A Legal Scenario ...................

[hatelilpeepees]

Probably belongs in another thread, but since it is a hypothetical scenario, I am putting it here. Your service hires a new employee who appears to be middle-eastern in descent. Obviously, you do not ask any questions about religion. He/she passes all your tests, so you give them a job. When he/she reports for orientation, he/she is in full muslim dress (head to toe). He/she refuses to where your uniform as their religion only allows for traditional muslim dress while in public. If this happened, could you fire them and not lose the lawsuit that will follow ?

Edited June 14, 2011 by hatelilpeepees

[akflightmedic]

Probably belongs in another thread, but since it is a hypothetical scenario, I am putting it here. Your service hires a new employee who appears to be middle-eastern in descent. Obviously, you do not ask any questions about religion. He/she passes all your tests, so you give them a job. When he/she reports for orientation, he/she is in full muslim dress (head to toe). He/she refuses to where your uniform as their religion only allows for traditional muslim dress while in public. If this happened, could you fire them and not lose the lawsuit that will follow ?

Typically before employees are hired, there is a policy review. If the employer states wearing a uniform is part of the job and the prospect has issue with it, it is simple....they do not get hired.

Also, surely the employer would have already interviewed the employee right? this would have occurred in public right? Therefore the prospect would have shown up in full dress as you stated they must do so when in public. The issue would have been revealed much sooner than Day 1 on the job.

And yes in most states you could terminate them quite easily as most are right to work states and the sooner you fire them, the easier it is.

[tcripp]

It would also be a moot point as soon as policies were reviewed if the new hire balked the uniform. Ours reads, "All staff members are required to be in full uniform at all times while on duty or representing the organization". Then it reads, failure to follow said policies can result in termination of employment. After that, it doesn't matter what religion you follow.

[Lone Star]

If the applicant must be in 'traditional Muslim dress every time they're in public’, we can logically conclude that they were dressed appropriately for their religious practices for the interview.

We can further conclude that the issue of wearing the company uniform would then be broached, whereby any objections would be brought forward at this time. In the event that the applicant cannot wear the company uniform, they wouldn't even be offered a position, let alone be hired; only to find out on the first day that they cannot wear the uniform due to religious considerations.

With that being the case, there would be no need to fire a ‘non-employee’ in the first place.

Additionally, if this ‘objection to the company uniform due to religious beliefs’ came out AFTER they were hired, then they could be terminated simply for not being honest and forthcoming during the hiring process. If this were the case, then there could be no grounds for a lawsuit for wrongful termination or discrimination.

[NYCEMS9115]

A Lawsuit can be made for almost any reason. This will be one of them. All the Company needs to defend itself are the Policy and Procedures stating that and the letter signed by the new hire that he/she received the P&P. Plus, he/she has too find a lawyer willing to take the case and he/she better have a solid case. Not too many lawyers do Pro-bonno work... What the Company has to hope for is that the new hire doesn't try to collect unemployment. NYS, tends to give terminated even 1 day on the job) Employees unemployment, even if they were justly terminated.

Ex. I fired a guy for driving and using his cell phone; have video to prove it. He almost hit a pedestrian crossing on the crosswalk. He still received unemployment.

Another guy was fired for fake Doctor's notes. Still got unemployment.

One guy stole patient controlled substances. He tested positive for it. Reported it to NYS. Lost his certification; no jail time, probation. He got the check.

This girl, nicknamed "Tardy Smurf" was late more than 6 times (excessively late; I give a 15minute window), 4x no call-no show, & banged out just before the start of her tour 5x: all within 3 months. She was canned; she got unemployment.

Another guy brought the truck back to base w/o permission; took off his uniform and threaten to kill an office member. Popo came to diffuse the situation. He stood the night in lockup and rec'd probation. He was gone that day; he has unemployment.

It's easier to get unemployment for being fired than it is to win a lawsuit for being terminated...

[Lone Star]

A Lawsuit can be made for almost any reason. This will be one of them. All the Company needs to defend itself are the Policy and Procedures stating that and the letter signed by the new hire that he/she received the P&P. Plus, he/she has too find a lawyer willing to take the case and he/she better have a solid case. Not too many lawyers do Pro-bonno work... What the Company has to hope for is that the new hire doesn't try to collect unemployment. NYS, tends to give terminated even 1 day on the job) Employees unemployment, even if they were justly terminated.

Ex. I fired a guy for driving and using his cell phone; have video to prove it. He almost hit a pedestrian crossing on the crosswalk. He still received unemployment.

Another guy was fired for fake Doctor's notes. Still got unemployment.

One guy stole patient controlled substances. He tested positive for it. Reported it to NYS. Lost his certification; no jail time, probation. He got the check.

This girl, nicknamed "Tardy Smurf" was late more than 6 times (excessively late; I give a 15minute window), 4x no call-no show, & banged out just before the start of her tour 5x: all within 3 months. She was canned; she got unemployment.

Another guy brought the truck back to base w/o permission; took off his uniform and threaten to kill an office member. Popo came to diffuse the situation. He stood the night in lockup and rec'd probation. He was gone that day; he has unemployment.

It's easier to get unemployment for being fired than it is to win a lawsuit for being terminated...

Not all states are as 'generous' as NY seems to be. Secondly, for the reasons I outlined, I doubt any lawyer would touch something like that. I also stated that it would be more likely that the person never got the job, and on most applications theres the 'truth in declaration' statement just above where the applicant signs the application...

[mobey]

This is the beauty of a probationary period.

"I'm sorry, your just not a good fit here".

Problem solved.

[island emt]

This is so far fetched: Even as a hypothetical idea. Have you been staying up at night to think of things such as this?

If they only wear traditional dress then when they applied, they would have been told of the required uniform to be employed.

If they stated no on religious reasoning then I as an employer do not have to make those accommodations to allow them to be different from the rest of my employees.

There are no reasons for hiring this person for your service unless you are providing EMS in rural Afghanistan.

Sorry AK

[NYCEMS9115]

This is the beauty of a probationary period.

"I'm sorry, your just not a good fit here".

Problem solved.

Not if they are in the Union...

[Lone Star]

Not if they are in the Union...

Having only worked with the UAW, I can only speak from my experiences there. I had a 90 day 'probationary period' before the Union was even allowed to represent me. I'm presuming that this is a 'standard practice' and would apply here as well.