Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Somali workers file bias suit against Gold'n Plump
Pioneer Press ^ | 10-3-06 | staff

Posted on 10/10/2006 12:01:59 PM PDT by Rakkasan1

Nine Somali immigrant employees at poultry processor Gold'n Plump Poultry Inc. alleged in a federal lawsuit that they were discriminated against because of their race and religion at the company's Cold Spring, Minn., plant. The group alleges the St. Cloud-based company would not permit them short breaks during the day to pray. The Muslim faith, the lawsuit says, requires five prayers a day at times defined by position of the sun. The lawsuit also claims that the company was more likely to force Somalis than whites to work the night shift and do the least desirable jobs in the factory. In a statement Monday, Peggy Brown, director of human resources, said Gold'n Plump respects the religious beliefs of all employees. Brown said Gold'n Plump has made accommodations since 2003 to its Muslim employees in an effort to provide them with opportunities to pray. She said the company announced further changes last week, before it became aware of the lawsuit, "that we believe provide yet more opportunity for observance of Muslim prayer."

(Excerpt) Read more at twincities.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Minnesota
KEYWORDS: chicken; meat; mn; muslim; other; plump; skinny; somali; suit; the; white
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-42 last
To: I still care
Actually the employer does shoulder some of the responsibility based on the basic religious accommodations law founded in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The legal framework for religious accommodations show that employees must first prove: 1) a genuinely held religious belief; 2) the employer was notified of the belief; and 3) a request for an accommodation of the belief. Following proof, the employer must prove that it could not accommodate the request because doing so would create an undue hardship.

Therefore, you are correct in that your employer had not responsibility to accommodate you because you did not make the employer aware of your belief.

Electrolux was involved in a similar situation in 2003 when suit was brought by the EEOC to afford Muslim employees an opportunity to observe their sunset prayer, and they swiftly came to a voluntary resolution.

One more point is that this controversy is not limited to Muslims, but frequently involve employee with other religious beliefs such as Jew or catholics.

41 posted on 04/18/2008 5:55:32 AM PDT by nomes11 (Actually employers do have a legal responsibility to accomodate religious beliefs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: 2banana

Unless you can show that it’s a genuinely held belief, you’ll be out money. If you can, have a very relaxing day.


42 posted on 04/18/2008 5:55:32 AM PDT by nomes11 (Actually employers do have a legal responsibility to accomodate religious beliefs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-42 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson