An interesting lawsuit that Howard Friedman blogged about, and
that I thought I’d pass along. I assume that in this situation, the employee
would win only if there were someone else who could have easily done the task
instead of the plaintiff, yes? I would think that, both as a matter of the
Title VII religious accommodation rules and as a matter of the company’s First
Amendment rights, a company has to be able to express its views notwithstanding
a speaker-employee’s objections to conveying those views.
Eugene
Feed: Religion Clause
Posted on: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 4:10 AM
Author: Howard Friedman
Subject: Fired Buddhist Employee Sues Claiming Failure To Accommodate Religious
Beliefs
Courthouse News Service<http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/03/24/66395.htm>
yesterday reported on a Title VII religious discrimination lawsuit filed in
Texas federal district court by the former director of marketing communications
for a wireless network services company. Plaintiff Jef Mindrup, a Buddhist,
claims he was fired because he refused to comply with a request by the
company's co-founder that he add Biblical verses to the company's daily
newsletter. His lawsuit alleges that the company "fail[ed] to accommodate
plaintiff on the basis of his religion by requiring him to proselytize the
Christian religion, a religion other than his own."
View
article...<http://religionclause.blogspot.com/2014/03/fired-buddhist-employee-sues-claiming.html>
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the
messages to others.
