Muslims draft complaint against Swift meatpacking plant

AP/Omaha World Herald ^ | 7/23/2007

[Uncledave]

Published Monday | July 23, 2007 Muslims draft complaint against Swift meatpacking plant THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Tension came to a head at a Grand Island meatpacking plant in June, when Jama Mohamed said his desire for 10 minutes to pray at sunset was met with shouting.

After he left the production line and began praying, Mohamed said, supervisors took his prayer mat, pulled him up by his collar and sent him crying to a lead supervisor, who fired him.

"I told him, 'Look, I know I am in America and I know in America there is a freedom of religion for everybody to practice their religion. . . . And as long as you fulfill that — as long as you let me pray — I will always work for you,'" Mohamed, 28, said last week through an interpreter.

"And he said, 'No, that's not acceptable — your prayers are not acceptable here. You're here to work, not pray.'"

The Council on American-Islamic Relations has drafted a complaint to federal officials that is awaiting the signatures of dozens of Muslim Somali workers who say they were fired or harassed by supervisors at a Grand Island meatpacking plant for trying to pray at sunset.

The complaint, to be filed with federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission officials, compiles testimony from at least 44 workers who say they quit or were either fired or verbally and physically harassed over the prayers.

The complaint alleges that breaktime rules at the Swift & Co. plant violate civil rights laws by not allowing workers to leave production lines to pray at sundown.

The sunset prayer, known as the maghrib, is the fourth of five daily prayers required of all Muslims.

A Minneapolis attorney for the Greeley, Colo.-based Swift said unscheduled breaks can force unplanned shutdowns of lines.

"That is a significant number of employees, and there is not much of a way to accommodate that consistent with keeping the production online," Donald Selzer said.

The complaint reprises concerns that boiled over in May, when 120 Somali workers abruptly quit when they were not allowed to pray at sundown. About 70 of them returned to the plant a week later, but union officials worried the issue would resurface as sundown inched later each day through the spring.

Later sunsets run past evening breaks meant to keep workers from long stretches on production lines.

"For three days it was all good and we were praying — there was no hassle, no interference, nothing at all," Ali Schire said through an interpreter. Schire, 30, said he was among the 70 who quit and later returned.

"All of a sudden after three days . . . they were suspending people, they were firing people," Schire said. "Some of the people even had to give up praying at all for fear of being fired."

Mohamed Rage, chairman of the Omaha Somali-American Community Organization, said: "They are treating (the Somalis) like criminals now — anyone who prays is a criminal."

Schire said a supervisor took his gloves, uniform and other working equipment as he prayed and threw it in the trash the day he was fired.

Rage said at least two dozen workers have been fired since May by Swift for praying. Swift disputes that number.

Selzer said three Somali workers were fired for walking off the line without permission, not for praying.

"These people are absolutely entitled to pray, and they should not be interfered with for doing so," Selzer said. "The only situations that I've been made aware of are people that walk off the job without permission, and that's a different kind of an issue."

Dan Hoppes, president of Local 22 of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, said he sees regular lists of those fired from the plant. Nothing in those lists raised his suspicions, he said, but he said the plant — which employs about 3,000 people in all and about 150 Somalis — generally has high turnover.

Hoppes said prayer breaks are not part of the contract, but he said he plans to revisit the issue with plant officials when the contract is renegotiated in 2010.

Rima Kapitan, a Chicago-based staff attorney with the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said Swift has been "unwilling to work with us to create a solution where the workers can pray."

Kapitan said Swift rejected her group's suggestion to allow the Somalis who work evenings to leave in small shifts to avoid disrupting lines. The prayer must be done within a 45-minute window surrounding sunset, according to Muslim prayer rules.

Selzer and Hoppes said the company suggested phasing evening workers to shifts earlier in the day that don't interrupt prayer times.

"We're perfectly happy to try to pursue that angle so that we don't have this conflict," Selzer said, but noted many people prefer the second shift.

Somali workers also complain that other workers are granted bathroom or smoking breaks and say prayer time should be granted in the same way.

Mohamed said it is important for Muslims to pray within scheduled times and not to postpone prayers or say them early.

"I would never forgive myself and God would not forgive me if I do not pray on time because I want to earn some money," he said.

[Lijahsbubbe]

Good info. (post #41) I love it when informed people bust this garbage wide open.

[Regulator]

Those animals are in Grand Island?

Nebraska?

Beyond belief...

[Shots]

Uh...Mohamed....Read it and weep:

If only that were true unfortunately it is not

Article 7 of the civil rights bill applies here not the first amendment

(j) The term ``religion'' includes all aspects of religious observance and
practice, as well as belief, unless an employer demonstrates that he is
unable to reasonably accommodate to an employee's or prospective
employee's religious observance or practice without undue hardship on the
conduct of the employer's business.


http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/vii.html

[rottndog]

Gee, I always thought The Constitution was the Supreme law of the land. The civil rights bill was an act of Congress. That the morons on SCOTUS choose to ignore that fact is their problem. Not arguing that it isn’t currently binding, just that the constitutionality of it is wrong.

BTW, how is it possible that an employer would have to allow workers time during the work day to pray, and yet workers can be prohibited from waring a crucifix?

[Shots]

BTW, how is it possible that an employer would have to allow workers time during the work day to pray, and yet workers can be prohibited from waring a crucifix?

The answer to that is very simple a crucifix (All jewelry for that matter) could get caught in machinery. thus is considered a safety hazard in most factories.  It is very common for factories to prohibit the wearing of jewelry

As for allowing them time off for prayer let met make it clear I am against it 100%. When they signed their employment agreement I am sure it states they are allowed two breaks a day perhaps three and the exact times for those breaks are specified on the agreement as well as their union contract  that they sign they have read and understood it.  That in and itself is a binding contract between the employer and employee as I see it. ( the union says their current contract does not allow times for prayer at this time although they will look into it in 2010).

It should also be noted that back in May they staged a walk out and that is when many were fired that was definitely a sufficient reason to fire the first batch.

[rottndog]

The answer to that is very simple a crucifix (All jewelry for that matter) could get caught in machinery. thus is considered a safety hazard in most factories. It is very common for factories to prohibit the wearing of jewelry

Yes, but office workers have been prevented from wearing a crucifix...Children have been prevented from wearing a crucifix to school...many other examples. There clearly is a double standard with enforcement when it comes to muslims.

Of course there hasn't been a court case yet. We'll have to wait and see how it pans out. Hopefully the Roberts court will decide correctly, if an when an actual case is brought.

[GatorGirl]

Two wrongs don’t make a right!

[GatorGirl]

Actually, I do get it, thanks!

This is a private company, so they have the right to run things however they want, but in principle I think EVERYONE should be allowed a prayer break!

You can read into the article whatever you want, but I’m looking at the bigger picture.

[Shots]

Yes, but office workers have been prevented from wearing a crucifix...Children have been prevented from wearing a crucifix to school...many other examples. There clearly is a double standard with enforcement when it comes to muslims.
 

You are taking this way out of context wearing jewelry in a factory is considered a safety hazard and has been for years. Do not try and combine that with other events that are not in a factory.

 

HAZARDS OF LONG HAIR, LOOSE CLOTHING & JEWELRY  What do wild habitats and factory or industrial work have in common? Both environments are dangerous because rotating shafts, moving machinery and other equipment will "bite" you as easily as a wild animal. Video shows viewers how they reduce the risk of injuries by controlling long hair, not wearing loose clothing or jewelry and being aware of hazards in the workplace.

[rottndog]

I think you missed my point...

I think the company is perfectly justified in firing workers who stop what they are doing to pray—workers are there to work not pray...and the government has no legitimate purpose in interfering with that interaction.

People who would wear a crucifix in a non-industrial atmosphere do so as religious expression, where safety is not an issue. The government IS ALREADY interfering in that instance, to say it’s appropriate to prevent that religious expression.

How then, is it possible, for the government to step in in this instance and say the company has no control over someone leaving the production line and interfering with the work of the plant, so they can practice their religion?

There IS a connection, and there IS a gross double standard. And at any rate, THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO BUSINESS GETTING INVOLVED!

[Shots]

"I think you missed my point..."

No I got your point alright, I just wanted to make it clear in the case of wearing jewelry in a factory it is and has been considered hazardous for as long a man has used machines. What you were doing by bringing them into for comparison was like comparing apples to oranges. The situation in a factory is unlike that of schools, planes, offices, whatever; yet you clearly tried to put them on the same level

Here a picture of Rosie the riveter from back in the early forties. Note the head scarf and lack of jewelry. The headscarf was at that time required to keep their hair out of the machines because of long hairstyles back then.

[Beckwith]

These people are absolutely entitled to pray

Of course they are -- just not on Swifts' dime.

[montag813]

I hope the Muzzies win...this traitorous Company deserves whatever they get for hiring this Somalia savages that Clinton gave asylum to. Had they hired American workers who speak English, this would never have happened. Let them get reamed, and hopefully it will be a lesson to companies in the future—don’t hire non-citizens, and especially don’t hire Muslims.