be excused on religious grounds, Arif would have been required to excuse him from the prayer sessions as a reasonable accommodation. A claim of harassment based on essay on demand, coerced religious participation or non-participation, however, only arises where it was intended to make the employee conform to of view or abandon a religious belief or practice. On Demand! By contrast, an monomyth essays employer would not be engaging in coercion if it required an employee to participate in a workplace activity that conflicts with the employee’s sincerely held religious belief, so long as the employer demonstrates that it would impose an undue hardship to accommodate the employee’s request to be excused. On Demand! However, the chaplain resume same fact pattern may give rise to claims of disparate treatment, harassment, and/or denial of essay, accommodation. For example, terminating rather than accommodating an employee may give rise to point of view essay both denial of accommodation and discriminatory discharge claims. [75] For discussion of the accommodation issue, see § IV, infra .[76] Title VII’s prohibition against religious discrimination can also be violated if the employee is subjected to a hostile work environment because of religion. [77] An unlawful hostile environment based on religion might take the form of either verbal or physical harassment or unwelcome imposition of religious views or practices on an employee. A hostile work environment is on demand, created when the “workplace is permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and chaplain resume insult that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to essay on demand alter the conditions of the victim’s employment and create an abusive working environment.” [78] To establish a case of religious harassment, an employee must show that the harassment was: (1) based on resume copy file, his religion; (2) unwelcome; (3) sufficiently severe or pervasive to essay on demand alter the conditions of employment by creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment; and, (4) that there is a basis for employer liability. [79] To support a religious harassment claim, the adverse treatment must be based on religion. [80] This standard can be satisfied regardless of whether the harassment is motivated by the religious belief or observance or lack thereof of either the harasser or the targeted employee.

Moreover, while verbally harassing conduct clearly is based on book report, religion if it has religious content, harassment can also be based on religion even if religion is not explicitly mentioned. [81] Harassing Conduct Based on Religion Religion Mentioned. Mohammed is an Indian-born Muslim employed at a car dealership. Because he takes scheduled prayer breaks during the work day and observes Muslim dietary restrictions, his co-workers are aware of on demand, his religious beliefs. Upset about the 9/11 terrorist attacks, his co-workers and managers began making mocking comments about his religious dietary restrictions and need to pray during the workday. They repeatedly referred to him as “Taliban” or “Arab” and asked him “why don’t you just go back where you came from since you believe what you believe?” When Mohammed questioned why it was mandatory for all employees to attend a United Way meeting, his supervisor said: “This is America.

That’s the way things work over here. This is not the resume copy file Islamic country where you come from.” After this confrontation, the supervisor issued Mohammed a written warning stating that he “was acting like a Muslim extremist” and that the essay on demand supervisor could not work with him because of his “militant stance.” This harassment is “based on” religion and resume national origin. [82] Harassing Conduct Based on essay on demand, Religion Religion Not Mentioned. Shoshanna is point essay on the lottery, a Seventh-day Adventist whose work schedule was adjusted to accommodate her Sabbath observance, which begins at sundown each Friday. When Nicholas , the new head of Shoshanna’s department, was informed that he must accommodate her, he told a colleague that “anybody who cannot work regular hours should work elsewhere.” Nicholas then moved the regular Monday morning staff meetings to essay on demand late Friday afternoon, repeatedly scheduled staff and childs report client meetings on essay on demand, Friday afternoons, and often marked Shoshanna AWOL when she was not scheduled to work.

In addition, Nicholas treated her differently than her colleagues by, for example, denying her training opportunities and loudly berating her with little or no provocation. Chaplain Resume! Although Nicholas did not mention Shoshanna’s religion, the essay evidence shows that his conduct was because of Shoshanna’s need for religious accommodation, and report therefore was “based on” religion. [83] To be unlawful, harassing conduct must be unwelcome. Conduct is “unwelcome” when the employee did not solicit or incite it and regards it as undesirable or offensive. [84] It is necessary to evaluate all of the surrounding circumstances to determine whether or not particular conduct or remarks are unwelcome. On Demand! [85] For example, where an employee is upset by repeated mocking use of derogatory terms or comments [86] about his religious beliefs or observance by a colleague, it may be evident that the conduct is unwelcome. This would stand in report, stark contrast to a situation where the same two employees were engaged in a consensual conversation that involves a spirited debate of religious views, and neither employee indicates that he was upset by it. The distinction between welcome and unwelcome conduct is especially important in the religious context in situations involving proselytizing of employees who have not invited such conduct. On Demand! [87] Where a religious employee attempts to persuade a non-religious employee of the correctness of advantage of tourism in cambodia, his belief, or vice versa, the conduct may or may not be welcome. Essay On Demand! When an employee objects to particular religious expression, unwelcomeness is chaplain resume, evident. Essay On Demand! [88] Beth’s colleague, Bill, repeatedly talked to advantage of tourism in cambodia essay her at work about her prospects for salvation. Essay On Demand! For several months, she did not object and discussed the matter with him. When he persisted even after she told him that he had “crossed the line” and should stop having non-work related conversations with her, the conduct was clearly unwelcome. [89] Even unwelcome religiously motivated conduct is point lottery, not unlawful unless “the victim . . . subjectively perceive[s] the environment to be abusive” and the conduct is “severe or pervasive enough to create an on demand objectively hostile or abusive work environment -- an environment that a reasonable person would find hostile or abusive.” [90] Whether a reasonable person would perceive the chaplain resume conduct as abusive turns on common sense and context, looking at essay, the totality of the circumstances. Copy! [91] Relevant factors include whether the conduct was abusive, derogatory, or offensive; [92] whether the conduct was frequent; [93] and whether the conduct was humiliating or physically threatening. On Demand! [94]

Reasonable Person Perceives Conduct To Be Hostile. Although he hired employees of all religions, the Director of “Get Drug Free Today” required employees to sign a statement that they would support the values of the Church of Scientology. Advantage! He regularly chastised those whose conduct did not conform to those values. A reasonable person would perceive this to be a religiously hostile work environment. [95] To “alter the conditions of employment,” conduct need not cause economic or psychological harm. [96] It need not impair work performance, discourage employees from essay remaining on the job, or impede their advancement. [97] The presence of one or more of chaplain resume, those factors would buttress the claim, but is not required. [98] However, Title VII is essay on demand, not a general civility code, and does not render all insensitive or offensive comments, petty slights, and monomyth essays annoyances illegal. [99] Offhand or isolated incidents (unless extremely serious) will not rise to the level of illegality. [100] Insensitive Comments Not Enough To Constitute Hostile Environment. Marvin is an Orthodox Jew who was hired as a radio show host. Essay! When he started work, a co-worker, Stacy, pointed to his yarmulke and cesario asked, “Will your headset fit over essay, that?” On a few occasions, Stacy, made other remarks about the yarmulke, such as: “Nice hat. Is that a beanie?” and “Do they come in different colors?” Although the co-worker’s comments about his yarmulke were insensitive, they were not sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a hostile work environment for Marvin. [101] Isolated Comments Not Enough to monomyth essays Constitute Hostile Environment.

Bob, a supervisor, occasionally allowed spontaneous and voluntary prayers by employees during office meetings. Essay On Demand! During one meeting, he referenced Bible passages related to “slothfulness” and frank cesario resume “work ethics.” Amy complained that Bob’s comments and the few instances of essay on demand, allowing voluntary prayers during office meetings created a hostile environment. The comments do not create an actionable harassment claim. They were not severe, and because they occurred infrequently, they were not sufficiently pervasive to state a claim. [102] The severity and pervasiveness factors operate inversely. The more severe the harassment, the less frequently the incidents need to recur. At the frank cesario resume same time, incidents that may not, individually, be severe may become unlawful if they occur frequently or in essay on demand, close proximity. [103] Although a single incident will seldom create an cesario resume unlawfully hostile environment, it may do so if it is unusually severe, particularly if it involves physical threat. [104] One Instance of Physically Threatening Conduct Is Enough to on demand Constitute Hostile Environment. Ihsaan is monomyth essays, a Muslim.

Shortly after the essay terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, Ihsaan came to frank resume work and found the essay words “You terrorists go back where you came from! We will avenge the victims!! Your life is next!” scrawled in red marker on his office door. Because of the timing of the statement and the direct physical threat, this incident, alone, is sufficiently severe to constitute hostile environment harassment based on chaplain resume, religion and on demand national origin. [105] Persistent Offensive Remarks Constitute Hostile Environment. Betty is a Mormon. During a disagreement regarding a joint project, a co-worker, Julian, tells Betty that she doesn’t know what she is talking about and that she should “go back to Salt Lake City.” When Betty subsequently proposes a different approach to the project, Julian tells her that her suggestions are as “flaky” as he would expect from “her kind.” When Betty tries to resolve the conflict, Julian tells her that if she is uncomfortable working with him, she can either ask to cesario be transferred, or she can “just pray about it.” Over the essay on demand next six months, Julian regularly makes similar negative references to Betty’s religion. His persistent offensive remarks create a hostile environment. Religious expression that is repeatedly directed at monomyth essays, an employee can become severe or pervasive, whether or not the content is intended to be insulting or abusive. Essay On Demand! Thus, for example, persistently reiterating atheist views to a religious employee who has asked that it stop can create a hostile environment. However, the resume copy file extent to which the expression is directed at a particular employee is relevant to essay on demand determining whether or when it could reasonably be perceived to be severe or pervasive by resume file, that employee. [106] For example, although it is conceivable that one employee may allege that he is offended by on demand, a colleague’s wearing of religious garb, expressing one’s religion by wearing religious garb is point essay on the, not religious harassment.

It merely expresses an essay on demand individual’s religious affiliation and of view lottery does not demean other religious views. As such, it is not objectively hostile. On Demand! Nor is it directed at any particular individual. Similarly, workplace displays of religious artifacts or posters that do not demean other religious views generally would not constitute religious harassment. No Hostile Environment from Comments That Are Not Abusive and Not Directed at chaplain resume, Complaining Employee. While eating lunch in the company cafeteria, Clarence often overhears conversations between his co-workers Dharma and essay on demand Khema. Dharma, a Buddhist, is discussing meditation techniques with Khema, who is point of view essay on the lottery, interested in Buddhism. Essay On Demand! Clarence strongly believes that meditation is an occult practice that leads to devil worship and complains to monomyth essays their supervisor that Dharma and Khema are creating a hostile environment for him.

Such conversations do not constitute severe or pervasive religious harassment of Clarence because they do not insult other religions and they were not directed at him. Overview: An employer is always liable for a supervisor’s harassment if it results in a tangible employment action. However, if it does not, the employer may be able to avoid liability or limit damages by essay, establishing an of tourism in cambodia affirmative defense that includes two necessary elements: (a) the employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct promptly any harassing behavior, and (b) the essay on demand employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of chaplain resume, any preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer or to essay on demand avoid harm otherwise. In cases of copy, harassment by a co-worker or a third party over whom the employer had some control, an employer is liable if it knew or should have known about the harassment and failed to on demand take immediate and appropriate corrective action. 1. Harassment by Supervisors or Managers. Employers are automatically liable for childs book report, supervisory harassment that results in on demand, a tangible employment action such as a denial of promotion, demotion, discharge, or constructive discharge. If the report harassment does not result in a tangible employment action, the employer can attempt to prove, as an affirmative defense to liability, that: (1) the employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct any harassing behavior, and (2) the employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer or to otherwise avoid harm. [107] Supervisory Harassment with Tangible Employment Action. George, a high level official in essay on demand, a state agency, is an atheist who has frequently been heard to say that he thinks anyone who is childs book report, deeply religious is a zealot with his own agenda and cannot be trusted to act in the best interests of the essay on demand public.

George particularly ridicules Debra, a devoutly observant Jehovah’s Witness, and consistently withholds the most desirable assignments from childs report her. He denies her request for a promotion to a more prestigious job in another division, saying that he can’t let her “spread that religious poppycock any further.” Debra files a religious harassment charge. Respondent asserts in its position statement that it is not liable because Debra never made a complaint under its internal anti-harassment policy and complaint procedures. Because the on demand harassment culminated in a tangible employment action (failure to promote), the employer is liable for the harassment even if it has an effective anti-harassment policy, and even if Debra never complained. Additionally, the denial of promotion would be actionable as disparate treatment based on religion. Supervisory Harassment Without Tangible Employment Action. Jennifer’s employer, XYZ, had an childs book anti-harassment policy and complaint procedure that covered religious harassment.

All employees were aware of it, because XYZ widely and regularly publicized it. Despite his knowledge of the policy, Jennifer’s supervisor frequently mocked her religious beliefs. When Jennifer told him that his comments bothered her, he told her that he was just kidding and she should not take everything so seriously. Essay On Demand! Jennifer never reported the problem. When one of Jennifer’s co-workers eventually reported the supervisor’s harassing conduct, the cesario employer promptly investigated, and acted effectively to stop the supervisor’s conduct. Jennifer then filed a religious harassment charge. Because the harassment of Jennifer did not culminate in a tangible employment action, XYZ may assert as an affirmative defense that it is not liable because Jennifer failed to make a complaint under its internal anti-harassment policy and on demand complaint procedures. File! On these facts, XYZ will not be liable for the harassment because Jennifer unreasonably failed to utilize XYZ’s available, effective complaint mechanisms, and because XYZ took prompt and reasonable corrective measures once it did learn of the harassment. An employer is liable for harassment by essay on demand, co-workers where it: knew or should have known about the cesario resume harassment, and failed to take prompt and appropriate corrective action. [108] Harassment by on demand, Co-Workers.

John, who is a Christian Scientist, shares an office with Rick, a Mormon. Rick repeatedly tells John that he is resume, practicing a false religion, and that he should study Mormon literature. Despite John’s protestations that he is very happy with his religion and essay has no desire to convert, Rick regularly leaves religious pamphlets on John’s desk and tries to talk to him about religion. After vainly asking Rick to advantage in cambodia stop the behavior, John complains to their immediate supervisor, who dismisses John’s complaint on the ground that Rick is on demand, a nice person who believes that he is advantage of tourism in cambodia, just being helpful. If the harassment continues, the employer is liable because it knew, through the supervisor, about Rick’s harassing conduct but failed to take immediate and appropriate corrective action. [109] An employer is essay, liable for monomyth essays, harassment by non-employees where it: knew or should have known about the harassment, could control the essay on demand harasser’s conduct or otherwise protect the employee, and failed to take prompt and appropriate corrective action. [110] Harassment by monomyth essays, a Contractor. Tristan works for XYZ, a contractor that manages Crossroads Corporation’s mail room. Essay On Demand! When Tristan delivers the mail to Julia, the Crossroads receptionist, he gives her religious tracts, attempts to convert her to his religion, and persists even after she tells him to stop. Julia reports Tristan’s conduct to her supervisor, who tells her that he cannot do anything because Tristan does not work for advantage in cambodia, Crossroads. If the harassment continues, the essay on demand supervisor’s failure to on the act will subject Crossroads to essay liability because Tristan’s conduct is pervasive and Crossroads refused to take preventive action within its control.

Options available to Julia’s supervisor or the point of view appropriate individual in essay on demand, the supervisor’s chain of command might include initiating a meeting with Tristan and XYZ management regarding the harassment and demanding that it cease, that appropriate disciplinary action be taken if it continues, and/or that a different mail carrier be assigned to Julia’s route. C. Monomyth Essays! Special Considerations for Employers When Balancing Anti-Harassment and Accommodation Obligations With Respect to Religious Expression. While some employees believe that religion is intensely personal and private, others are open about essay their religion. [111] There are employees who may believe that they have a religious obligation to share their views and to try to persuade co-workers of the truth of their religious beliefs, i.e. , to of view essay lottery proselytize. Essay! Some employers, too, may wish to express their religious views and advantage of tourism share their religion with their employees. [112] As noted above, however, some employees may perceive proselytizing or other religious expression as unwelcome harassment based on their own religious beliefs and observances, or lack thereof. This mix of divergent beliefs and practices can give rise to conflicts requiring employers to balance the rights of employees who wish to express their religious beliefs with the rights of other employees to be free from religious harassment under the foregoing Title VII harassment standards. [113] As discussed in more detail in on demand, § IV-C-6 of this document, an employer never has to accommodate expression of a religious belief in monomyth essays, the workplace where such an accommodation could potentially constitute harassment of co-workers, because that would pose an undue hardship for the employer. Therefore, while Title VII requires employers to accommodate an on demand employee’s sincerely held religious belief in engaging in religious expression ( e.g. , proselytizing) in the workplace, an point of view employer does not have to allow such expression if it imposes an undue hardship on on demand, the operation of the business. For example, it would be an undue hardship for an employer to accommodate proselytizing by an employee if it constituted potentially unlawful religious harassment of a co-worker who found it unwelcome, or if it otherwise interfered with the operation of the business. [114] Because employers are responsible for maintaining a nondiscriminatory work environment, they are liable for perpetrating or tolerating religious harassment of their employees. An employer can reduce the cesario chance that employees will engage in conduct that rises to the level of unlawful harassment by implementing an anti-harassment policy and an effective procedure for reporting, investigating, and correcting harassing conduct. [115] Even if the policy does not prevent all such conduct, it will likely limit the employer’s liability where the affected employee allows the conduct to rise to the level of illegality by failing to report it. However, Title VII violations may result if an employer tries to avoid potential co-worker objections to essay employee religious expression by preemptively banning all religious communications in the workplace, since Title VII requires that employees’ sincerely held religious practices and beliefs be accommodated as long as no undue hardship is posed.

Employers should have a well-publicized and consistently applied anti-harassment policy that: (1) covers religious harassment; (2) clearly explains what is prohibited; (3) describes procedures for book, bringing harassment to management’s attention; and, (4) contains an assurance that complainants will be protected against retaliation. The procedures should include a complaint mechanism that includes multiple avenues for complaint; prompt, thorough, and impartial investigations; and prompt and on demand appropriate corrective action. Employers should allow religious expression among employees to the same extent that they allow other types of personal expression that are not harassing or disruptive. Once an employer is on notice that an employee objects to religious conduct that is directed at him or her, the employer should take steps to resume copy file end the conduct because even conduct that the employer does not regard as abusive can become sufficiently severe or pervasive to affect the conditions of employment if allowed to essay persist in of tourism essay, the face of the essay on demand employee’s objection. If harassment is perpetrated by a non-employee assigned by a contractor, the supervisor or other appropriate individual in the chain of command should initiate a meeting with the contractor regarding the harassment and demand that it cease, that appropriate disciplinary action be taken if it continues, and/or that a different individual be assigned by the contractor.

To prevent conflicts from escalating to the level of a Title VII violation, employers should immediately intervene when they become aware of objectively abusive or insulting conduct, even absent a complaint. Employers should encourage managers to intervene proactively and discuss with subordinates whether particular religious expression is welcome if the manager believes the expression might be construed as harassing to a reasonable person. While supervisors are permitted to engage in certain religious expression, they should avoid expression that might due to their supervisory authority reasonably be perceived by frank, subordinates as coercive, even when not so intended. Employees who are the recipients of unwelcome religious conduct should inform the individual engaging in the conduct that they wish it to stop. If the conduct does not stop, employees should report it to their supervisor or other appropriate company official in essay, accordance with the procedures established in the company’s anti-harassment policy. Employees who do not wish to personally confront an point of view on the individual who is directing unwelcome religious or anti-religious conduct towards them should report the conduct to their supervisor or other appropriate company official in accordance with the company’s anti-harassment policy. Overview: Title VII requires an employer, once on notice, to essay reasonably accommodate an employee whose sincerely held religious belief, practice, or observance conflicts with a work requirement, unless providing the accommodation would create an undue hardship. [116] However, the file Title VII “undue hardship” defense is essay, defined very differently than the “undue hardship” defense for disability accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Frank! Under Title VII, the essay on demand undue hardship defense to providing religious accommodation requires a showing that the cesario resume proposed accommodation in a particular case poses a “more than de minimis” cost or burden, which is a far lower standard for essay, an employer to meet than undue hardship under the ADA, which is defined in copy, that statute as “significant difficulty or expense.” [117] A religious accommodation claim is distinct from a disparate treatment claim, in essay on demand, which the childs book question is whether employees are treated equally. Essay! An individual alleging denial of religious accommodation is seeking an childs book adjustment to a neutral work rule that infringes on the employee’s ability to practice his religion. The accommodation requirement is “plainly intended to relieve individuals of the burden of on demand, choosing between their jobs and their religious convictions, where such relief will not unduly burden others.” [118]

A reasonable religious accommodation is point essay on the, any adjustment to the work environment that will allow the employee to comply with his or her religious beliefs. However, it is essay, subject to the limit of more than de minimis cost or burden. The need for religious accommodation most frequently arises where an individual’s religious beliefs, observances, or practices conflict with a specific task or requirement of the job or the application process. The employer’s duty to accommodate will usually entail making a special exception from, or adjustment to, the particular requirement so that the employee or applicant will be able to practice his or her religion. Accommodation requests often relate to work schedules, dress and grooming, or religious expression or practice while at resume, work. 1. Notice of the Conflict Between Religion and Work.

An applicant or employee who seeks religious accommodation must make the employer aware both of the need for accommodation and that it is being requested due to a conflict between religion and work. The employee is obligated to explain the religious nature of the belief or practice at issue, and cannot assume that the employer will already know or understand it. [119] Similarly, the essay employer should not assume that a request is invalid simply because it is based on religious beliefs or practices with which the employer is unfamiliar, but should ask the employee to explain the religious nature of the practice and the way in which it conflicts with a work requirement. No “magic words” are required to place an employer on notice of an applicant’s or employee’s conflict between religious needs and a work requirement. To request an accommodation, an individual may use plain language and need not mention any particular terms such as “Title VII” or “religious accommodation.” However, the applicant or employee must provide enough information to chaplain resume make the employer aware that there exists a conflict between the individual’s religious practice or belief and a requirement for essay, applying for or performing the job. Frank Resume! [120] Failure to Advise Employer That Request Is Due to Religious Practice or Belief. Jim agreed to take his employer’s drug test but was terminated because he refused to sign the accompanying consent form.

After his termination, Jim filed a charge alleging that the employer failed to accommodate his religious objection to swearing an oath. Until it received notice of the charge, the employer did not know that Jim’s refusal to sign the form was based on essay on demand, his religious beliefs. Because the employer was not notified of the conflict at copy, the time Jim refused to sign the essay on demand form, or at any time prior to Jim’s termination, it did not have an opportunity to offer to accommodate him. The employer has not violated Title VII. [121] While an employer is not required by Title VII to conduct a discussion with an employee before denying the employee’s accommodation request, as a practical matter it can be important to do so. Both the employer and frank resume the employee have roles to play in resolving an accommodation request. In addition to placing the on demand employer on notice of the need for accommodation, the employee should cooperate with the employer’s efforts to determine whether a reasonable accommodation can be granted.

Once the employer becomes aware of the employee’s religious conflict, the employer should obtain promptly whatever additional information is needed to resume copy file determine whether an accommodation is available that would eliminate the religious conflict without posing an undue hardship on essay on demand, the operation of the employer’s business. [122] This typically involves the childs book report employer and employee mutually sharing information necessary to process the on demand accommodation request. Employer?employee cooperation and flexibility are key to advantage of tourism in cambodia essay the search for a reasonable accommodation. If the accommodation solution is not immediately apparent, the employer should discuss the request with the employee to determine what accommodations might be effective. If the employer requests additional information reasonably needed to evaluate the request, the employee should provide it. Failure to essay on demand confer with the employee is not an independent violation of resume file, Title VII but, as a practical matter, such failure can have adverse legal consequences for essay on demand, both an file employee and an employer. Essay On Demand! For example, in some cases where an employer has made no effort to act on an accommodation request, courts have found that the chaplain resume employer lacked the evidence needed to meet its burden of proof to establish that the plaintiff’s proposed accommodation would actually have posed an undue hardship. [123] Likewise, courts have ruled against employees who refused to cooperate with an employer’s requests for essay, reasonable information when, as a result, the employer was deprived of the information necessary to resolve the accommodation request. For example, if an employee requested a schedule change to accommodate daily prayers, the employer might need to resume file ask for information about the essay on demand religious observance, such as time and monomyth essays duration of the essay on demand daily prayers, in frank cesario, order to determine if accommodation can be granted without posing an undue hardship on the operation of the employer’s business. [124] Moreover, even if the on demand employer does not grant the employee’s preferred accommodation but instead provides an alternative accommodation, the employee must cooperate by attempting to chaplain resume meet his religious needs through the employer’s proposed accommodation if possible. [125] Where the accommodation request itself does not provide enough information to on demand enable the employer to make a determination, and the employer has a bona fide doubt as to monomyth essays the basis for the accommodation request, it is entitled to make a limited inquiry into the facts and circumstances of the employee’s claim that the essay on demand belief or practice at issue is religious and sincerely held, and that the belief or practice gives rise to the need for the accommodation. See “Sincerely Held” and point of view essay on the lottery “Employer Inquiries into Religious Nature or Sincerity of Belief,” supra §§ I-A-2 and I-A-3. Essay On Demand! [126] Whether an employer has a reasonable basis for seeking to verify the employee’s stated beliefs will depend on the facts of childs book, a particular case.

Sincerity of Religious Belief Questioned. Bob, who had been a dues-paying member of the on demand CDF union for fourteen years, had a work-related dispute with a union official and book one week later asserted that union activities were contrary to his religion and essay that he could no longer pay union dues. The union doubted whether Bob’s request was based on a sincerely held religious belief, given that it appeared to be precipitated by an unrelated dispute with the union, and he had not sought this accommodation in his prior fourteen years of employment. In this situation, the union can require him to provide additional information to support his assertion that he sincerely holds a religious conviction that precludes him from belonging to cesario resume or financially supporting a union. Essay! [127] When an employer requests additional information, employees should provide information that addresses the employer’s reasonable doubts. That information need not, however, take any specific form. For example, written materials or the employee’s own first-hand explanation may be sufficient to alleviate the employer’s doubts about the advantage sincerity or religious nature of the employee’s professed belief such that third-party verification is unnecessary. Further, since idiosyncratic beliefs can be sincerely held and religious, even when third-party verification is needed, it does not have to come from a church official or member, but rather could be provided by others who are aware of the essay on demand employee’s religious practice or belief. Chaplain Resume! [128] An employee who fails to cooperate with an employer’s reasonable request for verification of the sincerity or religious nature of a professed belief risks losing any subsequent claim that the employer improperly denied an accommodation. By the on demand same token, employers who unreasonably request unnecessary or excessive corroborating evidence risk being held liable for denying a reasonable accommodation request, and having their actions challenged as retaliatory or as part of a pattern of harassment.

It also is important to remember that even if an employer concludes that an individual’s professed belief is sincerely held and religious, it is only required to grant those requests for accommodation that do not pose an undue hardship on file, the conduct of its business. Clarifying a Request. Diane requests that her employer schedule her for “fewer hours” so that she can “attend church more frequently.” The employer denies the request because it is not clear what schedule Diane is requesting or whether the change is sought due to a religious belief or practice. While Diane’s request lacked sufficient detail for the employer to make a final decision, it was sufficient to constitute a religious accommodation request. Rather than denying the request outright, the employer should have obtained the information from Diane that it needed to make a decision. Essay! The employer could have inquired of book report, Diane precisely what schedule change was sought and for what purpose, and how her current schedule conflicted with her religious practices or beliefs. Diane would then have had an obligation to essay provide sufficient information to permit her employer to make a reasonable assessment of whether her request was based on a sincerely held religious belief, the precise conflict that existed between her work schedule and church schedule, and whether granting the accommodation would pose more than a de minimis burden on the employer’s business. 3. Chaplain Resume! What is a “Reasonable” Accommodation?

Although an essay on demand employer never has to provide an frank accommodation that would pose an undue hardship, see infra § IV-B, the accommodation that is provided must be a reasonable one. An accommodation is not “reasonable” if it merely lessens rather than eliminates the on demand conflict between religion and childs work, provided eliminating the conflict would not impose an undue hardship. [129] Eliminating the conflict between a work rule and an employee’s religious belief, practice, or observance means accommodating the essay employee without unnecessarily disadvantaging the monomyth essays employee’s terms, conditions, or privileges of employment. [130] Where there is more than one reasonable accommodation that would not pose an undue hardship, the essay employer is not obliged to provide the accommodation preferred by the employee. [131] However, an employer’s proposed accommodation will not be “reasonable” if a more favorable accommodation is monomyth essays, provided to other employees for essay, non-religious purposes, [132] or, for example, if it requires the advantage in cambodia essay employee to accept a reduction in pay rate or some other loss of a benefit or privilege of employment and there is an alternative accommodation that does not do so. Essay On Demand! [133] Ultimately, reasonableness is a fact-specific determination. “The reasonableness of an childs employer’s attempt at accommodation cannot be determined in essay, a vacuum. Instead, it must be determined on a case?by?case basis; what may be a reasonable accommodation for one employee may not be reasonable for another . Of View Lottery! . . . ‘The term ‘reasonable accommodation’ is a relative term and cannot be given a hard and fast meaning; each case . . . necessarily depends upon on demand its own facts and copy file circumstances, and comes down to a determination of essay, ‘reasonableness’ under the unique circumstances of the file individual employer-employee relationship.’” [134] Employer Violates Title VII if it Offers Only Partial Accommodation Where Full Accommodation Would Not Pose an Undue Hardship. Rachel, who worked as a ticket agent at a sports arena, asked not to essay on demand be scheduled for any Friday night or Saturday shifts, to permit her to observe the Jewish Sabbath from frank cesario sunset on Friday through sunset on Saturday. The arena wanted to give Rachel only every other Saturday off.

The arena’s proposed accommodation is essay, not reasonable because it does not fully eliminate the religious conflict. The arena may deny the accommodation request only if giving Rachel every Saturday off poses an undue hardship for the arena. [135] Employer Not Obligated To Provide Employee’s Preferred Accommodation. Tina, a newly hired part-time store cashier whose sincerely held religious belief is that she should refrain from work on Sunday as part of her Sabbath observance, asked her supervisor never to schedule her to work on Sundays. Tina specifically asked to be scheduled to work Saturdays instead. Chaplain Resume! In response, her employer offered to essay on demand allow her to work on Thursday, which she found inconvenient because she takes a college class on that day. Even if Tina preferred a different schedule, the employer is not required to grant Tina’s preferred accommodation. [136] Accommodation By Transfer Where Accommodation in Current Position Would Pose Undue Hardship. Yvonne, a member of the Pentecostal faith, was employed as a nurse at a hospital.

When she was assigned to the Labor and Delivery Unit, she advised the nurse manager that her faith forbids her from chaplain resume participating “directly or indirectly in ending a life,” and that this proscription prevents her from assisting with abortions. Essay! She asked the hospital to accommodate her religious beliefs by allowing her to trade assignments with other nurses in the Labor and Delivery Unit as needed. The hospital concluded that it could not accommodate Yvonne within the Labor and Delivery Unit because there were not enough staff members able and resume file willing to trade with her. The hospital instead offered to permit Yvonne to transfer, without a reduction in pay or benefits, to on demand a vacant nursing position in the Newborn Intensive Care Unit, which did not perform any such procedures. The hospital’s solution complies with Title VII. The hospital is not required to grant Yvonne’s preferred accommodation where it has offered a reasonable alternative solution that eliminates the conflict between work and a religious practice or belief under its existing policies and procedures. [137] If there had been no other position to which she could transfer, the employer would have been entitled to terminate her since it would pose an undue hardship to accommodate her in the Labor and Delivery Unit. Title VII is childs, violated by an employer’s failure to accommodate even if to avoid adverse consequences an employee continues to work after his accommodation request is denied. “An employee does not cease to be discriminated against because he temporarily gives up his religious practice and submits to the employment policy.” [138] Thus, the essay on demand fact that an employee acquiesces to the employer’s work rule, continuing to work without an accommodation after the employer has denied the request, should not defeat the employee’s legal claim. Cesario Resume! [139] In addition, the obligation to provide reasonable accommodation absent undue hardship is a continuing obligation. Employers should be aware that an employee’s religious beliefs and practices may evolve over time, and that this may result in requests for additional or different accommodations. [140] Similarly, the employer has the essay right to discontinue a previously granted accommodation that is no longer utilized for religious purposes or poses an undue hardship. An employer can refuse to provide a reasonable accommodation if it would pose an resume file undue hardship. Undue hardship may be shown if the essay accommodation would impose “more than de minimis cost” on the operation of the book employer’s business. [141] The concept of “more than de minimis cost” is discussed below in essay, sub-section 2. Although the of tourism in cambodia essay employer’s showing of undue hardship under Title VII is easier than under the ADA, the essay on demand burden of frank resume, persuasion is still on the employer. Essay On Demand! [142] If an file employee’s proposed accommodation would pose an undue hardship, the employer should explore alternative accommodations.

The determination of whether a particular proposed accommodation imposes an undue hardship “must be made by considering the particular factual context of each case.” [143] Relevant factors may include the type of workplace, the nature of the essay on demand employee’s duties, the identifiable cost of the accommodation in relation to the size and operating costs of the employer, and childs book report the number of employees who will in fact need a particular accommodation. [144] For example, an essay employer with multiple facilities might be better able than another employer to accommodate a Muslim employee who seeks a transfer to a location with a nearby mosque that he can attend during his lunch break. To prove undue hardship, the employer will need to demonstrate how much cost or disruption the childs employee’s proposed accommodation would involve. [145] An employer cannot rely on potential or hypothetical hardship when faced with a religious obligation that conflicts with scheduled work, but rather should rely on essay, objective information. [146] A mere assumption that many more people with the same religious practices as the individual being accommodated may also seek accommodation is not evidence of undue hardship. Childs Book! The determination of whether a proposed accommodation would pose an undue hardship is based on concrete, fact-specific considerations. [147] To establish undue hardship, the employer must demonstrate that the essay accommodation would require more than de minimis cost. [148] Factors to cesario resume be considered are “the identifiable cost in relation to the size and operating costs of the employer, and on demand the number of individuals who will in fact need a particular accommodation.” [149] Generally, the payment of administrative costs necessary for childs book report, an accommodation, such as costs associated with rearranging schedules and recording substitutions for payroll purposes or infrequent or temporary payment of essay on demand, premium wages ( e.g. Copy File! , overtime rates) while a more permanent accommodation is sought, will not constitute more than de minimis cost, whereas the regular payment of premium wages or the hiring of additional employees to provide an on demand accommodation will generally cause an undue hardship to the employer. [150] “[T]he Commission will presume that the infrequent payment of premium wages for a substitute or the payment of premium wages while a more permanent accommodation is book report, being sought are costs which an essay on demand employer can be required to advantage essay bear as a means of essay on demand, providing reasonable accommodation.” [151] Costs to be considered include not only direct monetary costs but also the burden on frank, the conduct of the employer’s business. For example, courts have found undue hardship where the accommodation diminishes efficiency in other jobs, [152] infringes on other employees’ job rights or benefits, [153] impairs workplace safety, or causes co-workers to carry the accommodated employee’s share of potentially hazardous or burdensome work. [154] Whether the essay on demand proposed accommodation conflicts with another law will also be considered. [155] Religious Need Can Be Accommodated. David wears long hair pursuant to his Native American religious beliefs.

David applies for report, a job as a server at a restaurant which requires its male employees to on demand wear their hair “short and neat.” When the childs restaurant manager informs David that if offered the position he will have to cut his hair, David explains that he keeps his hair long based on his religious beliefs, and offers to wear it in a pony tail or held up with a clip. The manager refuses this accommodation, and denies David the position based on his long hair. Since the evidence indicated that David could have been accommodated, without undue hardship, by wearing his hair in a ponytail or held up with a clip, the employer will be liable for denial of reasonable accommodation and discriminatory failure to hire. Safety Risk Poses Undue Hardship. Patricia alleges she was terminated from her job as a steel mill laborer because of essay on demand, her religion (Pentecostal) after she notified her supervisor that her faith prohibits her from wearing pants, as required by the mill’s dress code, and requested as an accommodation to be permitted to wear a skirt. Frank Resume! Management contends that the dress code is essential to the safe and essay on demand efficient operation of the mill, and has evidence that it was imposed following several accidents in which skirts worn by employees were caught in the same type of mill machinery that Patricia operates. Because the evidence establishes that wearing pants is truly necessary for file, safety reasons, the accommodation requested by Patricia poses an undue hardship. [156]

3. Seniority Systems and Collectively Bargained Rights. A proposed religious accommodation poses an undue hardship if it would deprive another employee of a job preference or other benefit guaranteed by essay, a bona fide seniority system or collective bargaining agreement (CBA). [157] Of course, the mere existence of a seniority system or CBA does not relieve the employer of the monomyth essays duty to attempt reasonable accommodation of its employees’ religious practices; the question is whether an accommodation can be provided without violating the essay on demand seniority system or CBA. [158] Allowing voluntary substitutes and swaps does not constitute an undue hardship to chaplain resume the extent the on demand arrangements do not violate a bona fide seniority system or CBA. Chaplain Resume! [159] Schedules Based on a Seniority System or Collectively Bargained Rights. Susan, an employee of on demand, QRS Corp., asks not to work on point of view lottery, her Sabbath. QRS and its employees’ union have negotiated a CBA which provides that weekend shifts will rotate evenly among employees. Essay! If Susan can find qualified co-workers voluntarily willing to swap shifts to childs book report accommodate her sincerely held religious beliefs, the employer could be found liable for essay, denial of resume file, reasonable accommodation if it refuses to essay on demand permit the swap to occur. The existence of the collectively bargained system for resume, determining weekend shifts should not result in the denial of accommodation if a voluntary swap can be arranged by the employee without violating the system or otherwise posing an undue hardship.

The result would be the same if QRS had a unilaterally imposed seniority system (rather than a CBA) pursuant to which weekend shifts are determined. However, if other employees were unwilling to swap shifts or were otherwise harmed by not requiring Susan to work on essay, the shift in question, or the chaplain resume employer would be subject to other operational costs that were more than de minimis by essay on demand, allowing Susan to swap shifts, then the employer can demonstrate undue hardship. Childs! [160] Although infringing on on demand, co-workers’ ability to advantage of tourism essay perform their duties [161] or subjecting co-workers to a hostile work environment will generally constitute undue hardship, [162] the essay on demand general disgruntlement, resentment, or jealousy of co-workers will not. [163] Undue hardship requires more than proof that some co-workers complained; a showing of undue hardship based on co-worker interests generally requires evidence that the accommodation would actually infringe on the rights of co-workers or cause disruption of childs, work. [164] See also §§ III-C and IV-C-6 (discussing specifically complaints regarding proselytizing and other forms of religious expression), infra . If a religious practice actually conflicts with a legally mandated federal, state, or local security requirement, an employer need not accommodate the practice because doing so would create an on demand undue hardship. If a security requirement has been unilaterally imposed by frank cesario, the employer and is not required by law or regulation, the employer will need to decide whether it would be an undue hardship to modify or eliminate the requirement to accommodate an employee who has a religious conflict. Accommodation Implicating Security Concerns. Patrick is employed as a correctional officer at a state prison, and his brother William is essay, employed as a grocery store manager. Both Patrick and William seek permission from their respective employers to wear a fez at work as an act of faith on a particular holy day as part of resume, their religious expression. Essay On Demand! Both employers deny the request, citing a uniformly applied workplace policy prohibiting employees from wearing any type of head covering. The prison’s policy is childs report, based on security concerns that head coverings may be used to conceal drugs, weapons, or other contraband, and may spark internal violence among prisoners.

The grocery store’s policy is based on a stated desire that all employees wear uniform clothing so that they can be readily identified by customers. If both brothers file EEOC charges challenging the denial of their accommodation requests, Patrick will likely not prevail because the prison’s denial of his request was based on on demand, legitimate security considerations posed by the particular religious garb sought to be worn. William will likely prevail because there is no indication it would pose an undue hardship for the grocery store to modify its policy with respect to chaplain resume his request. Essay! [165] Harvinder, a baptized Sikh who works in a hospital, wears a small (4-inch), dull and sheathed kirpan (miniature sword) strapped and hidden underneath her clothing, as a symbol of her religious commitment to defend truth and moral values. When Harvinder’s supervisor, Bill, learned about her kirpan from a co-worker, he instructed Harvinder not to wear it at work because it violated the hospital policy against weapons in the workplace. Childs Book Report! Harvinder explained to Bill that her faith requires her to on demand wear a kirpan in resume, order to comply with the Sikh Code of Conduct, and gave him literature explaining that the on demand kirpan is frank resume, a religious artifact, not a weapon. She also showed him the kirpan, allowing him to see that it was no sharper than butter knives found in the hospital cafeteria. Nevertheless, Bill told her that she would be terminated if she continued to wear the kirpan at work. Absent any evidence that allowing Harvinder to wear the kirpan would pose an on demand undue hardship in the factual circumstances of this case, the hospital is liable for of view essay on the lottery, denial of accommodation. [166] C. Common Methods of Accommodation in essay, the Workplace. Under Title VII, an employer or other covered entity may use a variety of methods to resume provide reasonable accommodations to its employees.

The most common methods are: (1) flexible scheduling; (2) voluntary substitutes or swaps of on demand, shifts and assignments; (3) lateral transfer and/or change of job assignment; and, (4) modifying workplace practices, policies, and/or procedures. An employer may be able to reasonably accommodate an employee by allowing flexible arrival and departure times, floating or optional holidays, flexible work breaks, use of lunch time in book report, exchange for early departure, staggered work hours, and other means to enable an employee to make up time lost due to the observance of essay, religious practices. [167] However, EEOC’s position is that it will be insufficient merely to eliminate part of the conflict, unless eliminating the frank cesario resume conflict in essay, its entirety will pose an undue hardship by disrupting business operations or impinging on other employees’ benefits or settled expectations. Break Schedules/Prayer at Work. Rashid, a janitor, tells his employer on childs book report, his first day of work that he practices Islam and will need to pray at essay on demand, several prescribed times during the workday in order to adhere to his religious practice of praying at five specified times each day, for several minutes, with hand washing beforehand. The employer objects because its written policy allows one fifteen-minute break in the middle of each morning and afternoon.

Rashid’s requested change in resume file, break schedule will not exceed the essay on demand 30 minutes of total break time otherwise allotted, nor will it affect his ability to perform his duties or otherwise cause an undue hardship for his employer. Thus, Rashid is entitled to accommodation. [168] Blanket Policies Prohibiting Time Off for Religious Observance. A large employer operating a fleet of buses had a policy of resume copy, refusing to accept driver applications unless the applicant agreed that he or she was available to be scheduled to work any shift, seven days a week. This policy violates Title VII to on demand the extent that it discriminates against chaplain resume applicants who refrain from work on certain days for essay, religious reasons, by point of view essay lottery, failing to allow for the provision of religious accommodation absent undue hardship. Essay! [169] 2. Voluntary Substitutes and Shift Swaps. Although it would pose an chaplain resume undue hardship to essay on demand require employees involuntarily to substitute for one another or swap shifts, the reasonable accommodation requirement can often be satisfied without undue hardship where a volunteer with substantially similar qualifications is available, either for a single absence or an extended period of time. The employer’s obligation is to make a good faith effort to allow voluntary substitutions and shift swaps, under circumstances which do not discourage employees from monomyth essays substituting for on demand, one another or trading shifts to accommodate a religious conflict. [170] However, if the point of view employer is on essay, notice that the employee’s religious beliefs preclude him not only from working on advantage essay, his Sabbath but also from essay on demand inducing others to resume copy do so, reasonable accommodation requires more than merely permitting the employee to essay on demand swap. [171] Nevertheless, an childs employer does not have to permit a substitute or swap if it would pose more than de minimis cost or burden to business operations. As noted above, if a swap or substitution would result in the employer having to pay premium wages (such as overtime pay), the frequency of the arrangement will be relevant to determining if it poses an undue hardship; “the Commission will presume that the infrequent payment of premium wages for essay on demand, a substitute or the payment of premium wages while a more permanent accommodation is being sought are costs which an monomyth essays employer can be required to bear as a means of providing reasonable accommodation.” [172] An employer may have to make an exception to its scheduling policies, procedures, or practices in order to grant religious accommodation. Essay On Demand! [173] For example, if it does not pose an undue hardship, an employer must make an exception to book its policy of requiring all employees, regardless of seniority, to essay on demand work an “equal number of weekend, holiday, and night shifts,” and childs book report instead permit voluntary shift swaps between qualified co-workers in order to accommodate a particular employee’s sincerely held religious belief that he should not work on the Sabbath. Of course, if allowing a swap or other accommodation would not provide the coverage the employer needs for its business operations or otherwise pose an undue hardship, the accommodation does not have to be granted.

3. Change of Job Tasks and Lateral Transfer. When an employee’s religious belief or practice conflicts with a particular task, appropriate accommodations may include relieving the employee of the task or transferring the employee to a different position or location that eliminates the conflict with the essay employee’s religion. Point Of View Essay On The! Whether or not such accommodations pose an undue hardship will depend on factors such as the nature or importance of the duty at essay, issue, the availability of monomyth essays, others to perform the function, the on demand availability of other positions, and the applicability of a CBA or seniority system. Restaurant Server Excused from Singing Happy Birthday. Kim, a server at a restaurant, informed her manager that she would not be able to join other waitresses in singing “Happy Birthday” to customers because she is monomyth essays, a Jehovah’s Witness whose religious beliefs do not allow her to celebrate holidays, including birthdays. There were enough servers on duty at any given time to perform this singing without affecting service.

The manager refused any accommodation. If Kim files a Title VII charge alleging denial of religious accommodation, she will prevail because the restaurant could have accommodated her with little or no expense or disruption. [174] Pharmacist Excused from Providing Contraceptives. Neil, a pharmacist, was hired by a large corporation that operates numerous large pharmacies at which more than one pharmacist is on duty during all hours of essay on demand, operation. Neil informed his employer that he refused on religious grounds to participate in distributing contraceptives or answering any customer inquiries about contraceptives. The employer reasonably accommodated Neil by offering to allow Neil to signal to a co-worker who would take over servicing any customer who telephoned, faxed, or came to the pharmacy regarding contraceptives. [175] Pharmacist Not Permitted to Turn Away Customers.

In the above example, assume that instead of facilitating the assistance of such customers by a co-worker, Neil leaves on hold indefinitely those who call on the phone about a contraceptive rather than transferring their calls, and walks away from in-store customers who seek to fill a contraceptive prescription rather than signaling a co-worker. Resume! The employer is not required to accommodate Neil’s request to remain in on demand, such a position yet avoid all situations where he might even briefly interact with customers who have requested contraceptives, or to accommodate a disruption of business operations. Childs Report! The employer may discipline or terminate Neil for not meeting legitimate expectations. On Demand! [176] The employee should be accommodated in his or her current position if doing so does not pose an book report undue hardship. [177] If no such accommodation is possible, the employer needs to consider whether lateral transfer is on demand, a possible accommodation. [178] For example, if a pharmacist who has a religious objection to dispensing contraceptives can be accommodated without undue hardship by allowing the pharmacist to frank resume signal a co-worker to assist customers with such prescriptions, the employer cannot choose instead to accommodate by transferring the pharmacist to a different position. Essay! Moreover, if the pharmacist cannot be accommodated within his position, the employer cannot transfer the pharmacist to cesario resume a position that entails less pay, responsibility, or opportunity for advancement unless a lateral transfer is unavailable or would otherwise pose an on demand undue hardship.[179] Lateral Transfer Versus Transfer to report a Lower-Paying Position. An electrical utility lineman requests accommodation of his Sabbath observance, but because the nature of his position requires being available to handle emergency problems at any time, there is no accommodation that would permit the lineman to essay remain in his position without posing an monomyth essays undue hardship. The employer can accommodate the lineman by offering a lateral transfer to another assignment at the same pay, if available. Essay On Demand! If, however, no job at the same pay is readily available, then the employer could satisfy its obligation to reasonably accommodate the lineman by offering to transfer him to a different job, even at lower pay, if one is available. [180]

4. Modifying Workplace Practices, Policies and Procedures. When an employer has a dress or grooming policy that conflicts with an employee’s religious beliefs or practices, the employee may ask for an exception to the policy as a reasonable accommodation. [181] Religious grooming practices may relate, for example, to shaving or hair length. Religious dress may include clothes, head or face coverings, jewelry, or other items. Absent undue hardship, religious discrimination may be found where an employer fails to accommodate the employee’s religious dress or grooming practices. [182] Prakash, who works for CutX, a surgical instrument manufacturer, does not shave or trim his facial hair because of childs, his Sikh religious observance. When he seeks a promotion to manage the division responsible for sterilizing the instruments, his employer tells him that, to work in that division, he must shave or trim his beard because otherwise his beard may contaminate the sterile field. When Prakash explains that he cannot trim his beard for essay on demand, religious reasons, the employer offers to allow Prakash to wear two face masks instead of trimming his beard. Point Essay Lottery! Prakash thinks that wearing two masks is unreasonable and on demand files a Title VII charge. CutX will prevail because it offered a reasonable accommodation that would eliminate Prakash’s religious conflict with the monomyth essays hygiene rule. Some courts have concluded that it would pose an undue hardship if an employer was required to accommodate a religious dress or grooming practice that conflicts with the public image the essay on demand employer wishes to convey to customers. [183] While there may be circumstances in advantage in cambodia essay, which allowing a particular exception to an employer’s dress and grooming policy would pose an undue hardship, an essay on demand employer’s reliance on the broad rubric of “image” to deny a requested religious accommodation may in point, a given case be tantamount to reliance on customer religious bias (so-called “customer preference”) in violation of Title VII. [184]

Nasreen, a Muslim ticket agent for essay on demand, a commercial airline, wears a head scarf, or hijab, to frank resume work at the airport ticket counter. After September 11, 2001, her manager objected, telling Nasreen that the on demand customers might think she was sympathetic to book report terrorist hijackers. Nasreen explains to her manager that wearing the hijab is essay, her religious practice and continues to wear it. She is monomyth essays, terminated for wearing it over on demand, her manager’s objection. Chaplain Resume! Customer fears or prejudices do not amount to essay undue hardship, and frank resume the refusal to accommodate her and the termination, therefore, violate Title VII.

In addition, denying Nasreen the position due to perceptions of customer preferences about religious attire would be disparate treatment based on religion in violation of Title VII, because it would be the same as refusing to hire Nasreen because she is a Muslim. See supra § II-B. [185] There may be limited situations in which the need for essay on demand, uniformity of appearance is so important that modifying the dress code would pose an undue hardship. [186] However, even in these situations, a case-by-case determination is advisable. [187] If any employee needs to use a workplace facility as a reasonable accommodation, for example use of a quiet area for point of view on the, prayer during break time, the essay on demand employer should accommodate the request under Title VII unless it would pose an monomyth essays undue hardship. If the employer allows employees to use the facilities at issue for non-religious activities not related to essay on demand work, it may be difficult for the employer to demonstrate that allowing the facilities to be used in the same manner for religious activities is not a reasonable accommodation or poses an undue hardship. Copy File! [188]

Use of Employer Facilities. An employee whose assigned work area is a factory floor rather than an enclosed office asks his supervisor if he may use one of the company’s unoccupied conference rooms to pray during a scheduled break time. The supervisor must grant this request if it would not pose an essay undue hardship. An undue hardship would exist, for example, if the only conference room is used for work meetings at that time. However, the monomyth essays supervisor is not required to provide the employee with his choice of the available locations, and essay on demand can meet the accommodation obligation by childs, making any appropriate location available that would accommodate the employee’s religious needs if this can be done absent undue hardship, for example by offering an unoccupied area of the work space rather than the on demand conference room. c. Tests and Other Selection Procedures. An employer has an obligation to resume file accommodate an employee or prospective employee when scheduling a test or administering other selection procedures, where the applicant has informed the employer of a sincerely held religious belief that conflicts with a pre-employment testing requirement, unless undue hardship would result. [189] An employer may not permit an applicant’s need for a religious accommodation to affect its decision whether or not to hire the applicant unless the employer can demonstrate that it cannot reasonably accommodate the applicant’s religious practice without undue hardship. [190] d. Providing Social Security Numbers. It will typically pose an essay undue hardship for childs report, an employer to accommodate an applicant or employee’s asserted religious belief against providing or using a social security number. [191] 5. Excusing Union Dues or Agency Fees. Absent undue hardship, Title VII requires employers and unions to essay on demand accommodate an employee who holds religious objections to point of view lottery joining or financially supporting a union. [192] Such an employee can be accommodated by allowing the equivalent of essay, her union dues (payments by union members) or agency fees (payments often required from of tourism in cambodia essay non-union members in a unionized workplace) to be paid to essay a charity agreeable to the employee, the union, and the employer. [193] Whether a charity-substitute accommodation for payment of union dues would cause an undue hardship is an individualized determination based upon, among other things, the union’s size, operational costs, and the number of essay on the, individuals that need the accommodation. [194] If an employee’s religious objection is essay, not to joining or financially supporting the union, but rather to childs the union’s support of on demand, certain political or social causes, the employee may be accommodated if it would not pose an undue hardship by, for example, reducing the chaplain resume amount owed and/or by allowing the employee to donate to on demand a charitable organization the full amount the employee owes or that portion that is chaplain resume, attributable to essay on demand the union’s support of the cause to which the resume copy file employee has a religious objection, or by diverting the essay on demand full amount to the national, state, or local union in of view essay on the, the event one of essay on demand, those entities does not engage in support of the cause to advantage of tourism in cambodia which the employee has a religious objection. Essay On Demand! [195]

6. Chaplain Resume! Permitting Prayer, Proselytizing, and essay on demand Other Forms of monomyth essays, Religious Expression. Some employees may seek to display religious icons or messages at their work stations. Others may seek to proselytize by engaging in one-on-one discussions regarding religious beliefs, distributing literature, or using a particular religious phrase when greeting others. Still others may seek to engage in prayer at their work stations or to use other areas of the workplace for either individual or group prayer or study. In some of these situations, an essay employee might request accommodation in advance to permit such religious expression. In other situations, the employer will not learn of the book report situation or be called upon to consider any action unless it receives complaints about the religious expression from either other employees or customers. As noted in §§ II-A-3 and on demand III-C of this document, prayer, proselytizing, and other forms of religious expression do not solely raise the issue of religious accommodation, but may also raise disparate treatment or harassment issues. To determine whether allowing or continuing to permit an employee to pray, proselytize, or engage in other forms of cesario, religiously oriented expression in the workplace would pose an undue hardship, employers should consider the potential disruption, if any, that will be posed by on demand, permitting this expression of religious belief. [196] As explained below, relevant considerations may include the effect such expression has had, or can reasonably be expected to have, if permitted to chaplain resume continue, on co-workers, customers, or business operations. a. Essay On Demand! Effect on Workplace Rights of Co-Workers. Expression can create undue hardship if it disrupts the work of of tourism in cambodia, other employees or constitutes or threatens to constitute unlawful harassment. Essay! Since an of tourism employer has a duty under Title VII to essay on demand protect employees from religious harassment, it would be an undue hardship to file accommodate such expression.

As explained in essay on demand, § III-A-2-b of this document, religious expression directed toward co-workers might constitute harassment in some situations, for example where it is facially abusive ( i.e. , demeans people of other religions), or where, even if not abusive, it persists even though the co-workers to whom it is directed have made clear that it is unwelcome. It is necessary to chaplain resume make a case-by-case determination regarding whether the effect on co-workers actually is an undue hardship. Essay! However, this does not require waiting until the alleged harassment has become severe or pervasive. [197] As with harassment on any basis, it is monomyth essays, permitted and essay advisable for employers to take action to stop alleged harassment before it becomes severe or pervasive, because while isolated incidents of harassment generally do not violate federal law, a pattern of such incidents may be unlawful. [198] The determination of whether it is an monomyth essays undue hardship to allow employees to engage in religiously oriented expression toward customers is a fact-specific inquiry and will depend on on demand, the nature of the expression, the nature of the employer’s business, and the extent of the impact on customer relations. For example, one court found that it did not impose an in cambodia undue hardship for a private sector employer to allow a cashier to use the general religious greeting “Have a Blessed Day” in on demand, accepting payment where it was said in resume copy, the context of brief anonymous interactions and on demand had little demonstrable adverse impact on customers or the business. Monomyth Essays! [199] However, other courts have found undue hardship where religiously oriented expression was used in the context of a regular business interaction with a client. [200] Whether or not the on demand client objects, this may be an undue hardship for book, an employer where the expression could be mistaken as the employer’s message. Essay On Demand! Where the religiously oriented expression is not limited to use of a phrase or greeting, but rather is in the manner of monomyth essays, individualized, specific proselytizing, an employer is far more likely to be able to on demand demonstrate that it would constitute an undue hardship to accommodate an employee’s religious expression, regardless of the length or nature of the business interaction. Childs Book! [201] Display of Religious Objects By an Employee. Susan and essay on demand Roger are members of the same church and are both employed at XYZ Corporation. Susan works as an architect in a private office on an upper floor, where she occasionally interacts with co-workers, but not with clients. Roger is a security guard stationed at a desk in the front lobby of the XYZ building through which all employees, clients, and other visitors must enter.

At a recent service at Susan and Roger’s church, the file minister distributed posters with the message “Jesus Saves!” and encouraged parishioners to display the posters at their workplaces in order to “spread the word.” Susan and Roger each display the poster on the wall above their respective work stations. XYZ orders both to essay on demand remove the poster despite the fact that both explained that they felt a religious obligation to advantage of tourism in cambodia essay display it, and essay on demand despite the fact that there have been no complaints from co-workers or clients. Susan and childs report Roger file charges alleging denial of religious accommodation. The employer will probably be unable to show that allowing Susan to essay display a religious message in her personal workspace posed an undue hardship, because there was no evidence of any disruption to of view on the the business or the workplace which resulted. By contrast, because Roger sits at the lobby desk and the poster is the first thing that visitors see upon entering the building, it would appear to represent XYZ’s views and would therefore likely be shown to pose an essay undue hardship. [202] Undue Hardship to Allow Employee to Discuss Religion with Clients. Helen, an employee in a mental health facility that served a religiously and ethnically diverse clientele, frequently spoke with clients about religious issues and shared religious tracts with them as a way to help solve their problems, despite being instructed not to childs do so. After clients complained, Helen’s employer issued her a letter of reprimand stating that she should not promote her religious beliefs to on demand clients and copy that she would be terminated if she persisted. Helen’s belief in the need to evangelize to clients cannot be accommodated without undue hardship. The employer has the right to control speech that threatens to on demand impede provision of effective and efficient services.

Clients, especially in a mental health setting, may not understand that the religious message represents Helen’s views rather than the clinic’s view of the resume copy file most beneficial treatment for essay, the patient. Chaplain Resume! [203] Some employers have integrated their own religious beliefs or practices into the workplace, and on demand they are entitled to do so. [204] However, if an employer holds religious services or programs or includes prayer in frank resume, business meetings, Title VII requires that the employer accommodate an employee who asks to be excused for essay on demand, religious reasons, absent a showing of frank cesario, undue hardship. [205] Excusing an essay employee from religious services normally does not create an undue hardship because it does not cost the employer anything and report does not disrupt business operations or other workers. [206] Prayer at Meetings. Michael’s employer requires that the mandatory weekly staff meeting begin with a religious prayer. Michael objects to participating because he believes it conflicts with his own sincerely held religious beliefs. He asks his supervisor to allow him to arrive at essay on demand, the meeting after the prayer. The supervisor must accommodate Michael’s religious belief by either granting his request or offering an alternative accommodation that would remove the conflict between Michael’s religious belief and the staff meeting prayer, even if other employees of Michael’s religion do not object to being present for the prayer. [207] Employer Holiday Decorations.

Each December, the president of XYZ corporation directs that several wreaths be placed around the office building and advantage a tree be displayed in essay on demand, the lobby. Several employees complain that to accommodate their non-Christian religious beliefs, the employer should take down the wreaths and childs book tree, or alternatively should add holiday decorations associated with other religions. On Demand! Title VII does not require that XYZ corporation remove the wreaths and resume copy tree or add holiday decorations associated with other religions. The result under Title VII on these facts would be the same whether in a private or government workplace. Essay! [208] Similarly, an employer is required, absent undue hardship, to excuse an employee from compulsory personal or professional development training where it conflicts with the essay employee’s sincerely held religious beliefs or practices. [209] There may be cases, however, where an employer can show that it would pose an undue hardship to provide an alternative training or to excuse an employee from any part of essay on demand, a particular training, even if the employee asserts it is contrary to point his religious beliefs to attend ( e.g. , where the training provides information on how to perform the essay on demand job, on how to comply with equal employment opportunity obligations, or on other workplace policies, procedures, or applicable legal requirements). Religious Objection to Training Program Employee Must Be Excused. As part of file, its effort to promote employee health and essay on demand productivity, the new president of a company institutes weekly mandatory on-site meditation classes led by a local spiritualist. Angelina explains to her supervisor that the meditation conflicts with her sincerely held religious beliefs, and frank cesario resume asks to be excused from participating.

Because it would not pose an undue hardship, the essay on demand company must accommodate Angelina’s religious belief by excusing her from the weekly meditation classes, even if the company and other employees believe that this form of meditation does not conflict with any religious beliefs. Religious Objection to Training Program Employee Need Not Be Excused. Employer XYZ holds an annual training for cesario, employees on a variety of personnel matters, including compliance with EEO laws and also XYZ’s own internal anti-discrimination policy, which includes a prohibition on sexual orientation discrimination. Lucille asks to be excused from the portion of the training on sexual orientation discrimination because she believes that it “promotes the acceptance of essay on demand, homosexuality,” which she sincerely believes is on the lottery, immoral and sinful based on her religion. The training does not tell employees to value different sexual orientations but simply discusses and reinforces the on demand employer’s conduct rule requiring employees not to discriminate against or harass other employees and to book treat one another professionally. Because an employer needs to make sure that its employees know about and comply with such employer workplace rules, it would be an essay undue hardship for XYZ to book report excuse Lucille from the training.[210] While not all of the following issues will be in dispute in every charge alleging denial of religious accommodation, if CP alleges that R failed to accommodate CP’s religious beliefs or practices, the investigator should generally follow this line of inquiry, considering these steps: Ascertain the nature of the belief or practice that CP claims R has failed to accommodate ( e.g. , dress, grooming, holy day observance, etc.) and what accommodation was sought (e.g., exception to dress code, schedule change, leave, etc.). If disputed by R, determine whether CP’s beliefs are “religious” in nature.

If disputed by on demand, R, determine whether CP “sincerely holds” the particular religious belief or practice at issue. Ascertain whether CP actually notified R of the in cambodia essay need for essay, a religious accommodation, i.e. , whether it was made known to R that an accommodation was needed and that it was for frank cesario, religious reasons. On Demand! The investigator should seek evidence of when, where, how, and to whom such notice was given, and the names of any witnesses to the notification. If R claims that it was not notified of CP’s need for an accommodation, the investigator should attempt to resolve the of view essay discrepancies between R’s contention and CP’s allegation by gathering additional available evidence corroborating or refuting CP’s and essay on demand R’s contentions. Determine R’s response, if any, to the accommodation request. Was an advantage of tourism accommodation offered, and if so, what? The investigator should obtain R’s statement of essay on demand, all attempts to accommodate CP, if any attempts were made. The investigator should seek a specific and complete explanation from R as to chaplain resume the facts on essay, which it relied ( e.g. , why R concluded CP did not have a sincerely-held religious belief or practice, or why R concluded that accommodation would have posed an undue hardship in resume copy, terms of cost, disruption, effect on co-workers, or any other reason).

For example, in the event R is a union and the accommodation claim relates to payment of agency fees or union dues, the investigator should obtain any relevant information regarding how the on demand particular union at issue may have handled payment by this religious objector in order to provide accommodation. If R asserts that it did not accommodate CP’s request because it would have posed an undue hardship, obtain all available evidence regarding whether or not a hardship would in fact have been posed, i.e. , whether the alleged burden is essay, more than de minimis . If R’s undue hardship defense is based on cost, ascertain the cost of the accommodation in relation to essay R’s size, nature of business operations, operating costs, and of tourism in cambodia essay the impact, if any, of similar accommodations already being provided to other employees. If R’s undue hardship defense is based on a factor other than cost ( i.e. Essay On Demand! , disruption, production or staffing levels, security, or other factor), similarly ascertain the impact of the monomyth essays accommodation with respect to R’s particular workplace and business. When there is more than one method of essay, accommodation available that would not cause undue hardship, the childs book investigator should evaluate whether the accommodation offered is reasonable by examining: (1) whether any alternative reasonable accommodation was available; (2) whether R considered any alternatives for accommodation; (3) the alternative(s) for accommodation, if any, that R actually offered to CP; and (4) whether the on demand alternative(s) the advantage of tourism employer offered eliminated the essay on demand conflict. [211] If R asserts CP failed to monomyth essays cooperate with R in reaching an accommodation, obtain any available evidence regarding the relevant communications, including whether CP refused any offer of reasonable accommodation. Reasonable Accommodation - Generally. Employers should inform employees that they will make reasonable efforts to accommodate the on demand employees’ religious practices.

Employers should train managers and supervisors on how to advantage essay recognize religious accommodation requests from employees. Employers should consider developing internal procedures for processing religious accommodation requests. On Demand! Employers should individually assess each request and avoid assumptions or stereotypes about what constitutes a religious belief or practice or what type of accommodation is appropriate. Employers and employees should confer fully and promptly to the extent needed to share any necessary information about the on the lottery employee’s religious needs and the available accommodation options. An employer is not required to provide an employee’s preferred accommodation if there is more than one effective alternative to choose from. Essay! An employer should, however, consider the employee’s proposed method of accommodation, and if it is denied, explain to the employee why his proposed accommodation is not being granted. Managers and monomyth essays supervisors should be trained to consider alternative available accommodations if the particular accommodation requested would pose an undue hardship. When faced with a request for a religious accommodation which cannot be promptly implemented, an essay employer should consider offering alternative methods of point of view essay lottery, accommodation on essay, a temporary basis, while a permanent accommodation is being explored. Monomyth Essays! In this situation, an employer should also keep the employee apprised of the status of the on demand employer’s efforts to implement a permanent accommodation. The de minimis undue hardship standard refers to the legal requirement. As with all aspects of employee relations, employers can go beyond the requirements of the point essay law and should be flexible in evaluating whether or not an accommodation is feasible.

An employer should not assume that an essay on demand accommodation will conflict with the terms of a seniority system or CBA without first checking if there are any exceptions for religious accommodation or other avenues to allow accommodation consistent with the seniority system or CBA. Childs! An employer should not automatically reject a request for religious accommodation just because the accommodation will interfere with the existing seniority system or terms of a CBA. Although an employer may not upset co-workers’ settled expectations, an employer is free to seek a voluntary modification to a CBA in order to accommodate an employee’s religious needs. Employers should train managers to be aware that, if the on demand requested accommodation would violate the CBA or seniority system, they should confer with the employee to determine if an alternative accommodation is available. Employers should ensure that managers are aware that reasonable accommodation may require making exceptions to childs report policies or procedures that are not part of a CBA or seniority system, where it would not infringe on other employees’ legitimate expectations. Employers should work with employees who need an adjustment to their work schedule to accommodate their religious practices. Notwithstanding that the legal standard for undue hardship is “more than de minimis ,” employers may of course choose voluntarily to incur whatever additional operational or financial costs they deem appropriate to accommodate an on demand employee’s religious need for scheduling flexibility. Employers should consider adopting flexible leave and scheduling policies and procedures that will often allow employees to meet their religious and copy file other personal needs. Such policies can reduce individual requests for exceptions. For example, some employers have policies allowing alternative work schedules and/or a certain number of “floating” holidays for each employee. While such policies may not cover every eventuality and some individual accommodations may still be needed, the number of such individual accommodations may be substantially reduced.

Voluntary Substitutes or Swaps. An employer should facilitate and encourage voluntary substitutions and swaps with employees of substantially similar qualifications by publicizing its policy permitting such arrangements, promoting an atmosphere in which substitutes are favorably regarded, and providing a central file, bulletin board, group e-mail, or other means to help an employee with a religious conflict find a volunteer to substitute or swap. Change of Job Assignments and Lateral Transfers. An employer should consider a lateral transfer when no accommodation which would keep the employee in his or her position is possible absent undue hardship. However, an employer should only on demand resort to transfer, whether lateral or otherwise, after fully exploring accommodations that would permit the employee to remain in his position. Where a lateral transfer is cesario resume, unavailable, an essay employer should not assume that an employee would not be interested in a lower-paying position if that position would enable the employee to monomyth essays abide by his or her religious beliefs.

If there is no accommodation available that would permit the employee to remain in essay, his current position or an of tourism equivalent one, the employer should offer the available position as an accommodation and permit the employee to essay decide whether or not to resume copy file take it. Modifying Workplace Practices, Policies, and Procedures. Employers should make efforts to essay accommodate an employee’s desire to wear a yarmulke, hijab, or other religious garb. Monomyth Essays! If the employer is concerned about uniform appearance in on demand, a position which involves interaction with the public, it may be appropriate to consider whether the cesario resume employee’s religious views would permit him to resolve the religious conflict by, for example, wearing the item of religious garb in the company uniform color(s). Managers and employees should be trained not to engage in stereotyping based on on demand, religious dress and frank resume grooming practices and should not assume that atypical dress will create an essay on demand undue hardship. Of View Essay Lottery! Employers should be flexible and creative regarding work schedules, work duties, and selection procedures to the extent practicable. Essay On Demand! Employers should be sensitive to the risk of unintentionally pressuring or coercing employees to monomyth essays attend social gatherings after the employees have indicated a religious objection to on demand attending. Permitting Prayer, Proselytizing, and Other Forms of Religious Expression. Employers should train managers to gauge the actual disruption posed by religious expression in the workplace, rather than merely speculating that disruption may result.

Employers should also train managers to identify alternative accommodations that might be offered to avoid actual disruption ( e.g. , designating an resume unused or private location in the workplace where a prayer session or Bible study meeting can occur if it is disrupting other workers). Employers should incorporate a discussion of religious expression, and the need for essay on demand, all employees to be sensitive to point of view essay on the the beliefs or non-beliefs of others, into any anti-harassment training provided to essay on demand managers and point of view on the employees. Employees should advise their supervisors or managers of the nature of the conflict between their religious needs and the work rules. Employees should provide enough information to enable the employer to understand what accommodation is essay, needed, and why it is point of view essay lottery, necessitated by essay on demand, a religious practice or belief. Employees who seek to proselytize in childs, the workplace should cease doing so with respect to any individual who indicates that the communications are unwelcome.

12-V RELATED FORMS OF DISCRIMINATION. A. National Origin, Race , and Color. Title VII’s prohibition against religious discrimination may overlap with Title VII’s prohibitions against discrimination based on national origin, race, and color. Where a given religion is strongly associated or perceived to be associated with a certain national origin, the same facts may state a claim of both religious and national origin discrimination. [212] All four bases might be implicated where, for example, co-workers target a dark-skinned Muslim employee from Saudi Arabia for essay, harassment because of his religion, national origin, race, and/or color. [213] Title VII prohibits retaliation by an employer, employment agency, or labor organization because an individual has engaged in protected activity. [214] Protected activity consists of opposing a practice the employee reasonably believes is made unlawful by one of the employment discrimination statutes or of filing a charge, testifying, assisting, or participating in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under the monomyth essays statute. EEOC has taken the essay on demand position that requesting religious accommodation is protected activity. [215] Retaliation for Requesting Accommodation. Jenny requests that she be excused from daily employer-sponsored Christian prayer meetings because she is an resume atheist.

Her supervisor insists that she attend, but she persists in her request that she should be excused, and explains that requiring her to attend is essay, offensive to in cambodia her religious beliefs. She takes her request to human resources, and informs them that requiring her to essay on demand attend these prayer meetings is offensive to her religious beliefs. Chaplain Resume! Despite her supervisor’s objections, the human resources department instructs the on demand supervisor that in the circumstances no undue hardship is posed and he must grant the request. Motivated by reprisal, her supervisor shortly thereafter gives her an unjustified poor performance rating, and denies her requests to attend training that is frank cesario, approved for similarly situated employees. This violates Title VII. Employers can reduce the risk of retaliation claims by training managers and supervisors to be aware of their anti-retaliation obligations under Title VII, including specific actions that may constitute retaliation. Essay On Demand! Employers can help reduce the risk of retaliation claims by carefully and timely recording the accurate business reasons for point, disciplinary or performance related actions and on demand sharing these reasons with the book employee. HOW APPLICANTS OR EMPLOYEES CAN FILE A CHARGE. If you believe you have been discriminated against by a private sector or state or local government employer, labor union, or employment agency when applying for a job or while on the job because of your race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age (40 or over), or disability, or believe that you have been discriminated against because you opposed unlawful discrimination or participated in an equal employment opportunity (EEO) proceeding, you may file a charge of discrimination with the U.S.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Charges against private sector and local and state government employers may be filed in person, by mail, or by telephone by on demand, contacting the nearest EEOC office. In Cambodia! If there is no EEOC office in essay, the immediate area, call toll free 1-800?669?4000 or 1?800?669?6820 (TTY) for more information. Cesario Resume! To avoid delay, call or write beforehand if you need special assistance, such as an interpreter, to file a charge. Federal sector employees and essay applicants should contact the EEO office of the agency responsible for the alleged discrimination to initiate EEO counseling. There are strict time frames in which charges of employment discrimination must be filed or your agency’s EEO office must be contacted. When charges or complaints are filed beyond these time frames, you may not be able to obtain any remedy. Charges against private sector or state or local governments must be filed with EEOC within 180 days of the in cambodia essay alleged discriminatory act.

The time frame is extended to 300 days if the alleged discrimination arose in on demand, a state or locality that has a fair employment practices agency (FEPA) with the authority to grant or seek relief for the alleged discrimination. Federal sector employees and of tourism in cambodia essay applicants must initiate EEO counseling at the agency responsible for the alleged discrimination within 45 days of the alleged discriminatory event. Allegations of harassment based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin are timely if at essay, least one incident of harassment that is part of the larger pattern of harassment occurred within the resume filing period. If you wish to remain anonymous during the period when an EEOC charge is on demand, being processed involving a private sector or state or local government employer, another individual or an organization may file a charge on your behalf. In some circumstances, an EEOC Commissioner may file a charge against a private sector or state or local government employer. Federal sector employees and applicants may remain anonymous during EEO counseling, but lose the right to anonymity after filing a formal complaint. WHEN A CHARGE IS FILED AGAINST A PRIVATE SECTOR OR STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYER. This appendix provides general information regarding the processing of a charge alleging discrimination by a private sector or state or local government employer under the EEO statutes. The information presented in this appendix applies to private sector and state and local government employers only. For information on the processing of complaints against federal agencies, visit the EEOC’s “Federal Sector Information” page on the Internet at Anyone who believes that a private sector or state or local government employer has violated his or her employment rights based on race, color, sex, religion, national origin, age (40 or over), disability, opposition to unlawful discrimination, or participation in point of view essay on the, an EEO proceeding, may file a charge of discrimination with the EEOC.

A charge does not constitute a finding that your company did, in fact, discriminate. The EEOC has a responsibility to investigate and determine whether there is reasonable cause to believe discrimination occurred. That process begins with the EEOC sending your company a copy of the on demand charge, which will briefly identify the charging party, the point of view basis ( e.g. Essay! , race, religion, etc.) and issues (hiring, promotion, etc.), and the date(s) of the alleged discrimination. You also may be asked to provide a response to the charge and chaplain resume supporting documentation. Essay On Demand! The EEOC also may ask to file visit your work site or to on demand interview some employees. Frank Cesario Resume! It is important that your company retain records relating to issues under investigation as a result of the charge until the charge or any lawsuit based on the charge is resolved. In some cases, the EEOC notice may offer mediation as a method of resolving the charge before an investigation. EEOC’s mediation program is a free service, and participation is voluntary. The process is confidential, and there is a firewall ( i.e. , total separation) between the mediation program and EEOC’s enforcement activities. Mediation provides employers and charging parties the opportunity to reach mutually agreeable solutions early in on demand, the process.

The EEOC will notify your company if a charge is eligible for mediation. In the event that mediation does not succeed, the charge is file, referred for essay, investigation. If the childs book EEOC finds reasonable cause to believe that your company discriminated against a charging party, it will invite you to conciliate the charge ( i.e. , the EEOC will offer you a chance to resolve the on demand matter informally). In some cases, where conciliation fails, the EEOC will file a civil court action. Cesario! If the EEOC does not find discrimination, or if conciliation fails and the EEOC chooses not to file suit, it will issue a notice of a right to sue, which gives the charging party 90 days to file a civil court action. Essay! The EEOC also must issue a notice of right to sue to the charging party on request if its handling of the charge is still pending after 180 days, or earlier if the EEOC knows it will take more than 180 days to complete action on the charge. In all cases, your company should remember that it is unlawful to retaliate against the charging party for filing the chaplain resume charge, even if you believe the charge is without merit. You should submit a response to the EEOC and essay on demand provide the information requested, even if you believe the charge is frivolous.

If the charge was not dismissed by the EEOC when it was received, that means there was some basis for proceeding with further investigation. There are many cases where it is unclear whether discrimination may have occurred and an investigation is necessary. Copy! You are encouraged to present any facts that you believe show the allegations are incorrect or do not amount to a violation of the law. [1] This document uses examples that refer to the practices and beliefs of various religions. These examples are intended to clarify the legal principles for which they are used and do not purport to represent the religious beliefs or practices to which they refer.

In some instances, links to non-EEOC Internet sites are also provided for essay on demand, the reader’s convenience in obtaining additional information. EEOC assumes no responsibility for their content and does not endorse their organizations or guarantee the accuracy of of tourism, these sites. [2] This Section of the Compliance Manual replaces Section 628: Religious Accommodation , EEOC Compliance Manual, Volume II and its Appendices: Appendix A, Policy Statement on essay on demand, Ansonia Board of Education v. Philbrook and Religious Accommodation ; Appendix B, Policy Guidance On ‘New Age’ Training Programs Which Conflict With Employees’ Religious Beliefs ; and Appendix C, Religious Objections to essay Unionism . It also replaces the following policy documents: Religious Organizations that Pay Women Less than Men in Accordance with Religious Beliefs ; Religious Organization Exemption Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended ; and Policy Statement on Goldman v. On Demand! Weinberger (Accommodation of the monomyth essays Wearing of Religious Dress ). The Commission’s Guidelines on on demand, Discrimination Because of Religion (hereafter Commission Guidelines ) are not affected by this Section. See Commission Guidelines , 29 C.F.R. Part 1605. [3] Use of the term “employee” in this document should be presumed to monomyth essays include an applicant and, as appropriate, a former employee. [4] 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a) provides that it is an unlawful employment practice for an employer: (1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; or.

(2) to limit, segregate, or classify his employees or applicants for employment in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(j) provides that: The term “religion” includes all aspects of religious observance and essay practice, as well as belief, unless an employer demonstrates that he is unable to essay reasonably accommodate an on demand employee’s or prospective employee’s religious observance or practice without undue hardship on the conduct of the of view on the employer’s business. [5] Federal legislation known as the Workplace Religious Freedom Act (“WRFA”), that has been proposed since the essay on demand 1990s, would amend Title VII to change the current “ de minimis ” standard for establishing undue hardship to require employers to show that the advantage in cambodia essay accommodation would cause significant difficulty or expense. See H.R. 1431, 110th Cong. (2007). This compliance manual chapter interprets and applies the current federal law, and takes no position on WRFA. Note: Various state and local laws extend beyond Title VII in terms of the protected bases covered, the essay on demand discrimination prohibited or accommodation required, and the legal standards and defenses that apply. [6] See, e.g., Torcaso v. Watkins , 367 U.S. Book Report! 488, 495 n.11 (1961) (First Amendment does not permit government to distinguish between theistic and non-theistic religions such as Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, and essay on demand Secular Humanism); Young v. Southwestern Sav. Loan Ass’n, 509 F.2d 140 (5th Cir.

1975) (Title VII violated by requiring atheist employee to attend prayer portion of business meeting). [7] Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) and the Tanenbaum Center for Interreligious Understanding, Religion in the Workplace Survey, at advantage, 6 (Society for on demand, Human Resource Management, 2001) (executive summary and file information on obtaining report available at (last visited July 2, 2008); Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, U.S. Religious Landscape Survey (2008), available at on demand, (last visited July 2, 2008). [8] In fiscal year 2007, EEOC received 2,880 religious discrimination charges, accounting for 3.5% of all charges filed with the Commission that year. In fiscal year 1992, EEOC received 1,388 religious discrimination charges, accounting for 1.9% of all charges filed with the Commission that year. Statistics regarding the number of religious discrimination charges filed with the Commission can be found at [9] “Religion in the Workplace is a Diversity Issue for U.S. Monomyth Essays! Companies,” U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of International Information Programs (Nov. 28, 2007), available at washfile-english/2007/November/20071128173019xlrennef0.1781427.html (last visited July 2, 2008). [10] The principles discussed in essay on demand, this Section apply to cesario Title VII claims against private employers as well as to federal, state, and essay on demand local public sector employers, unless otherwise noted.

See 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(a) - (b), 2000e-16(a), et seq. , and 2000e-16a. See, e.g. , infra nn.11-15, 66 (directing attention to situations where the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) may apply), and 201-203. As explained in n.5, supra , claims under various state or local laws may be analyzed under different standards. [11] The First Amendment religion and speech clauses (“Congress shall make no law respecting an chaplain resume establishment of on demand, religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech”) protect individuals against restrictions imposed by the government, not by private entities, and therefore do not apply to frank cesario resume rules imposed on private sector employees by their employers. The First Amendment, however, does protect private sector employers from essay on demand government interference with their free exercise and speech rights. Chaplain Resume! Moreover, government employees’ religious expression is essay, protected by both the First Amendment and Title VII. See infra nn.12-15, 66, and accompanying text; Brown v. Polk County , 61 F.3d 650 (8th Cir. 1995); Guidelines on Religious Exercise and monomyth essays Religious Expression in the Federal Workplace (Aug. 14, 1997) (hereafter Federal Workplace Guidelines ), 158 Daily Labor Report (BNA) 1522-5968 (Aug. 15, 1997) (available at essay, (last visited July 2, 2008)).

Although the Federal Workplace Guidelines are directed at federal employers, they provide useful guidance for private employers as well. In addition, the U.S. Department of Justice maintains a website,, which provides information on a variety of constitutional and statutory religious discrimination issues, including a section on childs, Title VII employment protections based on religion. [12] See Daniels v. City of Arlington , 246 F.3d 500 (5th Cir.) (as a government entity, police department may be able to demonstrate that providing the requested accommodation would have posed an undue hardship because allowing the officer to wear a cross on his uniform would give the appearance of public agency endorsement of the officer’s religious views, in essay on demand, violation of the department’s constitutional obligations), cert. denied , 534 U.S. 951 (2001); Helland v. South Bend Cmty. Sch. Corp. , 93 F.3d 327 (7th Cir. 1996) (public school did not violate either plaintiff’s Title VII religious accommodation right or his First Amendment free exercise right by removing plaintiff from chaplain resume substitute teacher list due to essay on demand his proselytizing in class); Brown v. Polk County , 61 F.3d at 656-59 (where there was no evidence that subordinates objected on religious grounds , it would not have posed an of tourism in cambodia essay undue hardship under Title VII, or violated the essay First Amendment Establishment Clause, to accommodate supervisor’s occasional affirmations of Christianity and spontaneous voluntary prayers during meetings). [13] See, e.g., EEOC v. Townley Eng’g Mfg.

Co. Resume File! , 859 F.2d 610, 621 (9th Cir. 1988) (court must balance the application of Title VII to the employment policy against essay on demand private employers’ right under First Amendment Free Exercise clause to practice their religion; private secular employer’s free exercise right to hold mandatory religious services for employees did not outweigh its Title VII obligation to accommodate atheist employee’s request to be exempt from chaplain resume attending the services on religious grounds; excusing plaintiff’s attendance would not pose an undue hardship on operation of employer’s business). [14] See, e.g., Knight v. Connecticut Dep’t of Pub. Health , 275 F.3d 156, 164-65 (2d Cir. 2001) (state agency did not violate either Title VII or First Amendment Free Exercise Clause by refusing to allow employee to evangelize clients of state agency while performing job duties; in addition, employer would have risked First Amendment Establishment Clause violation by essay on demand, permitting the accommodation); Fraternal Order of Police v. City of of tourism, Newark , 170 F.3d 359 (3d Cir. 1999) (police department violated Sunni Muslim officer’s First Amendment free exercise rights by refusing to make a religious exception to its “no beard” policy to accommodate his beliefs, while exempting other officers for medical reasons); Draper v. Logan County Pub. Library , 403 F. Supp. 2d 608 (W.D.

Ky. 2005) (public library employee’s First Amendment free speech and essay free exercise rights were violated when she was prohibited from wearing a necklace with a cross ornament). [15] Guidance for government workplaces on essay on the lottery, the First Amendment religious free exercise issues, much of which is also useful for the private sector, is essay on demand, available in the Federal Workplace Guidelines , supra n.11 ; see also Brown , 61 F.3d at 658 (applying First Amendment test governing free speech of public employees to First Amendment free exercise claims, court balanced an employee’s right to childs book free exercise with the essay employer’s interest in providing effective and efficient public services; public employee’s termination constituted both denial of religious accommodation under Title VII and violation of First Amendment Free Exercise Clause). [16] 42 U.S.C. Resume! § 2000e-2. Essay! To determine whether an entity is covered by Title VII, see EEOC Compliance Manual, “Threshold Issues,” Although this document concerns Title VII, employers and employees should note that there may be state and local laws in their jurisdiction prohibiting religious discrimination in employment, some of which may be parallel to chaplain resume Title VII and some of which may afford narrower or broader coverage.

[18] “Theistic” is essay on demand, defined as “believing in a god or gods.” The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language , Fourth Ed , Houghton Mifflin Co. Advantage Essay! (2004), available at essay, (last visited July 2, 2008). [19] 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(j). Redmond v. Childs Report! GAF Corp. , 574 F.2d 897, 900 (7th Cir. 1978) (the statutory language “all aspects of religious practice and belief” is essay, interpreted broadly; “to restrict the act to those practices which are mandated or prohibited by a tenet of the religion, would involve the court in essay, determining not only what are the tenets of a particular religion, which by itself perhaps would not be beyond the on demand province of the court, but would frequently require the courts to book report decide whether a particular practice is or is not required by the tenets of the religion”); s ee also Employment Div., Dep’t of Human Res. of Oregon v. Smith , 494 U.S. 872, 887 (1990) (in holding that the Free Exercise Clause did not prohibit application of Oregon drug laws to essay on demand ceremonial ingestion of peyote, Court noted that “[r]epeatedly and in many different contexts, we have warned that courts must not presume to determine the place of frank cesario resume, a particular belief in essay on demand, a religion or the chaplain resume plausibility of a religious claim”). [20] Thomas v. Review Bd. of the Indiana Employment Sec. Div. , 450 U.S. 707, 714 (1981) (“religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection”); see also Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. Essay! v. City of Hialeah , 508 U.S. 520, 531 (1993) (although animal sacrifice may seem “abhorrent” to frank resume some, Santerian belief is religious in essay, nature and chaplain resume is protected by on demand, the First Amendment); U.S. v. Resume File! Meyers , 906 F. Supp. Essay! 1494, 1499 (D. Wyo.

1995) (“one man’s religion will always be another man’s heresy”). [21] Thomas , 450 U.S. at 716 (“[I]t is not within the judicial function and judicial competence to inquire whether the petitioner or [another practitioner] . . . Advantage Of Tourism! more correctly perceived the essay commands of their common faith. Monomyth Essays! Courts are not arbiters of scriptural interpretation.”). [22] Redmond , 574 F.2d at 901 n.12 (Title VII case citing United States v. Essay On Demand! Seeger , 380 U.S. 163 (1969), and Welsh v. United States , 398 U.S. 333 (1970), which defined protected “religion” for purposes of the Universal Military Training and Service Act). Unless otherwise noted, cases are cited in this document for their Title VII holdings.

[23] Seeger , 380 U.S. at 176. “This standard was developed in [ Seeger ] and [ Welsh ]. The Commission has consistently applied this standard in its decisions.” 29 C.F.R. § 1605.1. [24] Commission Guidelines , 29 C.F.R. § 1605.1 (“The fact that no religious group espouses such beliefs or the fact that the religious group to which the resume copy individual professes to belong may not accept such belief will not determine whether the belief is a religious belief of the employee or prospective employee.”); Welsh, 398 U.S. at 343 (petitioner’s beliefs were religious in nature although the church to which he belonged did not teach those beliefs); accord Africa v. Commonwealth of Pa ., 662 F.2d 1025, 1032-33 (3d Cir.1981); Bushouse v. Local Union 2209, United Auto., Aerospace Agric. Implement Workers of Am. , 164 F. Supp. 2d 1066, 1076 n.15 (N.D. Ind. 2001) (“Title VII’s intention is to provide protection and accommodation for a broad spectrum of religious practices and belief not merely those beliefs based upon organized or recognized teachings of a particular sect”). [25] Commission Guidelines , 29 C.F.R. § 1605.1; Torcaso , 367 U.S. at 489-90 (government may not favor theism over pantheism or atheism); Welsh , 398 U.S.

333 (to be religion protected by the First Amendment, a belief system need not have a concept of a god, supreme being, or afterlife; plaintiff’s belief was deemed to be religious because it was held with strength of traditional religious beliefs); Townley , 859 F.2d 610 (Title VII prohibits an on demand employer from compelling its atheist employees to attend religious services); Young , 509 F.2d 140 (same). [26] United States v. Cesario Resume! Meyers, 906 F. Essay On Demand! Supp. 1494, 1499 (D. Wyo. 1995) (the threshold for establishing the religious nature of beliefs is low; under the First Amendment, “if there is any doubt about whether a particular set of beliefs constitutes a religion, the Court will err on the side of freedom and copy find that the beliefs are a religion. . . . [because the country’s] founders were animated in large part by a desire for religious liberty”), aff’d , 95 F.3d 1475, 1482-83 (10th Cir. 1996); see also Smith , 494 U.S. at 887 (in holding that the Free Exercise Clause did not prohibit application of essay on demand, Oregon drug laws to ceremonial ingestion of peyote, Court noted that “[r]epeatedly and in many different contexts, we have warned that courts must not presume to determine the place of a particular belief in a religion or the plausibility of a religious claim”). [27] Meyers, 906 F. Supp. at 1502 (religions address “ultimate ideas,” i.e. , “fundamental questions about of view on the life, purpose, and death”; holding that single-faceted worship of marijuana was not a religion for First Amendment purposes), aff’d , 95 F.3d at 1483; accord Africa, 662 F.2d at 1032 (“a religion [protected by essay on demand, the First Amendment] addresses fundamental and resume file ultimate questions having to do with deep and imponderable matters [and] . . . is comprehensive in nature; it consists of a belief-system as opposed to an isolated teaching”); Dettmer v. Landon , 617 F. On Demand! Supp. 592, 595-96 (E.D. Va.

1985) (under the First Amendment, Wiccans’ belief is religious in nature because, among other things, the belief structure relates to “ultimate” concerns and file reflects a broad concern for essay, improving the quality of monomyth essays, life for others), aff’d in relevant part and rev’d on other grounds , 799 F.2d 929 (4th Cir. 1986); Church of the Chosen People (No. Am. Essay! Panarchate) v. Book! United States , 548 F. Essay! Supp. 1247 (D. Minn. 1982) (a church whose single-faceted doctrine concerned sexual preference and not ultimate questions was not a religion entitled to tax exemption); Brown v. Copy File! Pena , 441 F. Supp. 1382, 1385 (S.D.

Fla. 1977) (“religious” belief under Title VII “is based on a theory of ‘man’s nature or his place in the Universe,’ [and is] not merely a personal preference”), aff’d, 589 F.2d 1113 (5th Cir. 1979). Although “religion” is often marked by essay, external manifestations such as ceremonies, rituals or clergy, such manifestations are not required for a belief to be “religious.” E.g., Malnak v. Yogi, 592 F.2d 197, 209-10 (3d Cir. 1979). [28] For example, EEOC and courts have found that the Ku Klux Klan is resume, not a religion within the meaning of Title VII because its philosophy has a narrow, temporal, and political character. Commission Decision No. On Demand! 79-06, CCH EEOC Decisions ¶ 6737 (1983); Bellamy v. Mason’s Stores, Inc., 368 F. Supp. 1025, 1026 (E.D.

Va. 1973), aff’d , 508 F.2d 504 (4th Cir. 1974); Slater v. King Soopers , 809 F. Supp. 809, 810 (D. Colo. 1992) (dismissing religious discrimination claim by a member of the Ku Klux Klan who allegedly was fired for participating in a Hitler rally because the Ku Klux Klan is “political and social in nature” and monomyth essays is not a religion for Title VII purposes); s ee also Brown v. Pena, 441 F. Supp.

1382 (plaintiff’s belief that eating cat food contributes to his well-being is on demand, a personal preference and not a religion). Chaplain Resume! In an essay on demand analogous case, Peterson v. Advantage In Cambodia Essay! Wilmur Communications, Inc ., 205 F. Supp. On Demand! 2d 1014, 1022 (E.D. Wis. 2002), the court held that an employee’s membership in the World Church of the Creator was a “religious” belief, even though the organization’s central tenet is white supremacy, because “it functions as religion in [plaintiff’s] life” as evidenced by the fact that he has been a minister in it for more than three years, worked to essay put the church’s teachings into practice, and actively proselytizes. However, the Peterson court might have reached a different conclusion had it considered whether the belief was merely one-dimensional and thus not religious, i.e. , not part of a moral or ethical belief system concerning “ultimate ideas” about “life, purpose, and death.” [29] Compare Tiano v. Dillard Dep’t Stores, Inc ., 139 F.3d 679 (9th Cir. 1998) (employer not liable for denying employee’s request to be absent from work on particular dates to attend a religious pilgrimage where the evidence showed that her religious needs could be met by going on the pilgrimage at another time and that the particular dates she requested were simply a personal preference), with Heller v. Essay On Demand! EBB Auto Co. Cesario! , 8 F.3d 1433 (9th Cir. 1993) (employer liable for failing to accommodate Jewish employee’s attendance of spouse’s conversion ceremony); see also Wessling v. Essay! Kroger Co. , 554 F. Supp. 548 (E.D.

Mich. 1982) (employer not liable for denial of accommodation where employee requested leave to chaplain resume help children get into their costumes and practice before performance of church play; employee’s own testimony revealed her participation in this instance was more in the nature of a parental and social obligation); Redmond , 574 F.2d at 901 (employer liable for failing to accommodate employee’s participation in Saturday Bible classes; the court found his attendance to essay on demand be pursuant to a sincerely held religious belief given that he was appointed to be lifetime leader of his church Bible study class many years earlier, time of meeting was scheduled by church elders, and employee felt that his participation was at dictate of file, his elders and constituted a “religious obligation”); Weitkenaut v. Goodyear Tire Rubber Co. Essay On Demand! , 381 F. Supp. 1284, 1288?89 (D. Vt. 1974) (employer liable for failing to protect minister’s attendance at monthly church organizational meetings where it was considered necessary to preparing for file, his pastoral duties and thus essential to his ability to lead his congregation). [30] Cf. LaFevers v. Essay On Demand! Saffle , 936 F.2d 1117 (10th Cir. 1991) (although not all Seventh-day Adventists are vegetarian, an frank individual adherent’s genuine religious belief in essay on demand, such a dietary practice warrants constitutional protection under the First Amendment). [31] See, e.g., Wessling v. Kroger Co. File! , 554 F. Supp. 548 (E.D.

Mich. 1982) (court held that plaintiff, who had volunteered to arrive at Church early to set up, decorate, and receive children prior to their performance of a play during Christmas Mass, was engaging in a social and family obligation rather than a religious belief, practice, or observance). [32] See Dettmer v. Landon, 799 F.2d 929, 932 (4th Cir. 1986) (in First Amendment case, rejecting argument that witchcraft was a “conglomeration” of “various aspects of the occult” rather than a religion; religious beliefs need not be “acceptable, logical, consistent or comprehensible to others” to essay be protected); Washington Ethical Soc’y v. District of Columbia , 249 F.2d 127, 128 (D.C. Cir. 1957) (Ethical Society qualifies as a “religious corporation or society” and advantage essay its building is entitled to tax exemption; belief in a Supreme Being or supernatural power is not essential to qualify for tax exemption accorded to on demand “religious corporations,” “churches” or “religious societies”); Fellowship of Humanity v. Monomyth Essays! County of essay, Alameda , 315 P.2d 394 (Cal. App. Resume Copy! 1957) (same holding with respect to Secular Humanists). [33] EEOC v. Red Robin Gourmet Burgers, Inc. Essay! , 2005 WL 2090677 (W.D. Wash.

Aug. 29, 2005) (denying employer’s motion for summary judgment on monomyth essays, accommodation claim arising from employee’s refusal to cover his Kemetic religious tattoos in order to comply with employer’s dress code). [34] These facts are similar to those in essay on demand, Cloutier v. Costco Wholesale Corp. , 390 F.3d 126 (1st Cir. 2004). However, the court in on the lottery, Cloutier did not resolve the on demand issue of whether or not the plaintiff’s facial piercing, which she alleged was displayed pursuant to her adherence to the beliefs of the Church of cesario resume, Body Modification, was part of a “religious” belief, practice, or observance, instead finding that the proposed accommodation of allowing display of the piercing would have posed an undue hardship. [35] Seeger , 380 U.S. at 185 (“[w]hile the essay on demand ‘truth’ of a belief is not open to question, there remains the significant question of whether it is ‘truly held’”). [36] EEOC v. Book Report! Union Independiente De La Autoridad De Acueductos, 279 F.3d 49, 56 (1st Cir. 2002) (evidence that Seventh-day Adventist employee had acted in on demand, ways inconsistent with the tenets of his religion, for example that he worked five days a week rather than the file required six, had lied on an employment application, and took an oath before a notary upon becoming a public employee, can be relevant to essay on demand the evaluation of point of view essay, sincerity but is not dispositive); Hansard v. Johns-Manville Prods. Corp ., 1973 WL 129 (E.D.

Tex. Feb. On Demand! 16, 1973) (employee’s contention that he objected to Sunday work for religious reasons was undermined by his very recent history of Sunday work); see also Hussein v. Waldorf-Astoria , 134 F. Supp. 2d 591 (S.D.N.Y. 2001) (employer had a good faith basis to doubt sincerity of employee’s professed religious need to wear a beard because he had not worn a beard at chaplain resume, any time in his fourteen years of employment, had never mentioned his religious beliefs to anyone at the hotel, and simply showed up for work one night and essay on demand asked for an on-the-spot exception to the no?beard policy), aff’d , 2002 WL 390437 (2d Cir. Resume! Mar. 13, 2002) (unpublished). [37] EEOC v. Ilona of Hungary, Inc ., 108 F.3d 1569 (7th Cir. 1997) (en banc) (Jewish employee proved her request for leave to observe Yom Kippur was based on a sincerely held religious belief even though she had never in her prior eight-year tenure sought leave from work for a religious observance, and conceded that she generally was not a very religious person; the evidence showed that certain events in her life, including the birth of essay on demand, her son and the death of her father, had strengthened her religious beliefs over the years); Cooper v. Oak Rubber Co ., 15 F.3d 1375 (6th Cir.

1994) (that employee had worked the chaplain resume Friday night shift at plant for approximately seven months after her baptism did not establish that she did not hold sincere religious belief against working on essay, Saturdays, considering that 17 months intervened before employee was next required to work on Saturday, and employee’s undisputed testimony was that her faith and commitment to her religion grew during this time); EEOC v. Chaplain Resume! IBP, Inc., 824 F. Supp. 147 (C.D. Ill. 1993) (Seventh-day Adventist employee’s previous absence of faith and essay on demand subsequent loss of faith did not prove that his religious beliefs were insincere at the time that he refused to work on the Sabbath); s ee also Union Independiente, 279 F.3d at 57 n.8 (the fact that the resume alleged conflict between plaintiff’s beliefs and union membership kept changing might call into question the sincerity of the beliefs or “might simply reflect an evolution in plaintiff’s religious views toward a more steadfast opposition to union membership”). [38] Commission Guidelines , 29 C.F.R. § 1605.1; Anderson v. U.S.F. Logistics (IMC), Inc. , 274 F.3d 470, 475 (7th Cir.

2001) (employee’s belief that she needed to use the phrase “Have a Blessed Day” was a religious practice covered by Title VII even though using the essay on demand phrase was not a requirement of file, her religion); Rivera v. Essay! Choice Courier , 2004 WL 1444852 (S.D.N.Y. Chaplain Resume! June 25, 2004) (the statutory language providing that Title VII encompasses “all aspects of on demand, religious observance and practice, as well as belief,” means that Title VII “protects more than . . . practices specifically mandated by an employee’s religion”). [39] For the text of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a), which applies to employers, see supra n.4. Under 42 U.S.C. Frank Resume! § 2000e-2(b), it is unlawful for employment agencies to “fail or refuse to refer for employment, or otherwise to discriminate against, any individual because of his . . On Demand! . religion . . . Advantage! or to essay on demand classify or refer for employment any individual on resume, the basis of essay on demand, his . . . religion . . . Chaplain Resume! .” Under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(c), it is unlawful for unions to “(1) to exclude or expel from membership, or otherwise to discriminate against, any individual because of his . . . religion . Essay! . . ; (2) to monomyth essays limit, segregate or classify its membership or applicants . Essay! . . or to refuse to refer for employment any individual . . . because of such individual’s . Resume! . Essay On Demand! . religion . . . ; or (3) to resume copy file cause or attempt to essay cause an employer to discriminate . . . in violation of chaplain resume, this section.” [40] See, e.g., Union Independiente, 279 F.3d 49; Bushouse , 164 F. Supp. 2d 1066. See infra §§ II, III, and IV; see also § IV-C-5. [41] Goodman v. Lukens Steel Co . 482 U.S.

656, 668-69 (1987) (unions violated “§ 703(c)(1) [of Title VII, which] makes it an unlawful practice for a Union to ‘exclude or to expel from its membership, or otherwise to discriminate against, any individual’” when they “ignored [racial] discrimination claims . . On Demand! . , knowing that the employer was discriminating in violation of the contract”). See, e.g., Perugini v. Safeway Stores, 935 F. Cesario! 2d 1083 (9th Cir. 1991) (remand to determine whether union discriminatorily failed to challenge employer’s refusal to give pregnant worker light duty); Rainey v. Town of Warren , 80 F. Supp. Essay On Demand! 2d 5, 17 (D.R.I. 2000) (“[i]t is axiomatic that a union’s failure to adequately represent union members in essay, the face of employer discrimination may subject the essay union to liability under either Title VII or its duty of fair representation”). To the extent it has been held that a union cannot be held liable where it knowingly acquiesces in discrimination, the EEOC disagrees.

See EEOC v. Resume! Pipefitters Ass’n Local Union 597 , 334 F.3d 656 (7th Cir. 2003). [42] Section 702(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-1(a), provides: This subchapter shall not apply to essay . . . a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the chaplain resume carrying on by such corporation, association, educational institution, or society of its activities. Section 703(e)(2) of essay on demand, Title VII, 42 U.S.C. Resume Copy! § 2000e-2(e)(2) provides: it shall not be an unlawful employment practice for essay, a school, college, university, or educational institution or institution of monomyth essays, learning to hire and essay on demand employ employees of a particular religion if such school, college, university, or other educational institution or institution of learning is, in whole or in point lottery, substantial part, owned, supported, controlled, or managed by a particular religion or by a particular religious corporation, association, or society, or if the on demand curriculum of such school, college, university, or other educational institution or institution of childs report, learning is essay on demand, directed toward the propagation of a particular religion.

While Congress did not include a definition of the § 702(a) term “religious corporation” in Title VII, at least one judge has argued that the chaplain resume legislative history indicates that Congress intended “the § 703(e)(2) exemption to essay on demand require a lesser degree of chaplain resume, association between an essay entity and advantage in cambodia a religious sect than what would be required under § 702(a).” See LeBoon v. Lancaster Jewish Cmty. Essay On Demand! Ctr. , 503 F.3d 217, 237 (3d Cir. 2007) (Rendell, J., dissenting). Executive Order 13279, Equal Protection of the Laws for Faith-Based and Community Organizations , issued on childs book, December 12, 2002, provides that certain faith-based organizations that provide social programs can deliver those services and make hiring decisions on the basis of their religious beliefs even if they receive federal funding. On Demand! See 67 Fed. Reg.

77,141 (12/16/02). The Guidance to Faith-Based and Community Organizations on Partnering with the Federal Government , (last visited July 2, 2008), issued by the White House Office of point on the lottery, Faith Based and Community Initiatives, explains that while religious organizations that receive federal funds to provide social services may choose to essay hire persons of the same religion, they are also subject to federal, state, and local employment and book anti-discrimination laws, such as Title VII. [43] Townley , 859 F.2d at 618; accord Hall v. Baptist Mem. Health Care Corp. , 215 F.3d 618, 624-25 (6th Cir. 2000) (college of essay on demand, health sciences qualified as a religious institution under Title VII because it was an affiliated institution of a church-affiliated hospital, had direct relationship with the Baptist church, and frank the college atmosphere was permeated with religious overtones). [44] Townley, 859 F.2d at 618; see also Killinger v. Samford Univ. Essay! , 113 F.3d 196 (11th Cir. Frank! 1997) (Baptist university was “religious educational institution” where largest single source of funding was state Baptist Convention, all university trustees were Baptists, university reported financially to essay on demand Convention and to Baptist State Board of Missions, university was member of Association of Baptist Colleges and essay on the Schools, university charter designated its chief purpose as “the promotion of the Christian Religion throughout the world by essay on demand, maintaining and monomyth essays operating institutions dedicated to the development of Christian character in essay on demand, high scholastic standing,” and both Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and Department of Education recognized university as religious educational institution).

[45] Townley , 859 F.2d at 619 (manufacturer of mining equipment, whose owners asserted that they made a covenant with God that their business “would be a Christian, faith?operated business,” is not a religious organization because it is for profit; it produces mining equipment, a secular product; it is not affiliated with or supported by a church; and chaplain resume its articles of incorporation do not mention any religious purpose) . Cf. EEOC v. Kamehameha Sch./Bishop Estate , 990 F.2d 458, 461 (9th Cir. Essay! 1993) (non-profit school not “religious” for chaplain resume, Title VII purposes where ownership and essay affiliation, purpose, faculty, student body, student activities, and curriculum of the schools are either essentially secular, or neutral as far as religion is concerned). [46] See Corp. of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. Amos , 483 U.S. 327 (1987) (a nonprofit church-run business does not violate Title VII if it refuses to hire anyone other than members of its own religion, even for enterprises or jobs that are not religious in nature). [47] Killinger , 113 F.3d at 200 (School of point essay on the lottery, Divinity need not employ professor who did not adhere to on demand the theology advanced by its leadership); Tirpanlis v. Unification Theological Seminary , 2001 WL 64739 (S.D.N.Y.

Jan. 24, 2001) (seminary operated by Unification Church cannot be sued for point of view, religious discrimination by Greek Orthodox employee who was allegedly terminated for essay, refusing to accept the teachings of the file Unification Church). [48] Ziv v. Valley Beth Shalom , 156 F.3d 1242 (Table), 1998 WL 482832 (9th Cir. Aug. 11, 1998) (unpublished) (religious organization can be held liable for essay on demand, retaliation and advantage of tourism in cambodia essay national origin discrimination); DeMarco v. Holy Cross High Sch. , 4 F.3d 166 (2d Cir. On Demand! 1993) (religious institutions may not engage in age discrimination). [49] EEOC v. Chaplain Resume! Fremont Christian Sch. , 781 F.2d 1362 (9th Cir. 1986) (religious school violated Title VII and the Equal Pay Act when it provided “head of household” health insurance benefits only to on demand single persons and married men). [50] McClure v. Childs Report! Salvation Army , 460 F.2d 553, 558-60 (5th Cir. 1972); s ee also Hollins v. Methodist Healthcare, Inc. , 474 F.3d 223 (6th Cir.

2007) (applying ministerial exception to bar claim by resident in hospital’s pastoral care program who alleged disability discrimination); Tomic v. Catholic Diocese of Peoria , 442 F.3d 1036 (7th Cir. Essay! 2006) (applying ministerial exception to point of view bar age discrimination claim brought by Catholic Diocese music director who was terminated following a dispute with the bishop’s assistant regarding what to play during the Easter Mass); Hankins v. Lyght , 441 F.3d 96 (2d Cir. 2006) (applying ministerial exception to bar age discrimination claim); Combs v. Central Texas Annual Conf. of United Methodist Church, 173 F.3d 343 (5th Cir. 1999) (barring claim because court could not determine whether an on demand employment decision concerning a minister was based on legitimate or illegitimate grounds without entering the constitutionally impermissible realm of internal church management); EEOC v. Catholic Univ. of America , 83 F.3d 455 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (ministerial exception barred Title VII sex discrimination claim brought by tenured member of Catholic University’s department of religious canon law); DeMarco v. Holy Cross High School , 4 F.3d 166 (2d Cir. 1993) (ministerial exception inapplicable to parochial school teacher’s age discrimination claim because employer’s contention that teacher was terminated specifically for failing to attend Mass and to lead his students in prayers could be evaluated without risk of excessive entanglement between government and resume file religious institution); Guianan v. Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Indianapolis, 42 F. Essay On Demand! Supp. Monomyth Essays! 2d 849 (S.D.

Ind. 1998) (ministerial exception inapplicable to parochial school teacher’s age discrimination claim, even though teacher taught at least one class in religion per on demand term, and organized one worship service per month, since vast majority of teacher’s duties involved teaching math, science, and other secular courses). [51] Rayburn v. Gen. Conference of Seventh?Day Adventists , 772 F.2d 1164, 1169 (4th Cir. 1985). [52] Rweyemamu v. Advantage Essay! Cote , 520 F.3d 198 (2d Cir. On Demand! 2008) (Title VII race discrimination claim by African-American Catholic priest challenging denial of promotion and subsequent termination was barred by the ministerial exception); Petruska v. Gannon Univ. , 462 F.3d 294 (3d Cir. 2006) (ministerial exception bars Title VII sex discrimination claim by female Catholic chaplain against school, alleging that she was forced out as chaplain after she advocated on behalf of alleged victims of sexual harassment and spoke out against the school’s president regarding alleged sexual harassment and discrimination against female employees); Werft v. Desert Southwest Annual Conf. of the book report United Methodist Church , 377 F.3d 1099 (9th Cir. 2004) (ministerial exception barred minister’s claim against church for failure to accommodate his disabilities). Essay! However, some courts have ruled that the ministerial exception does not bar harassment claims by ministers, but rather only applies to claims involving matters such as hiring, promotion, and termination. See Elvig v. Calvin Presbyterian Church , 375 F.3d 951 (9th Cir.

2004) (ministerial exception does not bar sexual harassment claim by minister), reh’g denied , 397 F.3d 790 (9th Cir. 2005) (two concurring and three dissenting opinions); Bollard v. California Province of the Soc’y of Jesus , 196 F.3d 940 (9th Cir. 1999) (novice’s sexual harassment claim could be maintained without excessive entanglement between church and monomyth essays state because religious order did not offer a religious justification for the alleged harassment, and plaintiff did not seek reinstatement or other equitable relief); Dolquist v. Heartland Presbytery, 342 F. Supp. 2d 996 (D. Kan. 2004) (First Amendment Establishment and on demand Free Exercise Clauses did not preclude minister from pursuing Title VII sexual harassment claim against her church, because claims did not involve choice of monomyth essays, clergy); see also Bryce v. Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Colorado, 289 F.3d 648, 657-59 (10th Cir. 2002) (although “employment decisions may be subject to essay on demand Title VII scrutiny, where the decision does not involve the cesario resume church’s spiritual functions,” minister’s Title VII harassment claim was subject to dismissal because it was based on communications protected by the First Amendment under the “church autonomy” doctrine; the doctrine is broader than the ministerial exception and bars civil court review of internal church disputes involving matters of doctrine and church governance). [53] Geary v. Visitation of Blessed Virgin Mary Parish Sch. , 7 F.3d 324 (3d Cir.

1993) (lay teacher at church?operated elementary school not a minister); Dole v. Shenandoah Baptist Church , 899 F.2d 1389 (4th Cir. On Demand! 1990) (lay teachers of private religious schools who “perform no sacerdotal functions [nor] serve as church governors [and] belong to no clearly delineated religious order” are not ministers despite their sincere belief that theirs is monomyth essays, a ministry); but see EEOC v. Catholic Univ. of America , 83 F.3d 455 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (ministerial exception barred Title VII sex discrimination claim brought by tenured member of on demand, Catholic university’s department of religious canon law). [54] Alicea?Hernandez v. Catholic Bishop of Chicago, 320 F.3d 698 (7th Cir.

2003) (ministerial exception applied to Communications Director who was responsible for crafting the chaplain resume Church’s message to the Hispanic community); EEOC v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Raleigh, 213 F.3d 795 (4th Cir. 2000) (ministerial exception applies to essay on demand cathedral’s director of music ministry and part-time music teacher); Rayburn , 772 F.2d at 1168 (ministerial exception applies to associate pastor who had completed seminary training but was not ordained); Starkman v. Evans , 198 F.3d 173 (5th Cir. 1999) (ministerial exception barred Americans with Disabilities Act claim by church choir director). [55] EEOC v. Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary , 651 F.2d 277, 283 (5th Cir. 1981) (“[w]hile religious organizations may designate persons as ministers for their religious purposes free from any governmental interference, bestowal of such a designation does not control their extra?religious legal status”). [56] Abramson v. William Paterson Coll. of N.J. , 260 F.3d 265, 281 (3d Cir. File! 2001) (prima facie case and evidentiary burdens of an employee alleging religious discrimination mirror those of an employee alleging race or sex discrimination).

A disparate impact analysis could also apply in the religion context, particularly in the area of essay on demand, recruitment and childs report hiring. Essay! See, e.g., Barrow v. Greenville Indep. In Cambodia Essay! Sch. Dist. , 480 F.3d 377 (5th Cir. 2007) (affirming summary judgment, citing lack of statistical evidence, for employer on Title VII claim brought by teacher who asserted policy favoring teachers whose children attended the public schools had a disparate impact on those whose children attended private school for religious rather than secular reasons). However, because the reasonable accommodation/undue hardship analysis usually applies when a neutral work rule adversely affects religious practices, s ee infra § IV, disparate impact analysis is seldom if ever used in religion cases. [57] 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(e)(1); see also §§ I-C and on demand II-D of of tourism in cambodia, this document. [58] See, e.g., EEOC v. Preferred Mgmt .Corp., 216 F. Supp. 2d 763, 813 (S.D. Ind. 2002) (telling applicant that “[y]ou damned humanists are ruining the world” and will “burn in hell forever” raises reasonable inference that the failure to hire her was unlawfully based on religion).

[60] In Noyes v. Kelly Servs. Inc ., 488 F.3d 1163 (9th Cir. 2007), the on demand plaintiff alleged “reverse religious discrimination” when she was not promoted because she did not follow the religious beliefs of advantage in cambodia essay, her supervisor and management, who were members of a small religious group and favored and promoted other members of the religious group. The court ruled that while the employee did not adhere to a particular religion, the fact that she did not share the employer’s religious beliefs was the basis for essay, the alleged discrimination against her, and the evidence was sufficient to create an frank resume issue for trial on whether the employer’s decision to essay on demand promote another employee was a pretext for religious discrimination. [61] Tincher v. Monomyth Essays! Wal-Mart Stores , 118 F.3d 1125, 1131 (7th Cir. On Demand! 1997) (reasonable jury could conclude that employer’s articulated reason for the discharge of a Seventh-day Adventist was pretextual and that the real reason was religious discrimination because of the inconvenience caused by employee’s inability to frank work on Saturdays); s ee also Campos v. City of Blue Springs, 289 F.3d 546 (8th Cir. 2002) (evidence supported religiously motivated constructive discharge based on plaintiff’s Native American spiritual beliefs); EEOC v. Essay! University of monomyth essays, Chicago Hospitals , 276 F.3d 326 (7th Cir. Essay On Demand! 2002) (evidence sufficient to proceed to trial in advantage of tourism in cambodia, case brought on behalf of essay, recruiter alleging constructive discharge based on her evangelical religious beliefs); Dachman v. Shalala , 2001 WL 533760 (4th Cir.

May 18, 2001) (unpublished) (Orthodox Jewish employee who was treated in the same manner as non-Jewish employees with similar performance and disciplinary records failed to show that she was terminated because of her religion); Altman v. Minn. Monomyth Essays! Dep’t of Corr. Essay! , 251 F.3d 1199, 1203 (8th Cir. 2001) (in case raising both Title VII and First Amendment claims, holding that employer may not discipline employees for religiously based conduct because it is religious in nature if it permits such conduct by other employees when not motivated by religious beliefs). However, not all employer decisions affect a term, condition, or privilege of employment as required to be actionable as disparate treatment. See, e.g. , Goldmeier v. Allstate Ins. Co. , 337 F.3d 629 (6th Cir.

2003) (resignation 53 days prior to effective date of employer’s policy that would have posed conflict with employees’ religious beliefs did not constitute constructive discharge); Shabat v. Blue Cross Blue Shield , 925 F. Supp. 977 (W.D.N.Y. 1996) (plaintiff’s contention that he received a promotion only by pressuring management did not allege an “adverse” employment action). [62] See infra § IV, Reasonable Accommodation. [63] 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1) (discriminating in cesario, hiring, discharge, or otherwise with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment); see also 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(2) (discriminating by limiting, segregating, or classifying employees or applicants in a way which would deprive or tend to deprive employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect employment status); cf. Ansonia Bd. of Educ. v. Philbrook , 479 U.S. 60, 71 (1986) (a benefit “that is part and parcel of the employment relationship may not be doled out in a discriminatory fashion, even if the employer would be free . . . Essay! not to chaplain resume provide the essay on demand benefit at all”) (quoting Hishon v. King Spalding , 467 U.S. Cesario! 69, 75 (1984)). However, at least one court has held that a private employer providing company resources to essay on demand recognized employee “affinity groups” does not violate Title VII by denying this privilege to any group promoting or advocating any religious or political position, where the company excluded not only groups advocating a particular religious position but also those espousing religious indifference or opposition.

See Moranski v. General Motors Corp. , 433 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. Childs Book Report! 2005). [64] Delelegne v. Kinney Sys., Inc., 2004 WL 1281071 (D. Mass. June 10, 2004) (Ethiopian Christian parking garage cashier could proceed to essay on demand trial on claims of frank, religious harassment and discriminatory termination where he was not allowed to bring a Bible to work, pray, or display religious pictures in his booth, while Somali Muslim employees were permitted to take prayer breaks and to display religious materials in their booths). [65] This fact pattern may also give rise to essay on demand a denial of accommodation claim. See infra § IV-C-6.

[66] Determining whether religious expression disrupts co-workers or customers is discussed in §§ III-C and IV-C-6, infra . Resume File! Additionally, in a government workplace, the First Amendment Free Exercise Clause and Establishment Clause may affect the employer’s or employee’s ability to restrict or engage in religious expression. Essay! See supra nn.11-15 infra nn.201-203 ; see also Federal Workplace Guidelines , supra n.11, at sections 2-B and 2-E, noting implications of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) for neutral rules that burden religion in of tourism in cambodia essay, the federal workplace. [67] 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(g) (permitting covered entities to on demand discharge or refuse to “hire and employ” or refer an individual who does not meet federal security requirements). However, the Commission is aware of no statute or order that requires or permits distinctions based on religion. See infra § IV-B-5 (discussion of security requirements and Title VII’s accommodation obligation). [69] Compare Abrams v. Baylor Coll. of Med. , 805 F.2d 528 (5th Cir. 1986) (being non-Jewish was not a BFOQ for a university which had a contract to chaplain resume supply physicians on rotation at a Saudi Arabian hospital when the hospital presented no evidence to support its contention that Saudi Arabia would actually have refused an on demand entry visa to a Jewish faculty member), and Rasul v. District of Columbia , 680 F. Supp.

436 (D.D.C. Monomyth Essays! 1988) (Department of Corrections failed to on demand demonstrate that Protestant religious affiliation was a BFOQ for position as prison chaplain because chaplains were recruited and hired on monomyth essays, a facility-wide basis and were entrusted with the on demand job of planning, directing, and maintaining a total religious program for all inmates, whatever their respective denominations), with Kern v. Childs Report! Dynalectron Corp ., 577 F. Supp. 1196 (N.D. Tex. 1983) (requirement that pilot convert to Islam was a BFOQ which warranted employer’s refusal to essay on demand hire him, inasmuch as requirement was not based on chaplain resume, a preference of contractor performing work in Saudi Arabia, but on the fact that non?Muslim employees caught flying into Mecca would, under Saudi Arabian law, be beheaded), aff’d , 746 F.2d 810 (5th Cir. 1984), and Pime v. Loyola Univ. of Chicago , 803 F.2d 351 (7th Cir. 1986) (although university was not a religious organization under Title VII, the essay court held that having some Jesuit presence in philosophy department was a BFOQ since university was founded by Jesuits, continues to have Jesuit tradition, and requires all of its undergraduates to take philosophy).

[70] Faragher v. Boca Raton , 524 U.S. Chaplain Resume! 775, 788 (1998) (harassment claims are actionable on any of Title VII’s protected bases); Meritor Sav. On Demand! Bank, FSB v. Vinson , 477 U.S. Chaplain Resume! 57, 66 (1986) (the same Title VII harassment principle applies whether the harassment is based on race, national origin, religion, or sex); see also Abramson, 260 F.3d at 276; Hafford v. Seidner , 183 F.3d 506, 512 (6th Cir. 1999); Tillery v. ATSI, Inc. , 242 F. Essay On Demand! Supp. 2d 1051, 1063 (N.D. Ala. 2003), aff’d , 97 Fed.

Appx. 906 (11th Cir. 2004) (Table). [71] See Venters v. City of Delphi , 123 F.3d 956 (7th Cir. 1997) (employee who was terminated after she disagreed with supervisor’s religious beliefs raised a triable Title VII harassment claim based on two separate theories of harassment liability: that a “tangible employment benefit” was conditioned upon acquiescing to her supervisor’s religious beliefs, and also that a hostile work environment was created). [72] Meritor Sav. Bank, 477 U.S. at 66 (1986) (prohibition on discrimination “in the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment” requires employers to maintain a workplace free from childs report harassment based upon protected status).

[73] See, e.g., Venters , 123 F.3d at essay on demand, 964 (employee established that she was discharged on frank cesario resume, the basis of her religion after supervisor, among other things, repeatedly called her “evil” and stated that she had to share his Christian beliefs in order to be a good employee). [74] Many of the example’s facts are taken from on demand Sattar v. Childs Report! Motorola, Inc ., 138 F.3d 1164 (7th Cir. 1998). On Demand! However, in cesario, Sattar the plaintiff did not prevail because the plaintiff failed to prove that his discharge was linked to essay the harassment by his former supervisor. [75] Pederson v. Childs Book! Casey’s Gen. Stores, Inc. On Demand! , 978 F. Childs! Supp.

926 (D. Neb. Essay! 1997) (employer’s refusal to accommodate employee’s need to have Easter day off, while knowing that she could not compromise her religious needs and childs where it would not have posed an essay on demand undue hardship, amounted to constructive discharge in violation of chaplain resume, Title VII). [76] Venters , 123 F.3d at 972 (“the accommodation framework . . . has no application when the employee alleges that he was fired because he did not share or follow his employer’s religious beliefs”). [77] Faragher , 524 U.S. at 788 (environmental harassment claims are actionable on any of Title VII’s protected bases); Meritor Sav. Bank, 477 U.S. at 67 (same); see also EEOC Enforcement Guidance: Vicarious Employer Liability for essay on demand, Unlawful Harassment by cesario resume, Supervisors (1999), available at [78] Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc. , 510 U.S. 17, 21 (1993). [79] Meritor Sav. Bank, 477 U.S. at 67. [80] Marcus v. West , 2002 WL 1263999, *11 (N.D.

Ill. June 3, 2002) (mistreatment of Sanctified Pentecostal Christian employee was not because of essay, religion; supervisor mistreated all of her employees and had poor management and interpersonal skills). [81] Turner v. Barr , 811 F. Supp. 1, 2 (D.D.C. 1993) (hostile environment created where Jewish employee was subjected to a “joke” about the Holocaust, denied opportunity to work overtime, and ridiculed as a “turnkey”; although the latter two incidents did not refer to chaplain resume religion, the on demand facts showed that he was singled out for such treatment because of his religion). [82] See EEOC v. Sunbelt Rentals, Inc. Cesario! , 521 F.3d 306 (4th Cir. 2008) (reversing summary judgment for the employer and remanding the case for trial, the court ruled that a reasonable fact finder could conclude that a Muslim employee who wore a kufi as part of his religious observance was subjected to hostile work environment religious harassment when fellow employees repeatedly called him “Taliban” and “towel head,” made fun of his appearance, questioned his allegiance to essay the United States, suggested he was a terrorist, and chaplain resume made comments associating all Muslims with senseless violence); EEOC v. WCM Enter., Inc. , 496 F.3d 393 (5th Cir. 2007) (reversing summary judgment for the employer and on demand remanding the case for trial, the court ruled that a reasonable fact finder could conclude that harassment initiated after September 11, 2001, against childs book report a car salesman who was born in India and is a practicing Muslim was severe or pervasive and motivated by his national origin and religion). In Sunbelt , the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals held: “we cannot regard as ‘merely offensive,’ and thus ‘beyond Title VII's purview,’ Harris , 510 U.S. at 21, constant and repetitive abuse founded upon misperceptions that all Muslims possess hostile designs against the United States, that all Muslims support jihad, that all Muslims were sympathetic to essay the 9/11 attack, and that all Muslims are proponents of radical Islam.” 521 F.3d at 318. [83] See Abramson, 260 F.3d at 279 (supervisor’s criticism of professor’s refusal to work on her Sabbath, scheduling meetings on Jewish holidays, and charging her for leave on those holidays could be found to have “infected [professor’s] work experience” because of her religion). [84] Henson v. City of Dundee , 682 F.2d 897, 903 (11th Cir.

1982). [86] See WCM Enter. , 496 F.3d at 400-01 (plaintiff’s religious and national origin harassment claim was based on having been referred to chaplain resume as a “Muslim extremist,” and on demand constantly called “Taliban” among other terms); Khan v. United Recovery Sys., Inc., 2005 WL 469603 (S.D. Tex. 2005) (plaintiff’s religious harassment claim was based on alleged comments by co-worker that court characterized as “malicious and vitriolic,” including that all Muslims are terrorists who should be killed, that he wished “all these Muslims were wiped off the face of the earth,” that plaintiff might get shot for resume, wearing an “Allah” pendant, and on demand questioning plaintiff about what was being taught at her mosque and cesario resume whether it was “connected with terrorists”; in addition, plaintiff alleged that her supervisor placed newspaper articles on her desk about mosques in Afghanistan that taught terrorism, along with a note telling her to essay come into his office and justify such activity). [87] Human resources professionals who responded to a survey by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) and the Tanenbaum Center for Interreligious Understanding reported that 19% of the employees in their organizations engaged in proselytizing to co-workers. While 32% of the employees perceived increased cooperation and point of view essay on the lottery communication within their organizations due to acceptance of religious diversity, 9% of the employees felt harassed by co-workers who expressed their religious beliefs.

Religion in the Workplace Survey, at 24 (Society for Human Resource Management, 2001) (executive summary and information on obtaining report available at (last visited July 2, 2008)). [88] Venters , 123 F.3d at 976 (because the employee made clear her objection to the comments by telling her supervisor he had “crossed the line,” she established that the comments were unwelcome). [89] Id. (“whatever questions there might have been as to whether Venters welcomed these discussions were answered as of th[e] date [that she told him he had crossed the essay line]”). [90] Harris , 510 U.S. at 21-22; Faragher , 524 U.S. at advantage of tourism essay, 788 (“We have made it clear that conduct must be extreme to amount to a change in the terms and conditions of essay on demand, employment.”). [91] Faragher , 524 U.S. at 787-88; Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Servs. , 523 U.S. 75, 82-83 (1998) (“[t]he real social impact of workplace behavior often depends on a constellation of surrounding circumstances, expectations, and relationships which are not fully captured by a simple recitation of the words used or the physical acts performed”); Harris , 510 U.S. at 23.

[92] Bains LLC v. Arco Prods. Co ., 405 F.3d 74 (9th Cir. 2005) (upholding finding of liability for harassment in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 where Sikh employees were regularly called “rag-heads” and “towel-heads,” and were asked to clean up fuel spills with their turbans). [93] Williams v. Point Of View Essay On The! Gen. Essay! Motors Corp ., 187 F.3d 553, 564 (6th Cir. 1999) (“a work environment viewed as a whole may satisfy the frank cesario legal definition of an abusive work environment, for purposes of essay, a hostile environment claim, even though no single episode crosses the Title VII threshold”). [94] Jones v. United Space Alliance , 2006 WL 250761 (11th Cir. Feb. 3, 2006) (unpublished) (plaintiff, a member of the Apostolic/Pentecostal faith, alleged that he was subjected to resume a hostile work environment based on religion when his manager made derogatory remarks to on demand him based on his religion, a co-worker removed from the community bulletin board a flyer describing events at the plaintiff’s church, the childs report plaintiff’s manager told him to remove the lanyard for his identification badge because it had “Jesus” on it, his manager told him not to leave his Bible on his desk, he was asked to turn down the essay on demand religious music that he played at work, and chaplain resume he was accused of having a conflict of essay, interest with the space program because he was a pastor; in finding there was insufficient evidence of a hostile work environment, court ruled that the alleged incidents were not objectively severe or pervasive because none occurred on a repeated basis, none were physically threatening or humiliating, and none interfered with the plaintiff’s job performance).

[95] EEOC v. AKZ Mgmt., Inc. , Civil Action No. 07-8356 (S.D.N.Y. consent decree filed Sept. 26, 2007) (settlement of religious harassment and resume copy file disparate treatment claims on on demand, behalf of employees who were pressured by management to essay on the lottery practice or conform to Scientology). See Johnson v. Spencer Press of essay on demand, Maine, Inc ., 364 F.3d 368 (1st Cir. 2004) (jury properly found harassment was severe and pervasive where supervisor repeatedly insulted plaintiff and frank resume mocked his religious beliefs, and essay threatened him with violence); Sattar , 138 F.3d at 1167 (employee harassed with a barrage of chaplain resume, e-mails with dire warnings of the divine punishments that awaited those who refuse to essay follow Islam) ; Preferred Mgmt. Corp ., 216 F. Supp. 2d 763 (Christian employer violated Title VII by requiring employees to conform to her views). [96] Harris , 510 U.S. at 21; Meritor , 477 U.S. at 64.

[97] Harris , 510 U.S. at 22 (“even without regard to these tangible effects, the chaplain resume very fact that the essay discriminatory conduct was so severe or pervasive that it created a work environment abusive to copy file employees because of their race, gender, religion, or national origin offends Title VII’s broad rule of workplace equality . Essay On Demand! . . . Certainly Title VII bars conduct that would seriously affect a reasonable person’s psychological well?being, but the statute is not limited to such conduct”); s ee Dey v. Colt Const. Dev. Co ., 28 F.3d 1446, 1454-55 (7th Cir. 1994) (“The mention in frank cesario, Harris of an unreasonable interference with work performance was not intended to penalize the employee who possesses the dedication and essay on demand fortitude to complete her assigned tasks even in the face of report, offensive and abusive [conduct] . . . . As Justice Scalia separately explained in Harris , the test under Title VII ‘is not whether work has been impaired, but whether working conditions have been discriminatorily altered.’”) (citation omitted). [98] See Harris , 510 U.S. at 23 (“whether an environment is ‘hostile’ or ‘abusive’ can be determined only by looking at all the circumstances . . . ; no single factor is required”). [99] Faragher , 524 U.S. at 788 (citing Oncale , 523 U.S. at 80); Sheikh v. Indep.

Sch. Dist. 535 , 2001 WL 1636504 (D. Minn. Oct. Essay! 18, 2001) (a Muslim employee who was ostracized by colleagues because he refused to advantage of tourism essay shake hands with female colleagues did not suffer a materially adverse change in the terms and conditions of employment). [100] See Marcus , 2002 WL 1263999 at *11 (asking very religious employee to on demand swear on a Bible to chaplain resume resolve differences with a colleague and telling her that people did not like her “church lady act” are isolated incidents that were not severe or pervasive enough to create a hostile work environment); Sublett v. Edgewood Universal Cabling Sys., Inc. , 194 F. Supp. 2d 692, 703 (S.D. On Demand! Ohio 2002) (supervisor’s single comment to of view on the Rastafarian employee that “those dread things” made him look too “radical” was not sufficiently severe to essay create a hostile environment). [101] Cf.

Tessler v. KHOW Radio, Inc. , 1997 WL 458489 at *8 (D. Colo. Apr. 21, 1997). [102] Cf. Brown v. Polk County , 61 F.3d at 656-57 (it did not pose an frank cesario undue hardship for employer to accommodate supervisor’s sporadic and essay voluntary prayers during workplace meetings). [103] Williams , 187 F.3d at 563 (in determining whether the essay on the alleged conduct rises to the level of essay on demand, severe or pervasive, a court should consider the factual “totality of the circumstances”; using a “holistic perspective is necessary, keeping in mind that each successive episode has its predecessors, that the impact of the separate incidents may accumulate, and that the work environment created thereby may exceed the monomyth essays sum of the individual episodes”). [104] Cf . Johnson v. Spencer Press of essay, Maine, Inc. , 364 F.3d 368 (1st Cir.

2004) (affirming jury verdict for plaintiff on point of view, religious harassment claim, court noted that plaintiff testified supervisor who made ongoing derogatory remarks about on demand plaintiff’s religion also once put the point of a knife under plaintiff’s chin, in advantage in cambodia essay, addition to threatening to kill him with a hand grenade, run him over with a car, and shoot him with a bow and essay arrow). [105] As with any harassment claim, employer liability will depend on whether the employee can show, in a case of co-worker harassment, that the employer knew or should have known of the misconduct and failed to take prompt and appropriate corrective action. Additionally, in of tourism, the case of harassment by non-employees, employer liability will depend on whether the employer had control over essay on demand, such individuals’ misconduct. Lottery! For standards regarding liability for harassment by supervisors, see EEOC Enforcement Guidance: Vicarious Employer Liability for Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors (1999), available at [106] See Peters v. Renaissance Hotel Operating Co. , 307 F.3d 535 (7th Cir. 2002) (the impact of essay on demand, actions not directed at of tourism essay, a complaining employee is not as great as the impact of harassment directed at essay, him and the combined impact of all the comments was not severe or pervasive enough to create an unlawful hostile environment). [107] Burlington Indus., Inc. Of View! v. Essay On Demand! Ellerth , 524 U.S. 742, 762 (1998); Faragher , 524 U.S. at 788; Preferred Mgmt. Corp. , 216 F. Frank! Supp. 2d at 839 n.25 (employer’s anti-harassment policy was inadequate because it did not include a prohibition on religious harassment, employer did not provide training on religious harassment, and managers responded to complaints of religious harassment by requiring employees to on demand participate in a training program based on religious principles). However, under agency principles an employer is in cambodia, automatically liable for hostile work environment harassment even if it does not result in a tangible employment action if “the agent’s high rank in the company makes him or her the employer’s alter ego.” Ellerth , 524 U.S. at 758.

If the essay harasser is of a sufficiently high rank to fall “within that class of an employer organization’s officials who may be treated as the organization’s proxy,” which would include officials such as a company president, owner, partner, or corporate officer, the harassment is chaplain resume, automatically imputed to the employer and on demand no affirmative defense can be raised. Faragher , 524 U.S. at 789 see also EEOC Enforcement Guidance: Vicarious Employer Liability for Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors (1999), [108] Sheikh , 2001 WL 1636504 at *5 (employer not liable because it took steps to stop alleged harassment of resume copy, Muslim employee by his co-workers); see Guidelines on Discrimination Because of essay, National Origin , 29 C.F.R. § 1606.8(d) (employer liable for co-worker harassment about of view lottery which it knew or should have known and failed to act). [109] Cf. Powell v. On Demand! Yellow Book USA, Inc. Childs Book Report! , 445 F.3d 1074 (8th Cir. Essay! 2006) (employer not liable for religious harassment of frank, plaintiff because upon learning of her complaints about a co-worker’s proselytizing, the employer promptly held a meeting and told the co-worker to stop discussing religion matters with plaintiff, and essay on demand there was evidence that the company continued to monitor the situation to ensure that the co-worker did not resume her proselytizing). [110] 29 C.F.R. § 1606.8(e). Berry v. Delta Airlines, Inc. , 260 F.3d 803 (7th Cir.

2001) (employer not liable for point of view essay, alleged sexual harassment of its female employee by on demand, a male contractor because it promptly investigated the monomyth essays allegations, requested a change in essay on demand, the contractor’s shift so that he would not have contact with the file employee, and asked that all contractors be required to view sexual harassment training video). [111] When asked whether they had discussed religion in essay, the workplace in frank cesario resume, the past twenty-four hours, 48% of Americans answered yes. See George Gallup, Jr. Timothy Jones, The Next American Spirituality: Finding God in the Twenty-First Century , at 72 (Cook Communication Ministries 2000). [112] Employers are permitted to on demand exercise their religion to the extent that such exercise does not infringe on their employees’ religious beliefs. Townley , 859 F.2d at 621 (“Where the religious practices of employers . . . and employees conflict, Title VII does not, and could not, require individual employers to abandon their religion. Rather, Title VII attempts to reach a mutual accommodation of the conflicting religious practices.”). [113] In a survey conducted by the Tanenbaum Center for Interreligious Understanding, 66% of employees surveyed reported that they had witnessed religious discrimination in the workplace. Religious Bias in the Workplace: The Employee’s View (Tanenbaum Center for Interreligious Understanding, 1999) (executive summary available at ) (last visited July 2, 2008).

[114] See Examples 15, 18-19, 27-28, 49-50. For a further discussion of the copy file circumstances under which reasonable accommodation of essay, religious expression in advantage of tourism in cambodia essay, the workplace, including proselytizing, may be denied because it poses an essay on demand undue hardship on the conduct of the employer’s business, see infra § IV-C-6. [115] Cf. Bodett v. CoxCom, Inc. , 366 F.3d 736 (9th Cir. 2004) (employer prevailed on frank, claim brought by terminated employee for disparate treatment based on religion; employee’s violation of employer’s anti-harassment policy was a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for termination, even if the violations were motivated by the employee’s religious beliefs). [116] 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(j); Commission Guidelines , 29 C.F.R. § 1605.2(b). [117] Compare Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Essay On Demand! Hardison, 432 U.S. Chaplain Resume! 63, 84 (1977) (interpreting Title VII “undue hardship” standard, with 42 U.S.C. § 12111(10)(A) (defining ADA “undue hardship” standard); see infra n.139. [118] Protos v. Essay On Demand! Volkswagen of copy, Am., Inc., 797 F.2d 129, 136 (3d Cir.

1986) (“[t]his is essay on demand, . . . part of our ‘happy tradition’ of avoiding unnecessary clashes with the point essay on the lottery dictates of conscience”) (citation omitted). [119] See Seshadri v. Kasraian , 130 F.3d 798, 800 (7th Cir. 1997) (employee who seeks accommodation need not belong to an established church but cannot preclude inquiry into whether he has a religion); Chrysler Corp. Essay On Demand! v. Mann , 561 F.2d 1282, 1285 (8th Cir. 1977) (observing that the plaintiff “did little to acquaint Chrysler with his religion and its potential impact upon his ability to perform his job”); s ee also Redmond , 574 F.2d at 902 (relying on Mann , concluding that “an employee who is disinterested in informing his employer of his religious needs ‘may forego the resume copy right to have his beliefs accommodated by his employer’”). [120] See Heller , 8 F.3d at essay, 1439 (employee’s request for leave to participate in religious conversion ceremony of his wife and children was sufficient to place employer on notice that this was pursuant to a religious practice or belief; an monomyth essays employer need have “only enough information about an essay employee's religious needs to permit the employer to understand the existence of a conflict between the childs report employee's religious practices and on demand the employer's job requirements”); Brown v. Resume! Polk County , 61 F.3d at 654 (even though employee did not explicitly ask for a religious accommodation, court held employer was on notice of the need for on demand, accommodation given that it reprimanded employee for engaging in known religious activities); Hellinger v. Eckerd Corp., 67 F. Supp. 2d 1359 (S.D. Fla. 1999) (although applicant did not himself inform employer about point lottery his religious conflict on his job application, employer had learned when he contacted applicant’s former supervisor for a reference that the applicant had refused to sell condoms at prior job due to essay on demand a religious objection, and was therefore on notice); cf. Wessling , 554 F. Supp. at 552 (employee’s request to leave work early in advantage in cambodia essay, order to on demand arrive early for a Christmas play at her church in order to decorate and receive children was insufficient to place her employer on notice of a religious practice; it was more in the nature of a social activity or family obligation that happened to be associated with the chaplain resume church). [121] Cary v. On Demand! Carmichael, 908 F. Supp.

1334 (E.D. Va. 1995), aff’d , 116 F.3d 472 (4th Cir. 1997); see also Elmenayer v. ABF Freight Sys. Resume! , 2001 WL 1152815 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 20, 2001) (employer not liable for disciplining employee for tardiness where employee failed until after his discharge to explain that tardiness was because he attended a prayer service), aff’d on other grounds , 318 F.3d 130 (2d Cir. 2003). [122] Notwithstanding the different legal standards for determining when a failure to accommodate poses an undue hardship under Title VII and the ADA, see supra n.117, courts have endorsed a cooperative information-sharing process between employer and employee, similar to essay the “interactive process” used for chaplain resume, disability accommodation requests under the ADA. See, e.g., Thomas v. Nat’l Ass’n of Letter Carriers , 225 F.3d 1149, 1155 n.5 (10th Cir. Essay On Demand! 2000) (“the [ADA] ‘interactive process’ rationale is equally applicable to the obligation to offer a reasonable accommodation to an individual whose religious beliefs conflict with an book report employment requirement”); Elmenayer , 2001 WL 1152815, at *5 (same), aff’d on other grounds , 318 F.3d 130 ; Kenner v. Domtar Indus., Inc ., 2006 WL 662466 (W.D.

Ark. Mar. 13, 2006) (“Title VII’s reasonable accommodation provisions contemplate an interactive process, with cooperation between the essay on demand employer and of tourism the employee, but which must be initiated by the employer”); Cosme v. Henderson , 2000 WL 1682755, *6 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 9, 2000) (“[t]he process of finding a reasonable [religious] accommodation is on demand, intended to be an interactive process in of view essay, which both the employer and employee participate”), aff’d , 287 F.3d 152 (3d Cir. 2002); cf. Ansonia Bd. of Educ. , 479 U.S. at essay on demand, 69 (“courts have noted that ‘bilateral cooperation is appropriate in the search for an acceptable reconciliation of the needs of the childs book employee’s religion and the exigencies of the employer’s business’”) (quoting Brener v. Diagnostic Ctr. Hosp. , 671 F.2d 141, 145-46 (5th Cir. 1982)). [123] EEOC v. Arlington Transit Mix, Inc ., 957 F.2d 219, 222 (6th Cir.

1991) (“[a]fter failing to pursue [a voluntary waiver of seniority rights] or any other reasonable accommodation, the company is in no position to argue that it was unable to accommodate reasonably [plaintiff’s] religious needs without undue hardship on the conduct of its business”); EEOC v. Ithaca Indus., Inc. , 849 F.2d 116 (4th Cir. 1988) (employer’s failure to essay on demand attempt to accommodate violated Title VII). [124] Shelton v. Univ. of Med. Monomyth Essays! Dentistry of N.J. , 223 F.3d 220, 227 (3d Cir. 2000) (by refusing to meet with employer’s human resources department, employee failed to essay on demand satisfy her duty to cooperate in finding a reasonable accommodation). [125] Ansonia Bd. of Educ. , 479 U.S. at 69 (employer could satisfy its obligation by offering an alternative reasonable accommodation to the particular one proposed by the employee); Brener , 671 F.2d at 146 (“employee has a correlative duty to make a good faith attempt to satisfy his needs through means offered by the employer”); EEOC v. AutoNation USA Corp ., 2002 WL 31650749 (9th Cir.

Nov. 22, 2002) (unpublished) (employer satisfied its initial burden by showing that it suggested possible accommodations but that the employee short-circuited the essay process by resigning without first giving the proposed accommodations the opportunity to be implemented or tested); Chrysler Corp. v. Mann , 561 F.2d 1282, 1286 (8th Cir. 1977) (where employee “will not attempt to essay accommodate his own beliefs through the chaplain resume means already available to essay him or cooperate with his employer in its conciliatory efforts, he may forego the right to have his beliefs accommodated”), cert. Childs! denied , 434 U.S. 1039 (1978). [126] See also Bushouse , 164 F. Supp. 2d 1066. [127] Id. at on demand, 1078 n.18 (court held that union’s refusal to provide accommodation unless employee produced independent corroboration that his accommodation request was motivated by a sincerely held religious belief did not violate Title VII’s religious accommodation provision, but cautioned that the holding was limited to “the facts and circumstances of the present case” and chaplain resume that “the inquiry [into sincerity] and scope of on demand, that inquiry will necessarily vary based upon the individual requesting corroboration and report the facts and circumstances of the request”).

[128] EEOC v. Essay! Tyson Foods, Inc ., Civil Action No. 99-5126 (W.D. Ark. consent decree entered Aug. 14, 2000) (settlement of Title VII challenge to employer’s policy of requiring a letter from in cambodia a church in on demand, support of all accommodation requests). [129] See EEOC v. Ilona of Hungary, Inc. Resume Copy File! , 108 F.3d 1569 (7th Cir. 1997) (employer did not satisfy reasonable accommodation requirement by offering to let Jewish employees take off a day other than Yom Kippur, because that would not eliminate the conflict between religion and work); Shelton , 223 F.3d at 225 (citing Ansonia Bd. of Educ ., 479 U.S. at 68-69) (employer’s accommodation of essay on demand, granting unpaid leave for religious observance instead of allowing use of paid personal days provided for in collective bargaining agreement (CBA), was a reasonable accommodation as long as use of the paid days was not allowed for childs report, all purposes other than religious ones); cf. Bruff v. N. Mississippi Health Serv., Inc., 244 F.3d 495 (5th Cir.

2001) (hospital offered reasonable accommodation as a matter of law where it offered plaintiff who could not be accommodated in her current position thirty days and on demand the assistance of its in-house employment counselor to find another position where the conflict between the duties and religious beliefs could be eliminated or reduced); EEOC v. Universal Mfg. Corp ., 914 F.2d 71 (5th Cir. 1990) (employer’s offer of five working days off or alternatively seven days off if employee worked one shift within that seven days, did not satisfy obligation to offer reasonable accommodation of her religious practice of refraining from work during seven-day religious festival, where employer did not show undue hardship). [130] See infra nn.131-133. Under the Commission’s approach, a reasonable accommodation must eliminate the conflict between work and religion unless such accommodation would impose an undue hardship, i.e. , more than de minimis cost or disruption on the employer’s business. Some courts have approached the issue of what is a reasonable accommodation in a manner that conflicts with longstanding Commission and judicial precedent. Of View! See, e.g., EEOC v. Firestone Fibers Textiles Co. , 515 F.3d 307 (4th Cir. 2008) (analyzing reasonableness of proposed accommodation based on essay on demand, facts typically considered as part of undue hardship analysis); Sturgill v. United Parcel Service, Inc. Advantage In Cambodia! , 512 F.3d 1024 (8th Cir. 2008) (noting that terminology which describes a reasonable accommodation as one that eliminates any work-religion conflict is imprecise, because it may incorrectly imply that reasonableness is on demand, determined as a matter of law without regard to the facts of an individual case, or that an employer is not permitted to monomyth essays choose among alternative accommodations, or that even accommodations which conflict with a CBA or otherwise pose an undue hardship must be granted). On Demand! The Commission’s approach is more straightforward and more in of tourism in cambodia essay, keeping with the purpose of Title VII’s accommodation requirement. Concerns about essay on demand issues such as conflicts with a union contract or burdens on other employees’ settled expectations can and should be addressed in the context of whether or not it would impose an undue hardship.

Moreover, the employer need not grant an employee’s requested reasonable accommodation if the employer wishes instead to offer an alternative accommodation of its own choosing that also would eliminate the work-religion conflict and book does not adversely affect the employee’s terms, conditions, or privileges of employment. [131] In Ansonia Bd. of Educ., 479 U.S. at essay on demand, 68-69, the resume copy Court held that an employer has met its obligation under § 701(j) of Title VII when it demonstrates that it has offered a reasonable accommodation to essay the employee; “where the book employer has already reasonably accommodated the employee’s religious needs, the statutory inquiry is at an end. The employer need not further show that each of the employee’s alternative accommodations would result in undue hardship.” Cf. Opuku?Boateng v. California, 95 F.3d 1461 (9th Cir. 1996) (where employer offered no accommodation and employee offered several possibilities, such as scheduling him instead for other equally undesirable shifts and adopting a system of voluntary or mandatory shift trades, the employer had to accept one of the employee’s proposals unless doing so would create an undue hardship). This section addresses only essay whether the accommodation was reasonable. An employer that does not provide a reasonable accommodation may nevertheless avoid liability if it shows that providing the accommodation would pose an undue hardship. Undue hardship is addressed below in childs book report, § IV.B. [132] Ansonia Bd. of Educ. , 479 U.S. at 70-71 (“requiring [an employee] to take unpaid leave for holy day observance rather than use personal paid leave days provided for on demand, under CBA would generally be a reasonable accommodation” because it has “no direct effect upon either employment opportunities or job status,” but “unpaid leave is not a reasonable accommodation when paid leave is provided for all purposes except religious ones . . . Of View On The! [s]uch an arrangement would display a discrimination against religious practices that is the antithesis of essay, reasonableness”).

In cases involving requests for chaplain resume, schedule changes or leave as an accommodation, an essay on demand employer does not have to cesario resume provide paid leave as an accommodation beyond that otherwise available to essay the employee, but may have to provide unpaid leave as an accommodation if it would not pose an chaplain resume undue hardship. [133] Commission Guidelines , 29 C.F.R. § 1605.2(c)(2)(ii) (“when there is more than one means of accommodation that would not cause undue hardship, the employer or labor organization must offer the essay alternative which least disadvantages the individual’s employment opportunities”). The Commission’s guidelines do not require an employer to point of view on the lottery accept any alternative favored by the employee, and, thus, are not inconsistent with Ansonia . On Demand! In fact, the file Court in Ansonia recognized that the limitation in the Commission’s guidelines that alternatives must be considered if they will not “disadvantage an essay on demand individual’s employment opportunities” distinguished the Commission’s position from the position of the Second Circuit that was rejected in Ansonia . 470 U.S. at 69 n.6. Resume File! Appellate courts in the wake of Ansonia have, as the essay on demand Commission’s guidelines instruct, evaluated whether employer accommodations had a negative impact on the individual’s employment opportunities. Point Of View On The! See Cosme v. Essay! Henderson , 287 F.3d 152, 160 (2d Cir. Childs Report! 2002) (an accommodation might be unreasonable if it imposes a “significant work-related burden on essay, the employee without justification”); Wright v. Runyon , 2 F.3d 214, 217 (7th Cir. 1993) (whether an accommodation is reasonable requires a more searching inquiry if an resume copy file employee, “in order to accommodate his religious practices, had to essay on demand accept a reduction in pay or some other loss of benefits”). [134] Smith v. Pyro Mining Co. , 827 F.2d 1081, 1085 (6th Cir. 1987) (quoting Redmond , 574 F.2d at 902-03). [135] Baker v. Home Depot , 445 F.3d 541 (2d Cir.

2006) (employer’s offer to schedule employee to work in the afternoon or evenings on Sundays, rather than the mornings, was not a “reasonable” accommodation under Title VII where employee’s religious views required not only copy file attending Sunday church services but also refraining from work on Sundays). [136] Wilshin v. Allstate Ins. Co., 212 F. Supp. 2d 1360 (M.D. Ga. Essay! 2002) (employer satisfied obligation to accommodate employee’s Saturday Sabbath observance by offering Sunday work hours instead, notwithstanding that employee would have preferred weekday hours). [137] Shelton , 223 F.3d at monomyth essays, 226 (state hospital’s offer to transfer nurse to newborn intensive care unit was reasonable accommodation for her religious beliefs which prevented her from assisting in emergency procedures to terminate pregnancies, where nurse presented no evidence that transfer would affect her salary or benefits); see also Rodriguez v. City of Chicago, 156 F.3d 771 (7th Cir.

1998) (city’s offer to essay allow police officer to monomyth essays exercise his right under CBA to transfer to a district with no abortion clinics resolved his religious objection to being assigned to guard such facilities; Title VII did not compel employer to instead grant his preferred accommodation of remaining in his district but being relieved of such assignments); Wright , 2 F.3d at 217 (7th Cir. 1993) (employer reasonably accommodated employee by suggesting he exercise his rights under CBA to bid on jobs that would have eliminated the conflict between work and religion). [138] Townley , 859 F.2d at 614 n.5 (citing Am. Postal Workers Union v. Postmaster , 781 F.2d 772, 774?75 (9th Cir. 1986)); see also Rodriguez v. City of Chicago, 1996 WL 22964, at essay, *3 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 12, 1996) (rejecting employer’s argument that a threat of adverse action is chaplain resume, not enough to state a claim; “it is nonsensical to suggest that an on demand employee who, when forced by his employer to choose between his job and his faith, elects to in cambodia essay avoid potential financial and/or professional damage by on demand, acceding to his employer’s religiously objectionable demands has not been the victim of religious discrimination”).

Moreover, a denial of accommodation claim can be brought if the employer could have provided an accommodation absent undue hardship that did not disadvantage a term, condition, or privilege of employment, but did not do so. For example, if a Muslim employee is transferred to non-customer service position because she refuses to stop wearing a religiously mandated headscarf, she states a claim for denial of accommodation under Title VII. Draper v. U.S. Pipe Foundry Co. , 527 F.2d 515 (6th Cir. Frank Cesario Resume! 1975) (resorting to transfer where accommodation was possible in employee’s current position is actionable as denial of reasonable accommodation). However, an employer need not accommodate an employee who chooses to resign before notifying the employer of the need for accommodation or fails to essay on demand cooperate with the employer in the accommodation process. See, e.g., Goldmeier v. Allstate Ins. Co. , 337 F.3d 629 (6th Cir. 2003) (resignation 53 days prior to effective date of employer’s policy that would have posed conflict with employees’ religious beliefs did not constitute constructive discharge); Lawson v. Washington , 296 F.3d 799 (9th Cir. Childs Report! 2002) (Jehovah’s Witness who quit state patrol rather than salute the flag or take an oath in essay, violation of his religious beliefs was not constructively discharged and thus was not subject to an adverse employment action where, rather than request accommodation, he informed employer that he was resigning due to his religious conflict); Shelton v. Univ. of Med.

Dentistry of monomyth essays, N.J. , 223 F.3d 220, 227 (3d Cir. 2000) (employee who refused to on demand meet with employer’s human resources department to pursue alternative accommodations could not argue that accommodation employer offered was not reasonable). [139] Townley , 859 F.2d at 614 n.5 ; Rodriguez, 1996 WL 22964. [140] Cooper , 15 F.3d at 1379 (Seventh-day Adventist employee’s need for accommodation to chaplain resume observe Sabbath had changed in the 17 months since employer had last scheduled her to work on a Friday night or Saturday; her “undisputed testimony was that her faith and commitment to her religion grew during this time”). [141] See, e.g., Hardison, 432 U.S. at 84. This “more than de minimis ” Title VII undue hardship standard is substantially lower than the on demand ADA undue hardship standard, which requires employers to show that the accommodation would cause “significant difficulty or expense.” [142] Both the statute, at essay, 42 U.S.C. On Demand! § 2000e(j), and the Commission Guidelines , at 29 C.F.R. § 1605.2(b), require an employer to reasonably accommodate an copy file employee’s or applicant’s religious beliefs and practices “unless the employer demonstrates” that doing so would pose an undue hardship. On Demand! Even under the Fourth Circuit’s decision in EEOC v. Firestone , and the Eighth Circuit’s decision in Sturgill v. Childs Report! United Parcel Service , where courts focused on reasonableness before looking at on demand, undue hardship, the resume employer still has the burden of persuasion. Firestone , 515 F.3d at 315; Sturgill , 512 F.3d at 1033 n.4. [143] Tooley v. Martin Marietta Corp. Essay On Demand! , 648 F.2d 1239, 1243 (9th Cir. Advantage In Cambodia Essay! 1981).

[144] Commission Guidelines , 29 C.F.R. § 1605.2(e). [145] Compare Cooper , 15 F.3d at 1380(employee’s request not to be scheduled for on demand, Saturday work due to Sabbath observance posed undue hardship for childs report, employer because it would have required hiring an on demand additional worker), and Beadle v. Tampa , 42 F.3d 633 (11th Cir. 1995) (requiring police department to alter training program schedule involving more than 900 employees to accommodate one employee’s religious needs amounts to chaplain resume more than de minimis cost and thus undue hardship), with Protos , 797 F.2d 129 (employee’s request not to be scheduled for Saturday work due to Sabbath observance did not pose undue hardship where employer made no showing that efficiency, production, or quality would be affected and entire assembly line remained intact notwithstanding employee’s Saturday absences). [146] See Brown v. Gen. Motors Corp., 601 F.2d 956, 960 (8th Cir. 1979) (“projected ‘theoretical’ future effects cannot outweigh the undisputed fact that no monetary costs and de minimis efficiency problems were actually incurred during the three month period in essay, which [employee] was accommodated”); EEOC v. Alamo Rent-A-Car, LLC , 432 F. Supp. 2d 1006 (D. Monomyth Essays! Ariz. 2006) (employer incorrectly believed that if it allowed plaintiff to wear her religious headscarf it could not enforce its uniform policy with respect to essay on demand other employees, and failed to show undue hardship based on its fear that allowing the accommodation would open “the floodgates to others violating the uniform policy”).

[147] Tooley , 648 F.2d at 1243 (“undue hardship cannot be supported by merely conceivable or hypothetical hardships . . . . The magnitude as well as the fact of hardship must be determined by ‘actual imposition on co-workers or disruption of the work routine’”) (quoting Anderson v. Gen. Dynamics Convair Aerospace Div. , 589 F.2d 397, 406-07 (9th Cir. 1978)); EEOC v. Alamo Rent-A-Car, LLC , 432 F. Supp. 2d at 1016 (“‘hypothetical hardships’” based on report, assumptions or “pure speculation” about accommodations which have never been put into practice are insufficient to show undue hardship”). [149] Id. Compare EEOC and Electrolux Reach Voluntary Resolution in Class Religious Accommodation Case (press release available at, Sept. 24, 2003) (settlement whereby employer agreed to essay accommodate the childs report religious request of 165 Somali workers who, pursuant to the tenets of the Islamic faith, must offer at least five daily prayers, two of which must be observed within a restricted time period of between one and two hours) with Farah v. Whirlpool Corp ., 3:02cv424 (M.D.

Tenn. Oct. 16, 2004) (jury verdict entered in favor of on demand, employer, which argued that allowing 40 Muslim factory workers to take a break from the line for their sunset prayers at the same time would result in an undue hardship because as a result of their absence, the line would have to be shut down). [150] Commission Guidelines , 29 C.F.R. § 1605.2(e)(1). Under Title VII, for copy, example, in Hardison , the payment of overtime (or premium pay) to another employee so that plaintiff could be off for weekly religious observance was an undue hardship. Id . By contrast, infrequent pay of premium wages for an occasional religious observance is not “more than de minimis .” See, e.g., EEOC v. Essay On Demand! Southwestern Bell Tel. LP , 2007 WL 2891379 (E.D. Ark. Oct. Of Tourism In Cambodia! 3, 2007) (summary judgment for employer denied on claim by two employees that they were improperly denied leave for an annual religious observance that would have required company to pay two other workers overtime wages of approximately $220 each to fill in, where the essay on demand facility routinely paid technicians overtime, the employer failed to contact the union about resume possible accommodation, the policy providing for only one technician on leave per essay on demand day was not always observed, and there was no evidence that customer service needs actually went unmet on the day at issue) (jury verdict for plaintiffs subsequently entered), appeal docketed , Case No.

08-1096 (8th Cir. filed Jan. 10, 2008); Brown v. Gen. Motors Corp. , 601 F.2d at of view essay, 959-60 (no more than de minimis cost imposed by essay, allowing employee to leave work at Sundown on Friday where he did not receive any pay for the time missed, a replacement worker was readily available to fill in for him on the shift during the hours he missed because the company maintained “extra board men” who were at monomyth essays, all times available to replace unscheduled absences of regular employees); Burns v. S. Pac. Transp. Essay! Co. Resume File! , 589 F.2d 403, 407 (9th Cir. 1978) (excusing employee from paying his monthly $19 union dues due to on demand religious objection did not pose an undue hardship, where one union officer testified that the loss “wouldn’t affect us at chaplain resume, all”; the loss was also de minimis because “even if so necessary to its fiscal well?being that its equivalent would be collected from the Local’s 300 members at a rate of 2 cents each per month; an essay accommodation that would only result in an increase of other union members dues in amount of 24 cents per of view essay on the year was de minimis ; unions asserted fear that many more religious objectors would request similar accommodation, resulting in greater cost, was based on mere speculation); EEOC v. IBP, Inc. , 824 F. Supp. 147 (C.D. Ill. Essay On Demand! 1993) (adopting EEOC’s interpretation in the Commission Guidelines that undue hardship means, with respect to costs for a substitute, “costs similar to frank resume the regular payment of premium wages,” and holding that “[i]nfrequent payment of premium wages made on essay, a temporary basis and administrative costs associated with implementing an accommodation are considered de minimis , although the ultimate determination is made with ‘due regard given to the identifiable cost in relation to childs report the size and essay on demand operating cost of the of tourism in cambodia employer.’ 29 C.F.R. § 1605.2(e)(1)).” [151] Commission Guidelines , 29 C.F.R. § 1605.2(e)(1); Redmond , 574 F.2d at 904 (employer could not demonstrate that paying replacement worker premium wages would cause undue hardship because plaintiff would have been paid premium wages for the hours at issue). [152] Protos , 797 F.2d at 134-35; Brown v. Polk County , 61 F.3d at 655 (allowing employee to assign secretary to type his Bible study notes posed more than de minimis cost because secretary would otherwise have been performing employer’s work during that time). [153] “[A]n employer need not accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs if doing so would result in discrimination against his co-workers or deprive them of contractual or other statutory rights.” Peterson v. Hewlett-Packard Co. , 358 F.3d 599 (9th Cir.

2004) (also holding that employee’s proposed accommodation of either allowing him to post religiously motivated messages intended to essay on demand demean and frank cesario resume harass co-workers, or the company deleting sexual orientation from its voluntarily adopted diversity and on demand non-discrimination policy, would have posed an undue hardship on the employer); EEOC v. BJ Servs. Co. , 921 F. Supp. Chaplain Resume! 1509 (N.D. Tex. 1995) (employer was unable to accommodate employee’s religious request for certain day off because no other employees were available to work, there were safety concerns regarding untrained substitute personnel, there were significant costs in bringing employees from essay other locations, and this accommodation would deny other employees their day off); Virts v. Consol. Of Tourism In Cambodia! Freightways Corp. of Delaware , 285 F.3d 508 (6th Cir. 2002) (trucking firm had no obligation under Title VII to accommodate a driver’s religious request for only male driving partners, where making assignments in this manner would have violated collective bargaining agreement). [154] BJ Servs. Essay! Co., 921 F. Supp. at 1509; Balint v. Carson City, Nevada , 180 F.3d 1047, 1054 (9th Cir. 1999) (citing Bhatia v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. Advantage Of Tourism In Cambodia! , 734 F.2d 1382, 1384 (9th Cir.1984) (cost of plaintiff’s requested accommodation was more than de minimis when it required co-workers to assume plaintiff’s share of the hazardous work)); Bruff 244 F.3d at 501 (requiring co-workers of plaintiff mental health counselor to assume disproportionate workload to accommodate plaintiff’s request not to counsel certain clients on religious grounds would constitute undue hardship). [155] See, e.g., Sutton v. Providence St.

Joseph Med. Ctr. , 192 F.3d 826 (9th Cir. 1999) (employer not required to accommodate job applicant’s religiously based refusal to provide his social security number where employer sought it to comply with Internal Revenue Service and Immigration and Naturalization Service requirements). Essay! However, an employer should not assume that it would pose an undue hardship to accommodate a religious practice that appears to conflict with a generally applicable safety requirement, but rather should assess whether an undue hardship is actually posed. Of View Essay On The! For example, there are existing religious exemptions to the government enforcement procedures of some safety requirements.

See, e.g. , U.S. On Demand! Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration STD 1-6.5 (“Exemption for Religious Reason from Wearing Hard Hats”) (June 20, 1994) (exempting employers from citations for certain violations based on religious objection of resume, employee, but providing for various reporting requirements). [156] See EEOC v. Oak-Rite Mfg. Corp. , 2001 WL 1168156 (S.D. Ind. Aug. 21, 2001) (manufacturing employee’s proposed accommodation of wearing close-fitting denim or canvas dress or skirt that extends to essay on demand within two or three inches above the ankle would impose an monomyth essays undue hardship on employer by requiring it to experiment with employee safety, given the absence of evidence demonstrating safety of proposed accommodation in a comparable work setting); EEOC v. Brink’s Inc., No. 1:02-CV-0111 (C.D. Ill.) (consent decree filed Dec. 27, 2002) (settlement of case alleging that employee was denied reasonable accommodation when she sought to wear culottes made out of messenger uniform material, rather than the required trousers, because her Pentecostal Christian beliefs precluded her from wearing pants); c f. Essay On Demand! Webb v. City of Philadelphia, 2007 WL 1866763 (E.D.

Pa. June 27, 2007) (undue hardship to advantage in cambodia accommodate the wearing of a traditional religious headpiece called a khimar by a Muslim police officer while in uniform, where evidence showed dress code in essay on demand, para-military organization promotes cooperation, fosters esprit de corps, emphasizes the hierarchical nature of the police force, and portrays a sense of resume copy file, authority as well as public and religious neutrality to the public). [157] Hardison, 432 U.S. at 80; Stolley v. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. , 2007 WL 1010418 (5th Cir. March 28, 2007) (unpublished) (affirming summary judgment in favor of the essay employer, the court ruled that a newly-hired aircraft assembly line worker was not entitled to have the of view lottery employer reassign him to essay on demand a different shift as an accommodation for his Sabbath observance, because the resume employer’s union contract dictated that shift swapping and transfers would be based on seniority and the union was unwilling to on demand waive the contract in this case); see also Balint , 180 F.3d at 1054. [158] Balint, 180 F.3d at 1054; Killebrew v. Local Union 1683 of Am. Book Report! Fed’n of essay on demand, State, County, Mun. Employees, AFL-CIO, 651 F. Supp. 95 (W.D. Ky. Of View! 1986) (union not required to negotiate a change in the CBA to allow an employee to on demand bump another employee to obtain an frank accommodation because bumping would have been detrimental to those bumped); see also Virts v. On Demand! Consol. Freightways Corp. of monomyth essays, Delaware , 285 F.3d 508 (6th Cir.

2002) (trucking firm had no obligation under Title VII to accommodate a driver’s religious request for only male driving partners, where making assignments in on demand, this manner would have violated CBA); Weber v. Resume! Roadway Express, Inc. Essay! , 199 F.3d 270 (5th Cir. 2000) (same); Thomas , 225 F.3d 1149 (because seniority system in CBA gave more senior employees first choice for job assignments, it would be an advantage in cambodia undue hardship for employer to grant employee’s accommodation request not to be scheduled to work on Saturdays); Mann v. Frank , 7 F.3d 1365 (8th Cir.1993) (no violation of the duty to accommodate where the essay on demand union refused the Postal Service’s request to assign another worker to take plaintiff’s Saturday shift, which would have violated CBA’s provisions governing overtime). [159] Commission Guidelines , 29 C.F.R. § 1605.2(e)(2); Stolley , 2007 WL 1010418. [160] Lee v. ABF Freight Sys., Inc., 22 F.3d 1019 (10th Cir. 1994) (employer satisfied Title VII obligation when it suggested method by which driver would usually be able to work the in cambodia number of trips each week required under the essay union contract prior to the Sabbath, and could use vacation time on other occasions; employer was not required to book grant driver’s request to skip assignments, which would then have to be worked by other drivers, or his request to work less than other full-time drivers and reimburse employer for additional costs; or his request to transfer with no loss of essay, seniority, which would violate its CBA, where the employer had sought but could not obtain a waiver from the union). [162] See Wilson v. U.S. West Communications, 58 F.3d 1337 (8th Cir. 1995) (employer reasonably accommodated an copy employee by asking her when she was outside her cubicle to cover up an anti-abortion button she wore containing a graphic photograph of a fetus because the button so distracted other employees that it had caused a 40% reduction in productivity and some employees threatened to walk off their jobs). [163] Opuku-Boateng , 95 F.3d at 1473 (mere complaints by other employees did not constitute undue hardship; employer failed to establish undue hardship in accommodating employee’s religious holidays because it did not show hardship on plaintiff’s co-workers or that accommodation required more than de minimis cost).

[164] Burns, 589 F.2d at essay, 407 (“Undue hardship requires more than proof of some fellow-workers’ grumbling or unhappiness with a particular accommodation to a religious belief. An employer or union would have to show . . Essay On The! . actual imposition on co-workers or disruption of the work routine.”); accord Brown v. Polk County , 61 F.3d at 655; Peterson v. Hewlett-Packard Co. , 358 F.3d 599 (9th Cir. Essay On Demand! 2004) (it would have posed an undue hardship for employer to accommodate employee’s religiously motivated posting of large signs in his cubicle which he “intended to be hurtful” and to demean and harass his co-workers; it also would have posed an undue hardship for employer to chaplain resume eliminate a portion of on demand, its diversity program to which plaintiff had religious objections). [165] See nn.182-184, infra. However, a different result may obtain depending on the setting and the religious garb at issue. See United States v. New York State Dep’t of Corr. Servs. , Civil Action No. Monomyth Essays! 07-2243 (S.D.N.Y. settlement approved Jan. 18, 2008) (providing for individualized review of essay on demand, correctional officers’ accommodation requests with respect to uniform and grooming requirements, and allowing employees to wear religious skullcaps such as kufis or yarmulkes if close fitting and solid dark blue or black in color, provided no undue hardship was posed).

[166] For example, Title 18 U.S.C. Section 930 generally prohibits the possession of knives, including kirpans, with blades longer than 2.5 inches, in federal facilities, unless otherwise authorized. [167] The Commission’s regulations, Commission Guidelines , 29 C.F.R. § 1605.2(d), set forth suggested methods of essay, accommodating scheduling conflicts, but those methods are not intended to comprise an exhaustive list. Different factual circumstances will require different solutions. State wage and hour laws may provide certain limitations that impact an employer’s potential flexibility. [168] See “Electronics Manufacturer and Islamic Group Settle Muslim Prayer Issue in essay on demand, Georgia Factory,” Daily Labor Report (BNA), No. 230 (Dec. 1, 1999) (ISSN 1522-5968); see also supra n.149; George v. Home Depot , 2002 WL 31319124 (5th Cir. Sept. Of Tourism Essay! 22, 2002) (unpublished) (excusing employee who served as department “greeter” from working any Sundays would have posed an undue hardship, because she was the on demand only greeter in the department; the chaplain resume store would have had to essay on demand do without a Sunday greeter or hire another employee in order to grant the accommodation, both of which would have posed an undue hardship based on the evidence the chaplain resume employer provided regarding the need for the position); Brener , 671 F.2d 141 (requiring hospital to hire a substitute pharmacist for days employee sought not to work due to essay on demand religious observance involved more than a de minimis cost, and operating without him or having the pharmacy director substitute for him would have had an frank unacceptable adverse impact on essay on demand, functions of the pharmacy). [169] See U.S. v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority , Case No.

CV 04-07699 JFW (JTLx) (C.D. Cal. consent decree filed Oct. 2005) (lawsuit filed by monomyth essays, Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice and resolved by consent decree prior to on demand ruling by court on merits; the settlement provided that the employer would accept the applications of chaplain resume, Sabbath-observant applicants; provide applicants with information about their accommodation rights; permit drivers to swap assignments with other drivers, and when no acceptable assignment is essay, possible either through use of seniority rights or swaps, permit drivers to resume copy file take temporary leaves of absence; and provide information about religious accommodation in essay on demand, marketing literature and in its training programs for supervisors). [170] EEOC v. Robert Bosch Corp. , 2006 WL 406296 (6th Cir.

Feb. 21, 2006) (unpublished) (in case involving request for shift swap and relief from mandatory overtime to accommodate Sabbath observance, summary judgment for employer reversed where reasonable factfinder could conclude that employer failed to provide reasonable accommodation based on essay, evidence that plaintiff was told a shift swap would not be permitted and the employer’s policy was only designed to identify employees willing to work additional shifts, not to swap shifts); Beadle v. Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Dep’t , 29 F.3d 589 (11th Cir. 1994) (employer satisfied its accommodation obligation by allowing employee to make announcement on bulletin board and at employee meeting to essay seek out co-workers willing to resume swap); McGuire v. Essay On Demand! Gen. File! Motors Corp ., 956 F.2d 607 (6th Cir. 1992) (summary judgment for employer reversed where genuine issue of material fact existed regarding whether employer’s accommodation of allowing voluntary shift swaps was a reasonable accommodation where there was evidence employer may have intentionally or unintentionally inhibited volunteers from swapping shifts by issuing a survey to employees regarding whether they would be willing to swap shifts in order to on demand accommodate plaintiff); see also Beadle v. Resume! Tampa, 42 F.3d at on demand, 636-37 (excusing police recruit from rotating training schedule would have posed undue hardship because it would undermine intended educational benefit of working with different training officers); Morrissette-Brown v. Mobile Infirmary Med. Ctr. , 2006 WL 1999133 (S.D. Ala. July 14, 2006) (in case brought by chaplain resume, Seventh-day Adventist who requested not to work on her Sabbath, employer satisfied its accommodation obligation by maintaining a neutral shift rotation schedule, allowing plaintiff to arrange a shift swap with co-workers, and making available the essay on demand schedules of other employees). [171] See, e.g., Pyro Mining Co. , 827 F.2d at 1088-89 (it would be a reasonable accommodation for employer simply to be amenable to a shift swap; employer not required itself actively to chaplain resume solicit other employees to make such a swap unless plaintiff had religious constraints against essay arranging his own schedule swap with other employees; a CBA’s provision permitting religious observers to trade days off with other employees did not provide reasonable accommodation in the case of an childs employee who had a religious objection to seeking such a trade); EEOC v. Texas Hydraulics, Inc. , Case No. 2:06-cv-161 (E.D. Tenn.

April 16, 2008) (employer's proposal that employee find another qualified candidate to take his Saturday shift was not a reasonable accommodation because the employer was on notice that the essay on demand employee considers it a sin for anyone to cesario resume work on Saturday, not just himself); EEOC v. Essay! Aldi , 2008 WL 859249 (W.D. Pa. March 28, 2008) (where an employee sincerely believes that working on [his Sabbath] is morally wrong and of tourism essay that it is essay on demand, a sin to try to induce another to work in chaplain resume, his stead, then an employer's attempt at essay on demand, accommodation that requires the employee to advantage in cambodia essay seek his own replacement is not reasonable ”) (emphasis in original) (citing Pyro Mining Co. , 827 F.2d at 1088). [172] Commission Guidelines , 29 C.F.R. § 1605.2(e)(1); Redmond. , 574 F.2d at 904 (employer could not demonstrate that paying replacement worker premium wages would cause undue hardship because plaintiff would have been paid premium wages for essay on demand, the hours at issue); EEOC v. Southwestern Bell Tel. LP, 2007 WL 2891379 (E.D. Ark. Oct. Frank Cesario Resume! 3, 2007) (payment of premium wages for essay on demand, one day to allow two employees to attend a yearly Jehovah’s Witness convention as part of their religious practice, at an alleged cost of $220.72 per person in a facility that routinely paid overtime was not an undue hardship as a matter of law, where there was no evidence that customer service needs actually went unmet on the day at issue), appeal docketed , Case No.

08-1096 (8th Cir. filed Jan. 10, 2008). [173] U.S.F. Monomyth Essays! Logistics (IMC), Inc. On Demand! , 274 F.3d at resume, 477 (“[i]n many cases, a company must modify its stated policies in practice to reasonably accommodate a religious practice”) (citing Minkus v. Metro. Essay! Sanitary Dist. , 600 F.2d 80 (7th Cir.1979) (municipal employer failed to accommodate a Jewish applicant when it followed its stated policy and scheduled civil service examinations only on Saturdays). [174] EEOC v. Razzoo’s , Civil Action No. 3:06-CV-1781-L (N.D. Tex. consent decree filed June 18, 2007) (settlement of case alleging that restaurant unlawfully failed to accommodate server’s religious beliefs by excusing her from participating in chaplain resume, singing “Happy Birthday” to celebrating customers). [175] Noesen v. Med. Staffing Network, Inc. , 2007 WL 1302118 (7th Cir. May 2, 2007) (unpublished) (pharmacy reasonably accommodated employee by allowing him to on demand transfer to co-worker any customer service involving contraceptives; employee’s proposed further accommodation of assigning responsibility for all initial customer contact to lower-paid technicians, even if it could be done, would impose an chaplain resume undue hardship because it would divert technicians from their assigned data input and insurance verification duties, resulting in uncompleted data work).

The reasonable accommodation that the employer was able to provide in Noesen might pose an undue hardship in a different case where there was no qualified co-worker on duty to whom such customer service duties could be transferred, or where it would otherwise pose more than a de minimis burden on the operation of the employer’s business. [177] Draper , 527 F.2d at 519-20 (transfer that involved substantial reduction in pay and essay would have “wasted [plaintiff’s] skills” would not be reasonable accommodation where plaintiff could have been accommodated in on the lottery, his original position without undue hardship). [178] Commission Guidelines , 29 C.F.R. § 1605.2(d)(iii) (“When an employee cannot be accommodated either as to his or her entire job or an assignment within the job, employers and labor organizations should consider whether or not it is possible to change the job assignment or give the employee a lateral transfer.”); Rivera v. Choice Courier , 2004 WL 1444852 (S.D.N.Y. On Demand! June 25, 2004) (employer’s failure to consider transferring employee to position with less stringent dress code so that he could continue his religious practice of proselytizing by chaplain resume, wearing patch stating “Jesus is Lord” may have violated Title VII). [179] See supra n.138; Rodriguez , 156 F.3d at 775-77 (permitting employee to essay on demand exercise transfer rights under CBA to obtain equivalent position that eliminated religious conflict with duty assignment was a reasonable accommodation); see also Cook v. Lindsay Olive Growers , 911 F.2d 233, 241 (9th Cir. Book! 1990) (under state law parallel to Title VII, transfer of essay, employee to a lower-level position was reasonable where no equivalent position was available); Bruff , 244 F.3d at monomyth essays, 501 (accommodation by transfer to lower-paying non-counselor job could satisfy Title VII if plaintiff could not be accommodated in essay on demand, her current position or an equivalent position). [180] Shelton , 223 F.3d at resume, 227 (offering transfer to nurse who had religious objection to abortion procedure sometimes performed in her department was a reasonable accommodation); EEOC v. Dresser-Rand Co. , 2006 WL 1994792 (W.D.N.Y. July 14, 2006) (summary judgment for employer denied in case on behalf of essay on demand, a Jehovah’s Witness who allegedly was denied transfer to book report different assignment as an accommodation of his religious objection to working on military projects). But cf. supra n.138 (discussing when a lateral transfer might be an adverse employment action). On Demand! At least one court has ruled that it is unreasonable for public protectors such as police officers or fire fighters to advantage of tourism in cambodia seek to be relieved from certain assignments as a religious accommodation.

See Endres v. Indiana State Police , 349 F.3d 922, 927 (7th Cir. 2003) (state police officer’s religious accommodation request not to be assigned to full-time, permanent work at a casino was unreasonable; police and on demand fire departments “need the cooperation of all members” and of tourism essay need them to perform their duties “without favoritism”), cert. denied , 541 U.S. 989 (2004). Because public protectors, such as police officers and firefighters, are obliged to essay serve and protect all under their care, and their public responsibilities must take precedence over their religious and other personal scruples, in some cases conflicts between the requirements of their job and their religious beliefs may not be able to be resolved. Childs Report! However, it is not per se unreasonable for public protectors to obtain changes in job assignments, schedule changes, or transfers in situations where a conflict between their job duties and their religious beliefs could be eliminated or reduced.

Therefore, the better approach is to determine on a case-by-case basis whether granting the request would pose an undue hardship. [181] See, e.g., EEOC v. United Parcel Serv. , 94 F.3d 314 (7th Cir. On Demand! 1996) (genuine issue of monomyth essays, material fact regarding whether the employer reasonably accommodated the on demand employee’s religious practice of wearing a beard precluded summary judgment for the employer); EEOC v. Comair, Inc. , Civil Action No. 1:05-cv-0601 (W.D. Mich. Resume! consent decree filed Nov. 22, 2006) (settlement prior to ruling on merits of case on behalf of Rastafarian airline applicant alleging he was not hired because he refused to cut his hair to conform with the company’s grooming standards); EEOC v. Pilot Travel Ctrs .LLC , Civil Action No. 2:03-0106 (M.D. Tenn. consent decree filed April 9, 2004) (settlement prior to ruling on essay on demand, merits of claim on behalf of monomyth essays, Messianic Christian maintenance worker, who wore beard as part of his religious practice, and was terminated for essay on demand, refusing to shave in compliance with employer’s no-beard policy). [182] United Parcel Serv ., 94 F.3d at 318-20; c ompare Daniels , 246 F.3d 500 (police department may be able to demonstrate that allowing an officer to wear a cross on his uniform would give the appearance of public agency endorsement of the officer’s religious views, in advantage of tourism, violation of the department’s constitutional obligations, and therefore would pose an essay on demand undue hardship under Title VII), cert. denied , 534 U.S. 951 (2001), with Draper v. Resume! Logan County Pub.

Library , 403 F. Supp. 2d 608 (W.D. On Demand! Ky. 2005) (public library employee’s First Amendment free speech and free exercise rights were violated when she was prohibited from of view essay wearing a necklace with a cross ornament). [183] See, e.g., Cloutier v. Costco Wholesale Corp. , 390 F.3d 126 (1st Cir.

2004) (holding that it would pose “an undue hardship to require Costco to grant an exemption because it would adversely affect the employer’s public image,” given Costco’s determination that facial piercings detract from the essay “neat, clean and professional image” that it aims to cultivate). [184] Denying the employer’s motion for summary judgment in EEOC v. Red Robin Gourmet Burgers, Inc. Chaplain Resume! , 2005 WL 2090677 (W.D. Essay! Wash. Aug. 29, 2005), the court ruled that notwithstanding the employer’s purported reliance on a company profile and customer study suggesting that it seeks to present a family-oriented and kid-friendly image, the company failed to demonstrate that allowing an employee to advantage have visible religious tattoos was inconsistent with these goals. “Hypothetical hardships based on essay, unproven assumptions typically fail to constitute undue hardship . . . . Red Robin must provide evidence of ‘actual imposition on co-workers or disruption of the work routine’ to childs book report demonstrate undue hardship.” S ee also Brown v. F.L. Roberts , 419 F. Supp. 2d 7, 17 (D. Mass. 2006) (district court held no Title VII violation occurred when employer transferred lube technician whose Rastafarian religious beliefs prohibited him from shaving or cutting his hair to a location with limited customer contact because he could not comply with a new grooming policy; stating it was bound to follow Cloutier as the law of the circuit, the court nevertheless observed in dicta: “If Cloutier’s language approving employer prerogatives regarding ‘public image’ is essay, read broadly, the implications for persons asserting claims for religious discrimination in the workplace may be grave. One has to wonder how often an employer will be inclined to cite this expansive language to on the lottery terminate or restrict from customer contact, on image grounds, an on demand employee wearing a yarmulke, a veil, or the mark on the forehead that denotes Ash Wednesday for childs book report, many Catholics. More likely, and more ominously, considerations of ‘public image’ might persuade an employer to tolerate the on demand religious practices of predominant groups, while arguing ‘undue hardship’ and on the ‘image’ in forbidding practices that are less widespread or well known.”); EEOC v. Chriskoll, Inc. , d/b/a Brookhaven Burger King, Civil Action No.

06-cv-1197 (E.D. On Demand! Pa. consent decree filed December 3, 2007) (settlement of claim on behalf of Muslim employee who was terminated pursuant to restaurant appearance code requiring male employees to be clean-shaven notwithstanding that employer’s written policy had exception permitting beards required for religious reasons). [185] See generally EEOC v. American Airlines , Civil Action No. 02-C-6172 (N.D. Ill.) (Order of Resolution filed September 3, 2002) (resolving claim on behalf of employee who was not hired as passenger service agent because she wore a hijab for religious reasons in violation of the resume airline’s since-changed uniform policy; the airline’s current uniform policy specifically contemplates exceptions for religious accommodation of on demand, employees). [186] Webb v. City of Philadelphia, 2007 WL 1866763 (E.D.

Pa. June 27, 2007) (granting summary judgment to the employer, the court ruled that the City of Philadelphia established as a matter of law that it would pose an undue hardship to accommodate the wearing of a traditional religious headpiece called a khimar by a Muslim police officer while in uniform, in contravention of the department’s dress code directive). [187] See U.S. v. New York State Dep’t of Corr. Servs. Essay! , Civil Action No. 07-2243 (S.D.N.Y. settlement approved Jan. On Demand! 18, 2008) (settlement of case brought on behalf of Muslim correctional officers by U.S. Department of Justice providing that employee requests for religious exemptions from uniform and grooming requirements of state prison system would be determined on a case-by-case basis, and allowing employees to wear religious skullcaps such as kufis or yarmulkes if close fitting and solid dark blue or black in color, provided no undue hardship was posed). [188] See also Federal Workplace Guidelines , supra n.11, at § 1.c (“Accommodation of Religious Exercise”), example (d) (under the First Amendment, government workplaces that allow employees to use facilities for non-work related secular activities generally are required to allow the privilege on equal terms for employee religious activities). [189] See, e.g., Minkus , 600 F.2d 80; Cary , 908 F. Supp. at 1343-44 (employee failed to give employer proper notice so that it could attempt an resume accommodation of essay, his religious objection to signing consent form for a drug test). [190] Minkus , 600 F.2d 80 (employer must demonstrate it would pose undue hardship to allow applicant to take exam at different time than others as a religious accommodation). [191] Sutton v. Of Tourism In Cambodia Essay! Providence St.

Joseph Med. Ctr. , 192 F.3d 826 (9th Cir. 1999) (hospital not liable for essay, refusing to hire applicant who declined to provide social security number on religious grounds; because federal tax law required the monomyth essays hospital to obtain all employees’ social security numbers, accommodation of applicant’s religious belief would pose undue hardship); Hover v. Florida Power Light Co., 1995 WL 91531 (S.D. Fla. Feb.

6, 1995) (employee’s proposed accommodation that employer “make up” a social security number rather than obtain employee’s actual social security number posed an undue hardship), aff’d , 101 F.3d 708 (11th Cir. 1996) (Table) (unpublished). [192] Commission Guidelines , 29 C.F.R. § 1605.2(d)(2); Tooley , 648 F.2d at 1242-44 (union cannot force an employer, under a contractual union security clause, to terminate three Seventh-day Adventists who offered to pay an amount equivalent to dues to a nonreligious charity because the essay on demand union failed to show that such an accommodation would deprive it of funds needed for its maintenance and operation); EEOC v. Univ. of Detroit , 904 F.2d 331 (6th Cir. 1990) (because employee’s religious objection was to union itself, reasonable accommodation required allowing him to make charitable donation equivalent to amount of union dues instead of paying dues); Int’l Assoc. of Machinists v. Boeing , 833 F.2d 165, 169 (9th Cir. 1987) (an employer may be required to accommodate an employee who has a sincerely held religious opposition to unionism by allowing an equivalent contribution to a mutually agreeable charity in lieu of dues payment); Burns , 589 F.2d at 406-07 (allowing equivalent charitable contribution in lieu of dues did not constitute undue hardship notwithstanding administrative cost to file union and “grumblings” by other employees); Cooper v. General Dynamics, 533 F.2d 163 (5th Cir. 1976) (religious belief that supporting labor union violated precept of “love thy neighbor,” i.e., including employers, was subject to essay on demand reasonable accommodation absent undue hardship); Reed v. UAW , 523 F. Supp. 2d 592 (E.D. Mich.

Oct. 19, 2007) (union was not liable for denial of reasonable accommodation to employee who objected to paying union dues for religious reasons, because union satisfied its accommodation obligation under Title VII by requiring the employee to pay to a charity of his choice an amount equal to full union dues). [193] See McDaniel v. Essex Int’l, Inc. , 696 F.2d 34 (6th Cir. 1982) (finding employee’s proposal to donate amount equivalent to dues to a “mutually agreeable” charity was a reasonable accommodation that would not have posed an undue hardship) and EEOC v. Am. Fed’n of State, County Mun. Employees , 937 F. Of View Essay! Supp. 166, 168 (N.D.N.Y.

1996) (referring to “mutually agreeable” charity as reasonable accommodation). Some CBAs have charities listed in them, pursuant to the requirements of section 19 of the National Labor Relations Act. See 20 U.S.C. § 169. [194] Commission Guidelines, 29 C.F.R. Essay On Demand! § 1605.2(e); Nottelson v. Smith Steel Workers D.A.L.U. 19806 , 643 F.2d 445 (7th Cir. 1981) (charity-substitute religious accommodation for union dues did not pose undue hardship to union where loss of file, plaintiff’s dues represented only .02% of union’s annual budget, and on demand the union presented no evidence that the loss of receipts from plaintiff would necessitate an increase in the dues of his co?workers); see also Burns , 589 F.2d at 407 (excusing employee from paying his monthly $19 union dues did not pose an undue hardship, where one union officer testified that the loss “wouldn’t affect us at all” and union’s asserted fear of many religious objectors was based on mere speculation; the court noted, however, that if “in the future, the expressed fear of widespread refusal to pay union dues on religious grounds should become a reality, undue hardship could be proved”). One court has held that it may be inappropriate to require the religious objector to pay the monomyth essays full amount of the essay on demand union dues to a charitable organization, however, if non-religious objectors are permitted to pay a reduced amount. See O’Brien v. Springfield Educ. Chaplain Resume! Ass’n , 319 F. Supp. 2d 90 (D. Mass.

2003) (not a reasonable accommodation to require religious objector to pay full union dues where state statute permitted non-union members to pay a lower amount in form of agency fee). Cf. Essay On Demand! Madsen v. Associated Chino Teachers, 317 F. Supp. 2d 1175, 1179 (C.D. Cal. 2004) (holding that it was not disparate treatment under Title VII to frank resume require religious objectors to pay full amount of dues to charity where non-religious objectors were only essay paying agency fee to union). [195] See EEOC v. Univ. of Detroit , 904 F.2d at 335; see also U.S. v. Ohio and of view EEOC v. Ohio Civil Service Employees Association , Case No. 2:05-CV-799 (S.D.

Ohio consent decree filed Sept. 2006) (lawsuits filed by Civil Rights Division of U.S. Department of Justice and essay EEOC against Ohio state agencies and their employee union, respectively, over their refusal to accommodate state employees’ religious objections to payment of union dues unless the childs book report employees were members of churches that have “historically held conscientious objections to joining or financially supporting” unions; pursuant to settlement reached prior to ruling by court on merits, the essay consent decree provides that a state employee is permitted to in cambodia pay an amount equal to on demand the union service fee to a mutually agreeable charity if he has sincerely held religious objections to supporting the union, even if he does not belong to cesario resume such a church); Int’l Assoc. of Machinists , 833 F.2d 165, 169 (9th Cir. 1987) (explaining that because “Title VII defines religion as ‘all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief,’” a union may be required to essay on demand accommodate an employee who has a sincerely held religious opposition to unionism by advantage, allowing equivalent contribution to mutually agreeable charity in lieu of dues payment, even if he “is not a member of an organized religious group that opposes unions”). [196] Wilson, 58 F.3d at 1341-42 (given disruption among co-workers actually caused in on demand, workplace, employee’s request to wear at all times a button containing a graphic photograph of a fetus with anti-abortion message posed undue hardship; employer reasonably accommodated employee by offering her several alternatives, including to chaplain resume take the button off or cover up the photograph portion when she left her work cubicle); cf . Essay On Demand! Red Robin Gourmet Burgers , 2005 WL 2090677 (denying employer’s motion for summary judgment because issue of whether employee’s Kemetic religious wrist tattoos would disrupt work or otherwise pose an undue hardship raised a disputed factual question to be decided by jury). [197] Wilson, 58 F.3d at 1341-42 (employer denied certain accommodation options because of demonstrated disruption to co-workers); Brown v. Polk County , 61 F.3d at book, 656-57 (there was insufficient evidence to establish that supervisor’s occasional prayers in meetings posed an undue hardship because, although the employer asserted that the supervisor’s conduct had polarized employees along religious lines, it adduced no supporting evidence).

[198] EEOC Enforcement Guidance: Vicarious Employer Liability for Unlawful Harassment by essay, Supervisors (1999), [199] U.S.F. Logistics (IMC) , 274 F.3d at 476 (employer reasonably accommodated plaintiff’s religious practice of sporadically using the phrase “Have a Blessed Day” when it permitted her to advantage use the essay phrase with co-workers and report supervisors who did not object, but prohibited her from using the phrase with customers where at least one regular client objected; allowing her to use the phrase with customers who objected would have posed an on demand undue hardship); Banks v. Serv. Am. Corp. , 952 F. Supp. 703 (D. Kan. Of Tourism! 1996) (plaintiff food service employees at company cafeteria, who were terminated when they refused to stop greeting customers with phrases such as “God Bless You” and on demand “Praise the Lord,” presented a triable issue of fact regarding whether they could have been accommodated without undue hardship; in the absence of employer proof that permitting the statements was disruptive or that it had any legitimate reason to fear losing business, a reasonable jury could conclude that no undue hardship was posed; the employer received only 20 to 25 complaints while serving approximately 130,000 to 195,000 customers, which is a complaint rate of between .01025 and advantage of tourism .01923%; and essay the employer produced no evidence of decreased use of the cafeteria or religious polarization among customers).

[200] See infra nn.201-203; see also Johnson v. Halls Merch. , 1989 WL 23201 (W.D. Mo. Childs Report! Jan. 17, 1989) (court found it would have posed undue hardship on on demand, employer to permit retail employee’s regular statement to advantage of tourism customers “in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth,” because it offended the beliefs of some customers and therefore cost the essay on demand company business). [201] See Knight , 275 F.3d at resume copy, 164-65 (allowing employee to evangelize clients would cause undue hardship). On Demand! Compare Baz v. Walters , 782 F.2d 701 (7th Cir. 1986) (government hospital did not violate employee chaplain’s Title VII religious accommodation or First Amendment Free Exercise rights by terminating him for evangelizing patients; it would have posed an undue hardship under Title VII, and would have violated the First Amendment Establishment Clause, to permit chaplain to remain employed given his intention to minister to patients), with Rivera v. Choice Courier Sys., Inc., 2004 WL 1444852 (S.D.N.Y. June 25, 2004) (genuine issue of material fact existed as to whether courier was denied reasonable accommodation where employer could have accommodated courier’s need to evangelize by transferring him to a position with a less stringent dress code that would have allowed employee to resume copy file continue wearing a patch stating “Jesus is Lord”). [202] Moreover, a private employer’s own rights under the First Amendment Free Speech Clause may provide a defense to a Title VII accommodation claim, if the proposed accommodation would require the private employer involuntarily to display a religious message that could be construed as its own.

See also infra § IV-C-7. Similarly, if XYZ were a government employer, the First Amendment Establishment Clause would likely justify its refusal to display a religious message. However, Susan’s display probably would not violate the Establishment Clause, or pose an undue hardship for essay on demand, Title VII purposes, because it has a minimal effect on any co-workers who saw it, whereas Roger’s display might be perceived to advantage of tourism constitute government endorsement of a particular religion and pose an Establishment Clause violation. Essay! See Berry v. Copy File! Dep’t of on demand, Social Servs. , 447 F.3d 642 (9th Cir. Point On The! 2006) (accommodating social worker’s request to display religious items in his cubicle and to discuss religion with clients would have posed an undue hardship under Title VII on county social services department since the accommodations sought would create a danger of the employer violating the Establishment Clause); cf. Essay On Demand! Peloza v. Capistrano Unified Sch. Dist. , 37 F.3d 517 (9th Cir.

1994) (school district’s restriction on advantage of tourism essay, teacher’s First Amendment right of free speech in prohibiting teacher from talking with students about on demand religion during school day was justified by school district’s interest in monomyth essays, avoiding Establishment Clause violation); Draper v. Logan County Pub. Library , 403 F. Essay! Supp. 2d 608 (W.D. Ky. 2005) (public library’s decision to bar employee from wearing necklace with cross was not justified by library’s purported interest in avoiding Establishment Clause violation; “[a] different conclusion might be justified, if for example, the library allowed employees to actively proselytize or if it permitted religious banners or slogans to be hung from the rafters”). [203] Knight , 275 F.3d 156; Grant v. Fairview Hosp. Healthcare Serv., 2004 WL 326694 (D. Minn. File! 2004) (ultrasound technician was offered a reasonable accommodation of his religious beliefs when hospital excused him from performing ultrasounds on women contemplating abortions; hospital did not have to allow technician to provide pastoral counseling, as that accommodation would have posed an undue hardship); see also Grossman v. Essay! South Shore Pub.

Sch. Dist. , 507 F.3d 1097 (7th Cir. 2007) (affirming summary judgment for school district on terminated guidance counselor’s First Amendment free exercise and Title VII claims, the court ruled that the resume copy file school district was permitted to terminate counselor for her conduct, even if her actions of essay on demand, praying with students who approached her for guidance and throwing away school contraceptive education materials were motivated by her religious beliefs; there was insufficient evidence that her termination was based on her religious views alone as opposed to chaplain resume these actions, which the school district was entitled to on demand prohibit). [204] See Townley, 859 F.2d at monomyth essays, 619-21 (private employer has First Amendment free exercise right to express its religion in the workplace). [205] Young , 509 F.2d 140; see, e.g., EEOC v. Essay On Demand! Native Angels Homecare Agency , Civil Action No. 7:06-cv-83 (E.D.N.C. File! consent decree filed March 22, 2007) (settlement prior to decision by court on the merits of essay on demand, claim alleging that a registered nurse was required to attend a “prayer circle” at work and was then terminated because she objected and refused to attend). [206] Townley, 859 F.2d at 620-21 (employer must accommodate an employee’s atheism; no undue hardship because excusing employee from services would not have cost anything nor caused a disruption; employer’s free exercise rights may be overridden where necessary to avoid religious discrimination in violation of Title VII). [207] Young , 509 F.2d 140 (employee was constructively discharged based on her religion in violation of Title VII where her superior advised her that she had obligation to copy file attend monthly staff meetings in their entirety and essay on demand advised her that she could simply “close her ears” during religious exercises with which meetings began). [208] Although it is beyond the scope of chaplain resume, Title VII enforcement, we note for essay, the sake of completeness that the U.S. Frank Cesario! Supreme Court has held that wreaths and essay Christmas trees are “secular” symbols, akin to items such as lights, Santa Claus, and reindeer, and thus that government display of these items does not violate the establishment clause of the First Amendment. See County of Allegheny v. ACLU , 492 U.S.

573 (1989) (stand-alone crèche on county courthouse steps violated establishment clause, but display elsewhere of monomyth essays, Christmas tree next to a menorah and a sign proclaiming “liberty” did not); Lynch v. Essay On Demand! Donnelly , 465 U.S. 668 (1984) (holding that government-sponsored display of crèche did not violate establishment clause because it was surrounded by various secularizing symbols, thus precluding a perception of government endorsement of religion); Federal Workplace Guidelines , supra n.11 at on the lottery, Section D (example (b)). On Demand! For a discussion of both Title VII and establishment clause claims arising from holiday decorations in federal government employment context, see, e.g., Spohn v. West , 2000 WL 1459981 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 2, 2000). In the private sector, establishment clause constraints would not apply. As a best practice, however, all employers may find that sensitivity to the diversity of their workplace promotes positive employee relations. [209] An employer may accommodate the employee’s religious belief by lottery, substituting an alternative technique or method that does not conflict with the employee’s religious belief or by essay, excusing the employee from that part of the training program that poses a conflict, if doing so would not pose an undue hardship.

[210] Many employers have policies that require employees to file treat each other with “courtesy, dignity and respect.” This terminology fits within the ambit of “professionally” as used in on demand, the example. See also Peterson v. Hewlett-Packard Co. , 358 F.3d 599 (9th Cir. 2004) (it would have constituted undue hardship for employer to copy accommodate employee by eliminating portions of its diversity program to essay which employee raised religious objections; to do so would have “infringed upon the company’s right to in cambodia promote diversity and encourage tolerance and good will among its workforce”). If training conflicts with an employee’s religious beliefs, the content of the training materials may be determinative in deciding whether it would pose an undue hardship to accommodate an employee by excusing him from the training or a portion thereof. If the training required or encouraged employees to value certain lifestyles or dimensions of diversity, it might be more difficult for an employer to establish that it would pose an undue hardship to accommodate an employee who objects to participating on religious grounds. Buonanno v. ATT Broadband, LLC, 313 F. Supp.

2d 1069 (D. Colo. 2004) (company can require and instruct employees to treat co-workers with respect in accordance with corporate diversity policy, but violation of Title VII occurred where company did not accommodate employee’s refusal on religious grounds to sign diversity policy asking him to “value” homosexual co-workers, which he reasonably believed required him to subscribe to a certain belief system rather than simply agree to treat his co-workers appropriately). [211] Commission Guidelines , 29 C.F.R. § 1605.2. [212] EEOC v. WCM Enter., Inc. , 496 F.3d 393 (5th Cir.

2007) (evidence was sufficient for employee to on demand proceed to trial on claim that he was subjected to hostile work environment harassment based on both religion and national origin where harassment motivated both by his being a practicing Muslim and by having been born in India); Vitug v. Multistate Tax Comm’n , 88 F.3d 506, 515 (7th Cir. 1996) (Catholic Filipino employee made out a prima facie case of national origin and religious discrimination, although he did not prevail on the merits).