Smith 1

1Zack Smith

Nathan Melcher

Explanatory Synthesis

2/18/08

Religious Rights in the Workplace

Religion is an important aspect of many peoples’ daily lives. Religions

such as Islam, for example, usually require its followers to pray five times a

day. Many Christians believe that physical labor should not be performed on

Saturdays or Sundays. Some religions even have practices such as keeping

a beard and sacrificing animals. The First Amendment guarantees freedom of

religion and its practices, but how far can this go in the workplace? It is not

uncommon for workplace rules to interfere with a person’s religious

practices. What say do the employer and the employee have in these

situations? In the workplace, an employee may practice their religion, but if

it causes undue hardship to the company, the employer does not have to

allow it.

A large amount of an average person’s life is spent in the workplace.

In fact, people spend approximately a month more in the workplace every

year than they did twenty years ago(Conlin). Combine that with the fact

that about 95% of Americans believe in a God of some sort or another, and

it is not surprising that faith is so often found in the workplace(Conlin).

From the way they dress to the way they act, employees indeed bring their

personal religious beliefs and practices to work. The ICSW, the International
 Smith 2

Center for Spirit at Work, is an organization dedicated to globally integrating

spirituality into the workplace. They believe that the workplace provides a

great opportunity to practice spiritual principles, allowing us to grow to our

full potential, and that organizations that welcome this approach are more

likely to be effective(ICSW). Many believe that spirituality in general

improves the workplace and increases productivity, but it is also known to

cause a wide array of problems.

As it turns out conflict is inevitable when it comes to religion. There

has never been complete peace and cooperation between opposing beliefs,

especially in the workplace. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

reported a 29% increase in religion-related discrimination cases from 1992

to 1999 as spirituality begins to leak more into secular institution and

businesses(Conlin). Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,

employees are protected from religious discrimination, also allowing them to

practice their religion at work as long as it does not minimally burden the

company(Conlin).

According to Jeffrey Steinberger, a writer on legal issues, if an

employer finds that an employee’s religious activities hurt the company in

such ways as causing higher financial costs, lost efficiency, or discrimination

against other employees, the employer does not have to accommodate

them(Steinberger). He also suggests to employees wanting to take specific

time off for religion to always notify their employer of their religious
 Smith 3

absences because if the employer is never notified that your absences are

religion-related, he can terminate you regardless(Steinberger). Steinberger

likewise warns employers to always offer options to fix problems if they arise

before claiming they cause hardship to the company. This way, the

employee is given a reasonable solution, and if taken to court, the employer

can prove he offered accommodations. These bits of advice aren’t always

followed perfectly, though. Many times, if a problem arises, the employer

and the employee may both offer numerous ways to accommodate the

problem. The employee generally has no say in these situations, and the

employer may decide on whatever solution he sees fit. (Steinberger)

There are many examples of how an employee’s need for a special

schedule or dress have caused problems at work. Christine Wilson, a U.S.

WEST Communications employee who wore a pro-life button that had a

colored picture of a fetus on it, ultimately got fired for causing disruptions in

her workplace(MFC). Wilson made a personal vow to God that she would not

remove the pin until abortions came to a stop. Since her co-workers were

very upset with the pin for various reasons, Wilson’s employers tried to

accommodate her by proposing that she cover it up when she left her

cubicle. She did not like the offered solution and offered to move to the

other side of the office. U.S. WEST refused Wilson’s solution. Eventually the

court ruled that since the accommodation offered to her by her employers

would have allowed her to keep her vow to God, and solve the problem of
 Smith 4

disruption in the office, she had no case, and was consequently fired(MCF).

In early 2007 the Workplace Religious Freedom Act was introduced in

Minnesota’s Congress due to some recent religious discrimination clashes.

Layla Abukar, a Muslim cashier at Target, refused to ring up pork, while

some Muslim cabdrivers refused to transport people carrying Alcohol(Aynte).

These and other similar conflicts gave rise to the bill. The bill mainly was

proposed to reinstate and strengthen Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,

giving employees even more protection(Aynte). This bill failed, like the

many previous attempts to pass it. Clearly, there is much dispute on the

issue of religion and the workplace.

Another example of how religion can cause conflict on the workplace

has to do with the career of law enforcement. Richard Schott, a journalist,

explains that law enforcement personnel generally always have to wear their

uniforms and concede to certain standards and regulation that they may not

always agree with. They also may not agree to the laws that they vow to

uphold. Law enforcement is a job that is done 24 hours a day, all year long.

These job specifics make it almost a certainty that something will eventually

conflict with an employee’s religious beliefs. Schott brings up examples such

as when employees who violate a ban on lapel pins when they feel it is their

responsibility to wear a Christian cross, or when an officer refuses to assign

other officers to maintain the peace at an abortion clinic when abortion is in

contradiction with his faith. Obviously it is hard to tell who is in the right in
 Smith 5

these and many other situations.

Solving religious cases in the workplace is far from an exact science.

The First Amendment grants citizens freedom of religion and the Civil Rights

Act of 1964 grants everyone that same freedom in the workplace provided it

doesn’t cause ‘undue hardship’ to the company. If it does cause hardship,

and the employer and employee can’t find an accommodating solution, the

employer no longer needs to regard the worker’s religion, and has the right

to fire the employee. Further, if a case is dragged to court, a worker needs

to prove his religious practices did not cause undue hardship, while an

employer needs to prove it did and that he/she tried and could not

accommodate it. For example, in the case with Christine Wilson and her

pro-life button, her pin in fact did cause disruptions which she could not

disprove, and her employer offered accommodations she wouldn’t accept, so

she consequently lost the case. Religion in the workplace can bring unity

and productivity, but tensions are all too common. Problems are best dealt

with when employers and employees are honest and upfront about religious

issues. This is commonly forgotten, though, and the battle between religion

and the workplace goes on.

 Smith 6

Works Cited

Aynte, Abdi. “Workplace Religious Freedom Act Introduced in Congress.” (3 April 2007) 11 Feb. 2008
http://www.minnesotamonitor.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1546

Brown, Allan. ”Religion in the Workplace.” The SideRoad. 11 Feb. 2008

http://www.sideroad.com/Legal_Advice/religion-in-the-workplace.html

Conlin, Michelle. “Religion in the Workplace.” BusinessWeek. (1 Nov. 1999). 11 Feb. 2008
http://www.businessweek.com/1999/99_44/b3653001.htm

Council on American-Islamic Relations. An Employer’s Guide to Islamic Religious Practices.

Washington, D.C. : Council on American-Islamic Relations, c1997.

Hansen, B. (2002, August 23). Religion in the workplace. CQ Researcher, 12, 649-672. Retrieved
Feb. 11, 2008, from CQ Researcher Online,
http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre2002082300.

Hicks, Douglas A. Religion and the Workplace: Pluralism, Spirituality, Leadership. New York :
Cambridge University Press, 2003.

Joseph & Herzfeld LLP. “Employment Law: Religion in the Workplace.” (2003) 11 Feb. 2008
http://www.jhllp.com/Articles/Articles25.php

Minnesota Family Council. “Religion in the Workplace.” (Sept. 2001) 11 Feb. 2008
www.mfc.org

Schott, Richard. “Religion in the public workplace: regulation and accommodation.” FBI Law
Enforcement Bulletin,The (June 2007) 11 Feb. 2008
<http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2194/is_6_76/ai_n19330098>

Steinberger, Jeffrey. “Religion and the Workplace.” Entrepreneur. (19 Sep. 2007). 11 Feb. 2008
 Smith 7

<http://www.entrepreneur.com/management/legalissues/legalissuescolumnistjeffreysteinberger
/article184334.html>

United States. Congress. House. Committee on Education and the Workforce. Subcommittee on
Employer-Employee Relations. The Workplace Religious Freedom Act of 2005. 109th
Cong., 1st sess. Washington: GPO, 2006.