In an EEOC Press release of 1/23/2013 the Dallas-based Fries Restaurant Management will pay a former employee $25,000 to settle a religious discrimination lawsuit. The employee, Ashanti McShan, is a member of the Christian Pentecostal Church which requires women to wear either skirts or dresses. During the interview process with Burger King, Ashanti requested a religious accommodation to wear a black skirt versus the black uniform pants. She was told by the interviewing manager that her accommodation would be granted. However, during her orientation the store manager advised her she could not wear a skirt and had to leave the store. McShan attempted to contact higher management, and was unable to speak with anyone. She was later discharged as a result of the accommodation denial. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits religious discrimination. It requires employers to make reasonable accommodation as long as such does not pose an undue hardship on the organization.
Florida Courts: In Hurley v. Kent of Naples, on or about 2005, Patrick Hurley was diagnosed with depression and related mental health symptoms. The doctor who provided the diagnosis, and the therapist, both advised that he should take medical leave. The employee advised the company senior officer that he had been diagnosed with depression and needed time off to deal with it. Having accumulated several weeks of vacation, the employee requested to take most of the year off on vacation. His request was denied and he was terminated. Obviously an FMLA suit, alleging interference with FMLA rights and retaliation, followed and Hurley won. (FMLA entitles eligible employees to take unpaid, job-protected leave for certain family and medical reasons.) The estimated judgement:
- $200,000 for actual monetary losses
- $353,901.85 for front pay
- $200,000 liquidated damages
- $233,109.75 for attorneys' fees
- $21,329.36 for "costs."
Texas courts: In an EEOC press release of December 18, 2012, Dillard's will pay $2 million to settle a class action disability discrimination lawsuit. Dillard's Inc, enforced a maximum-leave policy limiting the amount of health-related leave an employee could take. Additionally, since 2005, Dillard's had a national policy and practice that required employees to disclose the exact nature of their medical conditions to be approved for sick leave. Further, Dillard's terminated a class of employees nationwide for taking sick leave beyond the maximum amount of time allowed. This policy violated the ADA which prohibits employers from making inquiries into the disabilities of employee's unless it is job-related and necessary for the conduct of business. The second violation was that managers/supervisors (or even HR) did not regularly engage in an interactive process with employees to determine if more leave was allowed under the ADA as an accommodation. (More information is available on the EEOC website.) While you can't blame the managers for this company-wide form of discrimination, logically HR should have identified the violation and pushed for policy reform. But, who's to say that they didn't?
When discharging an employee who just revealed the need to take time off for a medical condition, use caution. Make sure the discharge reason is unrelated to the request. Remember, firing an employee who is pregnant has legal risk. Firing an employee because she is pregnant is illegal.
Employers can take steps to prevent discrimination claims by ensuring that all managers are properly trained. Please invest in training your managers.
"The best way to begin is to begin."
- Benjamin Franklin.
No comments:
Post a Comment