Posted on 01/02/2003 1:43:55 PM PST by GeneD
A woman who was fired for refusing to wear pants as part of her work uniform will be paid $30,000 by her employer, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission said Thursday.
Carol Grotts, a Pentecostal, was hired by Brink's in Peoria as a uniformed messenger. She told the company that her religious beliefs precluded her from wearing pants, and she offered to buy culottes.
Brink's fired her, then hired her back, allowing her to wear culottes, after she filed a religious discrimination complaint with the EEOC.
Under a consent decree filed in federal court, Brink's will also pay Grotts' attorney fees and train its Peoria managers about religious discrimination.
"Grotts should not have been required to choose between respecting her religious beliefs and keeping her job with Brink's," EEOC attorney Richard J. Mrizek said.
Brink's had no comment.
Hypocrite.
Oh yes she should have. Don't like a companies dress code, do not apply or quit. Period.
One of the reasons I work where I do today is because of its dress code. I can wear what ever the hell I want. Whereas other employers in the area, where I would be doing the exact same job wanted me to wear a suit and tie! I decided to work at the place that would let me do the job in jeans and a tshirt.
I would bet she's thinking of Deuteronomy 22:5.
As for your lightning-fast accusation of hypocrisy, YOU tell ME the truth: can you name the passage, from memory, that forbids believers filing lawsuits? Even one that YOU THINK forbids it?
Study harder, spout slower. Free advice.
As devil's advocate here:
Why did she take the job, if job requirements were against her religious beliefs in the first place?
She could take a job as a Stripper, and sue because exposing too much of her body was against her religious beliefs.
She could take a job as cocktail waitress, and sue because she refused to serve drinks, because alcohol was against her religious beliefs.
Hmmm It must not be against her religious beliefs to covet or be greedy, because she got $30,000 out of it. Most people work very hard to earn $30,000.
Main Entry: cu·lotte
Pronunciation: 'kü-"lät, 'kyü-; kü-'lät, kyü-'
Function: noun
Etymology: French, breeches, from diminutive of cul backside -- more at CULET
Date: 1911
: a divided skirt; also : a garment having a divided skirt -- often used in plural
My wife is the branch manager for a bank. One of her employees is muslim. About 6 months ago she decided she wanted to start 'covering' herself. So she asked my wife if she could come to work with a headcover on. My wife took it to her boss and that person said NO! The reason they gave the employee was that when you started working here and the entire time you have worked her you have worked uncovered. If you had applied 'covered' then we would allow it. But you didn't.
There are other muslim women who work for the bank that are covered and have been since day one at the bank. So they do seem to have a very consistent policy. I am surprised though that she didnt sue them for discrimination or something.
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.