Hertz fires Muslim drivers for praying on company time

[msj]

And please note that they are NOW applying it to smokers. They hadn't been applying it to Muslims praying on their breaks either, but some were taking more than the ten minutes allowed. The clocking in and out is to document how long they are taking on their breaks - they are still paid for the breaks. And again. The company said it is now applying the same requirement to smokers. To all. Nothing unfair or unreasonable about that.

Where is your link for this?

I have provided a link to a claim made by the union spokesperson stating that the company was not applying it to smoke breaks.

So, has Hertz come back and admitted the policy was implemented inconsistently but they have corrected that? Has Hertz denied the allegation?

Even so, I still don't think you understand the definition of "if," "may," "could," and "contingent."

Edited October 22, 2011 by msj

[msj]

Gray doesn't exist in AMWO's world.

Maybe that's because it's really grey.

[Guest American Woman]

And, allegedly, Hertz allows other people to take smoke breaks without clocking in and out; ie. the smoker may be getting extra paid breaks while the religious don't.

Again, from what I've read, that policy has changed. Thing is, with 70% of the employees being Muslim, I'm guessing some of the Muslims smoked too. So they were also privy to those breaks. So the religious who smoke were getting extra paid breaks too - on top of their prayer time. The non-Muslims non-smokers were the ones really getting screwed. I'm sure they're all for the enforcement of the "clock out for breaks" policy.

We don't know all of the facts.

As I said earlier, I doubt if Hertz is stupid. I doubt if they are stupid enough not to enforce the "clock in and out" rule to all, as they claim they are now doing, in light of a possible law suit. But again, it's not about religion, it's about undue long breaks.

Just because you buy the company line hook, line, and sinker does not mean that that is what has really gone on.

One is innocent until proven guilty. Again, I give Hertz credit for not being dolts.

The union, gasp!, could be right about the application of this policy and, if they are, and a court can be convinced of this, then Hertz will be known as it's own kind of Denny's.

Again, I have no idea of what you are talking about regarding Denny's - your sketchy details of what might have happened did nothing to help me out in that area - but from what I did gather, the fact that Hertz provided prayer space for the Muslims for years tells me a little something about the company regarding whether or not they are simply prejudiced against Muslims and would treat Muslims unfairly simply because of their beliefs.

From what I've read, it was abuse of the allotted time by those engaging in longer prayer sessions that led to the "clock out" enforcement. Had that not been the case, it sounds as if they wouldn't have been required to clock out.

This isn't about prayer; it's about company policy and taking advantage of/abusing said policy - leaving others holding the bag.

[cybercoma]

Maybe that's because it's really grey.

Gray is a color, while grey is a colour.

I was translating into American.

Edited October 22, 2011 by cybercoma

[msj]

Again, from what I've read, that policy has changed.

Yes, I have read that too.

However, it is the application of the policy that is in question.

Thing is, with 70% of the employees being Muslim, I'm guessing some of the Muslims smoked too. So they were also privy to those breaks. So the religious who smoke were getting extra paid breaks too - on top of their prayer time. The non-Muslims non-smokers were the ones really getting screwed. I'm sure they're all for the enforcement of the "clock out for breaks" policy.

Where is the link for this info?

As I said earlier, I doubt if Hertz is stupid.

Normally I'd agree however consider Denny's.

I doubt if they are stupid enough not to enforce the "clock in and out" rule to all, as they claim they are now doing, in light of a possible law suit. But again, it's not about religion, it's about undue long breaks.

Once again, I largely agree with the exception that I can see management being stupid enough.

One is innocent until proven guilty. Again, I give Hertz credit for not being dolts.

I did not say they were guilty of anything - hence the use of words like "may," "could,", "if," and "contingent." I even throw an "alleged" in at one point.

Again, I have no idea of what you are talking about regarding Denny's - your sketchy details of what might have happened did nothing to help me out in that area -

Well, since you're not going to show me any additional links for where you get your info on Hertz I'm not going to look up Denny's.

Google it if you want to learn something about management stupidity.

but from what I did gather, the fact that Hertz provided prayer space for the Muslims for years tells me a little something about the company regarding whether or not they are simply prejudiced against Muslims and would treat Muslims unfairly simply because of their beliefs.

That is hardly relevant if the union spokesperson's story is true (and, once again, note the use of "if").

From what I've read, it was abuse of the allotted time by those engaging in longer prayer sessions that led to the "clock out" enforcement. Had that not been the case, it sounds as if they wouldn't have been required to clock out.

This isn't about prayer; it's about company policy and taking advantage of/abusing said policy - leaving others holding the bag.

I agree it isn't about prayer.

I actually stated that many many pages ago when I stated "f 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."

However, if the company has implemented a policy and then carried it out inconsistently/incompetently then there could be some legal trouble.

I have not said anything controversial here and we largely agree:

I agree with the policy and as long as it is applied consistently to all people (i.e. you get paid for 2 10 minute breaks and any other desired breaks must be clocked out) then it should be all good.

But it still comes down to the implementation of the policy and what can be taken to court.

Yes, it is possible that Hertz screwed up with the initial implementation of the policy and, if that is so and they have corrected it, then I hope a court would agree that that is a minor factor and side with Hertz and their policy.

[dre]

Companies need to be careful of overly rigid HR policies because theyll come back to bite you in the ass. Companies shouldnt be forced to accomodate religion in the world place but sometimes it would be a smart choice.

Instead of worrying about a few minutes extra in paid breaks a day they should look at how productive these employees are overall.

I have one Muslim that works for me in the US, and he leaves between 1 and 3 oclock on friday for Mosque. I could force him to stop going but the problems with that are 2 fold. He might just quit, and hes very bright and resourcefull dude, so that would be a huge loss. Or he might stay but hed be pissed off, and productivity would likely suffer.

At the end of the days hes one of our most productive developers, so I could really care less about that extra hour off each friday.