This is a notification that can be used for cookie consent or other important news. It also got a modal window now! Click "learn more" to see it!
OKLearn MoreWe may request cookies to be set on your device. We use cookies to let us know when you visit our websites, how you interact with us, to enrich your user experience, and to customize your relationship with our website.
Click on the different category headings to find out more. You can also change some of your preferences. Note that blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience on our websites and the services we are able to offer.
These cookies are strictly necessary to provide you with services available through our website and to use some of its features.
Because these cookies are strictly necessary to deliver the website, you cannot refuse them without impacting how our site functions. You can block or delete them by changing your browser settings and force blocking all cookies on this website.
We also use different external services like Google Webfonts, Google Maps and external Video providers. Since these providers may collect personal data like your IP address we allow you to block them here. Please be aware that this might heavily reduce the functionality and appearance of our site. Changes will take effect once you reload the page.
Google Webfont Settings:
Google Map Settings:
Vimeo and Youtube video embeds:
NO RELIGIOUS RIGHT TO BASH GAYS – EEONews
UncategorizedHewlett-Packard fired an employee after he refused to stop posting scriptures that condemned homosexuality in response to the Company’s diversity initiative. The Ninth Circuit found that Title VII does not protect such postings, especially since “good business practices are appropriately promoted by Hewlett-Packard’s workplace diversity program.”
HAVE A BLESSED DAY – EEONews
News, ReligiousAn office worker sought an injunction because her employer failed to accommodate her religious practice of ending some conversations with: “Have a blessed day.” The Seventh Circuit found that use of the phrase is not a requirement of her religion and held that the employer did not have to satisfy an employee’s every desire.
BREAK FOR PRAYERS NOT PERMITTED – EEONews
UncategorizedWhirlpool is not required to permit time for Muslim factory workers to break for sunset prayers because it would cause an undue hardship. Whirlpool argued that it “could not afford to have so many employees off the production line at the same time.”
ACCOMODATING “APPEARANCE OF EVIL” – EEONews
UncategorizedTwo truck drivers are sometimes required to share the driving on “sleeper runs.” A male employee asked for a religious Accommodation; his religious beliefs prevented him from traveling with a woman he was not married to because of the “appearance of evil” and “hanky panky.” The Sixth Circuit held that the case could be dismissed because the employer’s seniority system was more important than its responsibility to accommodate.
ANTI-GAY CATHOLIC FIRED BY LESBIAN BOSS – EEONews
UncategorizedA Catholic hospital secretary expressed her views about gays to an ex-Catholic lesbian who became her boss. Since the reasons for the secretary’s discharge were “inconsistent,” the secretary’s religious discrimination claim was not dismissed.
SINCERITY OF RELIGIOUS BELIEFS – EEONews
News, ReligiousA Seventh Day Adventist stated that his religion barred him from joining a union. Religious beliefs protected by Title VII do not have to be “acceptable, logical, consistent or comprehensible to others,” but they must be sincere. Sincerity is for the jury to decide.
LIBRARY FIRES EMPLOYEE FOR WEARING CROSS – EEONews
News, ReligiousA library employee was fired for violating a dress code by wearing a cross. She sued under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. The court found that the library’s interest in enforcing its dress code did not outweigh the employee’s right to free speech or the free exercise of her religion.
TEASING IS NOT SEXUAL HARASSMENT – EEONews
UncategorizedA prison librarian alleged offensive comments, unwarranted attention and sexual interest by an assistant warden. The court dismissed her case, noting that she did not allege that the assistant warden “requested a sexual act, touched her inappropriately, discussed sexual subjects, showed her obscene materials, told her vulgar jokes or threatened her.”
WAS COMPLAINT ABOUT SEXUAL HARASSMENT REASONABLE? – EEONews
HarassmentA Lowe’s Home Center employee discussed her sexual harassment informally with a department manager in the store break room. Whether the employee acted reasonably and followed Lowe’s sexual harassment policy is a question for the jury.
NO DUTY TO INVESITGATE – EEONews
UncategorizedA male advertising manager complained about sexual harassment by a female general manager. After the employer refused to handle the complaint anonymously, the advertising manager insisted on handling the situation himself. His actions excused the employer from having to fully investigate the sexual harassment claim.