Hertz fires Muslim drivers for praying on company time

[Shwa]

I am posting this here since the impact of a similar event in Canada would likely be a national incident and this sort of relates to another thread/content about time provided to employees to pursue outside activities on company time or expense.

From the Star:

Hertz fires Muslim drivers for praying on company time: Report

I think it would unduly handcuff any company if this sort of thing - being allowed to pray on company time - were legislated as acceptable. I am sure there are better employers than others, some who allow outside pursuits to happen on their dime or on their premises. But should they pay the employee for it? No way!

What is stopping any employee from creating their own religion and pursuing other activities on company time? That is, where does one draw the line? I think Hertz just did.

I have no problem with accomodating staff to pray or read a book or whatnot, provided it is on their time, during lunches or breaks or other time periods approved of by the employer, but certainly not as a 'right' of employment for everyone across the board.

[fellowtraveller]

This story has been brewing for some time, and The Star has the short version.

Hertz has no problem with employees praying on their paid breaks or on unpaid breaks such as lunch, but since Muslims pray up to five times per day certain employees were taking adbvantage and stopping for extra breaks.

They argued that they had a right to express their religion, and Hertz had little quarrel with that either but did not permit it as paid leave. By insisting that all staff- all staff not just Muslims and not just for prayer- clock out for their breaks, the employer could manage their time and pay as they have every right to do. These staff refused to clock out for breaks, so they have been fired.

As long as all employees are treated the same, there is no discrimination.

[Bonam]

Not working while being paid to work? Sounds like acceptable grounds for dismissal. Nothing out of the ordinary. Just hope some stupid pc court doesn't decide to meddle.

Edited October 21, 2011 by Bonam

[Bob]

What Canada has done in past years with certain minority groups, particularly Mohammedans, is encourage the worst among them to turn their ineptitude into an opportunity to sue. Fire me for incompetence? I'll accuse you of firing me because I'm a Muslim. Terminate me for theft? I'll accuse you of terminating me because I'm a Muslim. This is just a recent Canadian example of a story we've seen many times before. Remember the Muslim girl who sued Abercrombie and Fitch, with the assistance of CAIR and other Islamic PR organization, for religious discrimination because her religious garb (hijab or burka) wasn't acceptable as part of their employee dress code? Then there was the Toronto Muslimah, a young girl, who was incompetent at her simple secretary job, and then she "sued" her employer, and was awarded something like $10K+ by the "Human Rights Tribunal" (later to be overturned by the Ontario Superior Court), because she lied about being fired because of her religion? The message Canada is sending is clear: exploit your Muslim minority status every chance you get, and immunize yourself from accountability for your actions at work.

CAIR suing A+F with their willing Muslimah "victim".

The Toronto Muslimah "victim".

Edited October 21, 2011 by Bob

[cybercoma]

Not working while being paid to work? Sounds like acceptable grounds for dismissal. Nothing out of the ordinary. Just hope some stupid pc court doesn't decide to meddle.

You can't make a person disobey their religious obligations as a qualification for a job. That's why in every province workers have to be allowed with impunitys to take Sundays off. If it's not for a safety reasons, a person can't be discriminated against by an employer for observing their religion.

[Bob]

You can't make a person disobey their religious obligations as a qualification for a job. That's why in every province workers have to be allowed with impunitys to take Sundays off. If it's not for a safety reasons, a person can't be discriminated against by an employer for observing their religion.

Absolutely false. Unfortunately, Canadian law does offer "protections" to employees, by abusing employers through obligating them to make "reasonable accommodations" for religious practises. This is quite different than some blanket guarantee that all religious practises be immune for consideration (i.e. a Mohammedan who "needs" to pray two or three times at work) by the employer, without limits.

[Bonam]

You can't make a person disobey their religious obligations as a qualification for a job. That's why in every province workers have to be allowed with impunitys to take Sundays off. If it's not for a safety reasons, a person can't be discriminated against by an employer for observing their religion.

All the employees had to do was clock out for their breaks, rather than claiming that they were working. An employer is not obligated to provide extra daily breaks for people to accommodate frequent praying.

[Moonlight Graham]

You can't make a person disobey their religious obligations as a qualification for a job. That's why in every province workers have to be allowed with impunitys to take Sundays off. If it's not for a safety reasons, a person can't be discriminated against by an employer for observing their religion.

I wouldn't have a problem letting them have the time to observe their religion. That should be their right. But they shouldn't get paid for it. No work, no pay.

[DogOnPorch]

I wouldn't have a problem letting them have the time to observe their religion. That should be their right. But they shouldn't get paid for it. No work, no pay.

Plus...why hire anyone you KNOW is going to work less than someone who doesn't go butt-up 5 times a day? The government would have to legislate me to hire them.

[cybercoma]

Employees that aren't religious are not working flat-out for their entire shifts either. You're kidding yourself if you think they do. What you people are advocating here is discriminating against someone because their religious obligations require them to pray for a few minutes a couple times during a shift. Whether you like it or not, you can't not hire someone because they need to pray and you can't fire them because their religion requires them to pray. It's like telling a Sikh they have to cut their beard for no other reason than you find it unsightly, telling a Jew they can't wear their yamulka, or denying a Catholic Sundays for observance. You're not allowed to do it. And the reason is simple, you have people that are not religious not working for just as much time for any myriad reasons.

Also, they only pray 5 times a day. If they were working a 9-5 job it wouldn't interfere with the day at all because they would pray sunrise (before work), noon (lunch hour), afternoon (after work), sunset, and evening (just before bed). So, I'm guessing at best, they maybe have to pray 3 times during their shifts. One of which could probably occur during a lunch break. Moreover, they only take anywhere from 5-15 minutes. I would be really surprised if the handful of non-Muslim drivers didn't take a few 5-15 minute breathers here and there throughout the day... paid.

[Moonbox]

Cyber,

I'm not sure what you're big hang-up is. They were permitted to pray. They were not permitted to pray and get paid at the same time. This is simply a matter of a minority group kicking up a stink over something that's EXTREMELY reasonable just because they think they can scare the politically correct into giving them their own, unreasonable way.

As for employees screwing the pooch on company time, well of course everyone does that, muslims and non-muslims included. Muslim employees, however, I'm certain screw around during the work day just like everyone else does in addition to disappearing for prayers 5 times a day.

[Bob]

I wouldn't have a problem letting them have the time to observe their religion. That should be their right. But they shouldn't get paid for it. No work, no pay.

It should absolutely not be anyone's "right" to have time off for religious "needs". If a person's religious practises are not compatible with the demands of the job they are seeking, then they should seek another job. Different business have different needs for scheduling, and they should be not be forced to accommodate anyone's "needs" because they are designated as religious. We already have provisions for "reasonable accommodation", anyways.

[Bob]

Employees that aren't religious are not working flat-out for their entire shifts either. You're kidding yourself if you think they do. What you people are advocating here is discriminating against someone because their religious obligations require them to pray for a few minutes a couple times during a shift. Whether you like it or not, you can't not hire someone because they need to pray and you can't fire them because their religion requires them to pray. It's like telling a Sikh they have to cut their beard for no other reason than you find it unsightly, telling a Jew they can't wear their yamulka, or denying a Catholic Sundays for observance. You're not allowed to do it. And the reason is simple, you have people that are not religious not working for just as much time for any myriad reasons.

Also, they only pray 5 times a day. If they were working a 9-5 job it wouldn't interfere with the day at all because they would pray sunrise (before work), noon (lunch hour), afternoon (after work), sunset, and evening (just before bed). So, I'm guessing at best, they maybe have to pray 3 times during their shifts. One of which could probably occur during a lunch break. Moreover, they only take anywhere from 5-15 minutes. I would be really surprised if the handful of non-Muslim drivers didn't take a few 5-15 minute breathers here and there throughout the day... paid.

There is obviously no problem with Mohammedans praying on their break time. What's mentioned in the above story is that these Mohammedans did their prayers while still on the clock, above and beyond whatever breaks may be allotted to them. That's obviously unacceptable, and sometimes referred to as "time theft".

[cybercoma]

I'm certain screw around during the work day just like everyone else does in addition to disappearing for prayers 5 times a day.

You're certain of that? The company's employees are 70% Muslim. You're not certain of anything. You're making assumptions. My hangup is that this is an unnecessary attack on the religious rights of their employees. Taking a few minutes a couple times a day to pray is not going to destroy their productivity beyond what other people's slacking would do. Since they're doing an identifiable activity, it's something that can be policed, where the company can demand that they punch out. Meanwhile, when anyone else slacks or takes an "unscheduled break", it's not so easily identifiable and can't be regulated in the same manner. In other words, they're being targeted because of their religion for doing something that everyone else does in a way that's not as identifiable. You can argue that it's all wrong, but telling Muslims they have to punch out when they pray while ignoring everyone else's slacking is just silly.

The bigger issue is this. Why are they not given more breaks where they could be praying not on company time? Years ago when I worked in retail we would put in a 9 hour shift with an hour unpaid lunch and two paid 15 minute breaks. This kind of structure would offer them ample opportunity to pray without being on company time. Why are they working for such long stretches of time without so much as 5 minutes to pray? The least they could do is allow them to pray, imo.

[GostHacked]

Pray on your own time.

[cybercoma]

Look, I'm a radical atheist, as Penn Jillette says, "I don't believe in God and I don't believe anyone else believes that crap either." I don't think there should be any special rights given to people for religious reasons. However, our Charter of Rights in Canada and in this case the rights that Americans have protect people from being discriminated against based on religion. We don't charge the Church taxes because it's considered "sacred". But, I don't see how this could possibly be affecting the bottom-line of the company in any way beyond what every other person in that job would do with their own level of slacking that couldn't be regulated. I want to know why they're not given breaks spread out evenly throughout the day where they can pray, if that's what they choose to do. I don't see the company regulating this as a reasonable request at all. I just don't see the justifiable amount of harm being done to the business to even make it worthwhile to get into a pissing match against a constitutionally protected right.

[msj]

The article clearly states that the employees are being fired for refusing to clock out on their breaks.

That is, they are being paid for time they have not rightfully earned.

So, it doesn't seem to matter if you are going for a break to have a smoke or to pray, if you are going for a break you either clock out properly or you don't. And if you don't you can be terminated.

Don't see how that is an issue as it is applied fairly to all.

As an employer I will anonymously admit that I do not like to hire smokers and it is cases like this that encourage me to never consider hiring a deeply religious person (of any persuasion) if I know they are deeply religious (or orthodox).

So, the irony of all this is that Muslims are hurting their employment chances by taking the unreasonable position that they are entitled to be paid to pray.

Just saying that that is the reality.

Edited October 21, 2011 by msj

[cybercoma]

If that was the case, then I would wholly agree with you. However, it seems that they're merely calling their prayers breaks because they can identify that activity specifically as being a break. Meanwhile, other people that don't conduct prayers are taking paid breaks without being caught. Besides, I've never known an employer to make coffee breaks unpaid.

[cybercoma]

What I'm suggesting is that they should require all employees to clock out so many times for breaks, if they're going to be unpaid. Then let the Muslim employees know that they can pray, but it must be during one of their breaks. However, everyone should be required to take the same amount of breaks.

[msj]

If that was the case, then I would wholly agree with you. However, it seems that they're merely calling their prayers breaks because they can identify that activity specifically as being a break. Meanwhile, other people that don't conduct prayers are taking paid breaks without being caught. Besides, I've never known an employer to make coffee breaks unpaid.

It depends on the employment agreement.

Where I am (BC) employers do not have to offer nor pay for coffee breaks and we do not have to pay for meal breaks. Link.

[msj]

What I'm suggesting is that they should require all employees to clock out so many times for breaks, if they're going to be unpaid. Then let the Muslim employees know that they can pray, but it must be during one of their breaks. However, everyone should be required to take the same amount of breaks.

Where is your evidence that they don't require all employees to clock out for breaks if they exceed the rules?

The agreement in the OP clearly states that all employees are allowed 2 ten minute paid breaks.

If someone wants to take a third or fourth ten minute break for whatever reason (and the reason really is irrelevant) then it should be unpaid because their agreement only allows 2.

[Tilter]

Look, I'm a radical atheist, as Penn Jillette says, "I don't believe in God and I don't believe anyone else believes that crap either." I don't think there should be any special rights given to people for religious reasons. However, our Charter of Rights in Canada and in this case the rights that Americans have protect people from being discriminated against based on religion. We don't charge the Church taxes because it's considered "sacred". But, I don't see how this could possibly be affecting the bottom-line of the company in any way beyond what every other person in that job would do with their own level of slacking that couldn't be regulated. I want to know why they're not given breaks spread out evenly throughout the day where they can pray, if that's what they choose to do. I don't see the company regulating this as a reasonable request at all. I just don't see the justifiable amount of harm being done to the business to even make it worthwhile to get into a pissing match against a constitutionally protected right.

So, being an open minded person, you think that the employer should bear the cost of any deluded employee who believes that facing east and kissing the ground a bunch of times will result in a better accord with some mythical entity. Sounds as if you're hedging your spiritual bets

[fellowtraveller]

You can't make a person disobey their religious obligations as a qualification for a job. That's why in every province workers have to be allowed with impunitys to take Sundays off. If it's not for a safety reasons, a person can't be discriminated against by an employer for observing their religion.

Untrue. If you are a Jew or Muslim working at BillyBobs BBQ Bonanaza you are exp[ected to serve those pork ribs cheerfully or they will find soembody who does.

Same with working on your Sabbath, if it is a normal part of the work week and you are assigned- you work or buh-bye.

Edited October 21, 2011 by fellowtraveller

[Bob]

Untrue. If you are a Jew or Muslim working at BillyBobs BBQ Bonanaza you are exp[ected to serve those pork ribs cheerfully or they will find soembody who does.

Same with working on your Sabbath, if it is a normal part of the work week and you are assigned- you work or buh-bye.

Exactly. Of course, we've got this thing called "reasonable accommodation" in Canada, which is obviously exploitable.

[msj]

Exactly. Of course, we've got this thing called "reasonable accommodation" in Canada, which is obviously exploitable.

Proof?