Posted on 03/18/2016 10:38:18 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
FROM THE EEOC WEBSITE:
http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/5-29-13.cfm
___________________________________________________
EEOC Sues Star Transport, Inc. for Religious Discrimination
Agency Charges Trucking Company Failed to Accommodate and Wrongfully Terminated Two Muslim Employees For Refusal to Deliver Alcohol Due to Religious Beliefs
PEORIA, Ill. - Star Transport, Inc., a trucking company based in Morton, Ill., violated federal law by failing to accommodate two employees because of their religion, Islam, and discharging them, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit filed today.
The lawsuit alleged that Star Transport refused to provide two employees with an accommodation of their religious beliefs when it terminated their employment because they refused to deliver alcohol. According to EEOC District Director John P. Rowe, who supervised administrative investigation prior to filing the lawsuit, “Our investigation revealed that Star could have readily avoided assigning these employees to alcohol delivery without any undue hardship, but chose to force the issue despite the employees’ Islamic religion.”
Failure to accommodate the religious beliefs of employees, when this can be done without undue hardship, violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion. The EEOC filed suit, (EEOC v. Star Transport, Inc., Civil Action No. 13 C 01240-JES-BGC, U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois in Peoria, assigned to U.S. District Judge James E. Shadid), after first attempting to reach a voluntary settlement through its statutory conciliation process. The agency seeks back pay and compensatory and punitive damages for the fired truck drivers and an order barring future discrimination and other relief.
John Hendrickson, the EEOC Regional Attorney for the Chicago District Office said, “Everyone has a right to observe his or her religious beliefs, and employers don’t get to pick and choose which religions and which religious practices they will accommodate. If an employer can reasonably accommodate an employee’s religious practice without an undue hardship, then it must do so. That is a principle which has been memorialized in federal employment law for almost50 years, and it is why EEOC is in this case.”
The EEOC’s Chicago District Office is responsible for processing charges of discrimination, administrative enforcement and the conduct of agency litigation in Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa and North and South Dakota, with Area Offices in Milwaukee and Minneapolis.
The EEOC is responsible for enforcing federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. Further information about the EEOC is available on its website at www.eeoc.gov.
Just think if the refusal was to deliver cupcakes. And they wonder why people are pissed...
Are they allowed to not deliver cakes to homosexual weddings?
What about delivering beer to a gay wedding?
Now THAT would be an interesting case ....
Would have been cheaper to clip the two of them.
Nah, it would probably be peach schnapps or something similar...
The muzzies had a lawyer.
The lawyer has an address.
The trial had a judge.
The judge has an address.
The muzzies have addresses.
‘Nuff said.
Is this some of that religious liberty I’ve been hearing about?
RE: Is this some of that religious liberty I’ve been hearing about?
Yes, but only for Muslims. Christians are not included (See: Colorado Bakers, New Mexico Photographers and the Little Sisters of the Poor )
In my experience, you do what the boss says when the boss says it. Failure to follow orders has always had unpleasant consequences, religious reasons or not. And by unpleasant circumstances I mean fired on the spot. [Not me] How these dimwits were allowed to drag their stupid religion into the middle of the argument seems more like a setup than anything else, but government is too anxious to validate islam for some strange reason instead of following the logic of the situation. UNREAL!
But the unfair treatment and double standards of Christians is peddling fear, right?
“...but government is too anxious to validate islam for some strange reason...”
Maybe I can help you out by offering you a hint: islam and Western civilization are totally incompatible.
There is no middle ground. It inevitably leads to armed conflict and only one ideology can prevail.
So would the drivers have to deliver alcohol to a homosexual wedding reception?
This right here is grounds for not delivering condoms, sex toys, birth control or any number of things. This case should also be used by nuns who dont want to give out birth control. It should also be used by the people who want to be doctors but dont want to preform a abortion to get their degree.
I asked the same question in Post #6 above.
A brave Republican candidate should bring this case up if gay marriage is brought up by the MSM.
The county clerk in Kentucky was not allowed her religious freedom in the workplace when she didn’t issue a marriage license to gays.
When there is a group like CAIR, and no CAC(Christian)R, you know there is no separation of church and state and the government just endorsed a religion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.