Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal complai

[Renae]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

You support Kim Davis?

Inane equation based on AHA stupidity.



Was Gay Marriage legal when Kim Davis applied for the job, accepted the job? No.

Apples, meet oranges, oranges, apples.

 

[Visbek]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

So, you are just minimizing everyone else's feelings and inconvenience.

Noted. Carry on.

So, you are just vastly exaggerating everyone else's feelings and inconveniences.

Noted. Carry on.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

So, you are just vastly exaggerating everyone else's feelings and inconveniences.

Noted. Carry on.

No, they made them clear in the complaint. Are you suggesting submitting such a complaint is a casual or frivolous thing?

Your assumptions are unfounded.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

Inane equation based on AHA stupidity.



Was Gay Marriage legal when Kim Davis applied for the job, accepted the job? No.

Apples, meet oranges, oranges, apples.

While I agree this is very different because one is a govt official and the other not:

She took the position in Jan. The case had already been scheduled by SCOTUS. How unprepared and bad a candidate was she for the position if she wasnt aware of that and didnt take it into consideration? She just didnt want to deal with it...I mean, $80,000/yr in rural KY aint too shabby.

Her office (where she already worked) knew this decision was impending.

 

[MrT]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

Inane equation based on AHA stupidity.

Was Gay Marriage legal when Kim Davis applied for the job, accepted the job? No.

Apples, meet oranges, oranges, apples.

So you're telling me that you support Kim Davis because the law changed after she accepted her job, but you dismiss this flight attendant because her deeply held religious beliefs changed after she accepted her job?

If you want to talk about the problem with comparing these two people - allow me:

Does Kim Davis face a court order to comply with the requirements of her job?

Does Kim Davis work a federal employer?

Did Kim Davis swear an oath to abide by the Constitution?

 

[Visbek]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

No, they made them clear in the complaint. Are you suggesting submitting such a complaint is a casual or frivolous thing?

I am rather explicitly stating that, from what we know of it (which is limited), the complaint itself is quite trivial, and potentially discriminatory. E.g. it should not matter that Ms Stanley wears a hijab and reads a book of "foreign writing" (neither of which interfere with her duties) yet that was included in the complaint.

She was not refusing to serve all food, asking the airline to ban all alcohol sales while she was on board, or point towards Mecca 5 times a day, or read the Koran over the PA system, or even change her schedule (as you erroneously asserted).

She asked other employees to handle one task, and in exchange took over other tasks. This request did not incur any costs for the employer, or block customers from receiving their precious alcohol, nor did it ask the other stewards and stewardesses to perform a duty they would never do otherwise.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

I am rather explicitly stating that, from what we know of it (which is limited), the complaint itself is quite trivial, and potentially discriminatory. E.g. it should not matter that Ms Stanley wears a hijab and reads a book of "foreign writing" (neither of which interfere with her duties) yet that was included in the complaint.

She was not refusing to serve all food, asking the airline to ban all alcohol sales while she was on board, or point towards Mecca 5 times a day, or read the Koran over the PA system, or even change her schedule (as you erroneously asserted).

She asked other employees to handle one task, and in exchange took over other tasks. This request did not incur any costs for the employer, or block customers from receiving their precious alcohol, nor did it ask the other stewards and stewardesses to perform a duty they would never do otherwise.

Again you dismiss the costs to fellow attendants (at least one of whom was burdened) and passengers.

 

[Renae]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

So you're telling me that you support Kim Davis because the law changed after she accepted her job, but you dismiss this flight attendant because her deeply held religious beliefs changed after she accepted her job?

If you want to talk about the problem with comparing these two people - allow me:

Does Kim Davis face a court order to comply with the requirements of her job?

Does Kim Davis work a federal employer?

Did Kim Davis swear an oath to abide by the Constitution?

I didn't say ANYTHING about her, you keep trying to dump your own preconceived bull**** in my lap. I'm not talking about Kim Davis, I haven't mentioned her or her situation in this thread until you tried lay a claim on me I did not make, and I have only stated that the two circumstances are not the same thus make for ****ty comparisons. By your laughably desperate attempts to peg a position on me that YOU need me to have to make your shtick work, and the utter inane rationalizations you are justifying your tirades with tells me you think somehow you can play some strange grab ass gotcha hypocrite game.

This gal ain't playing that, she's mocking you for your silliness, pointing out the irrational elements of your argument, refuting your weak attempts to lay claim on what she's saying. The two sitautions aren't at all the same the flight attendant can suck wind she's an idiot, you lose, have a nice ****ing day.

 

[mike2810]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

I am rather explicitly stating that, from what we know of it (which is limited), the complaint itself is quite trivial, and potentially discriminatory. E.g. it should not matter that Ms Stanley wears a hijab and reads a book of "foreign writing" (neither of which interfere with her duties) yet that was included in the complaint.

She was not refusing to serve all food, asking the airline to ban all alcohol sales while she was on board, or point towards Mecca 5 times a day, or read the Koran over the PA system, or even change her schedule (as you erroneously asserted).

She asked other employees to handle one task, and in exchange took over other tasks. This request did not incur any costs for the employer, or block customers from receiving their precious alcohol, nor did it ask the other stewards and stewardesses to perform a duty they would never do otherwise.

All to accommodate a recent conversion to Islam.
Seems she knew she may have to serve alcohol. She had to before the conversion.

What she does on her own time is her business. When she is at work, the duties of the job come first. If not, get a different job.
That is what many are asking govt employees to do. Should be no different in the private sector.

 

[MrT]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

I didn't say ANYTHING about her, you keep trying to dump your own preconceived bull**** in my lap. I'm not talking about Kim Davis, I haven't mentioned her or her situation in this thread until you tried lay a claim on me I did not make, and I have only stated that the two circumstances are not the same thus make for ****ty comparisons. By your laughably desperate attempts to peg a position on me that YOU need me to have to make your shtick work, and the utter inane rationalizations you are justifying your tirades with tells me you think somehow you can play some strange grab ass gotcha hypocrite game.

This gal ain't playing that, she's mocking you for your silliness, pointing out the irrational elements of your argument, refuting your weak attempts to lay claim on what she's saying. The two sitautions aren't at all the same the flight attendant can suck wind she's an idiot, you lose, have a nice ****ing day.

I started our discussion by asking if you supported her. You responded by defending against any comparison. It is rational to draw the conclusion that you supported Kim Davis, but not this flight attendant because the perceived differences in their situations.

If you did not support Kim Davis, then you should have stated such.

 

[Renae]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

I started our discussion by asking if you supported her. You responded by defending against any comparison. It is rational to draw the conclusion that you supported Kim Davis, but not this flight attendant because the perceived differences in their situations.

If you did not support Kim Davis, then you should have stated such.

Whatever.

 

[tres borrachos]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

I started our discussion by asking if you supported her. You responded by defending against any comparison. It is rational to draw the conclusion that you supported Kim Davis, but not this flight attendant because the perceived differences in their situations.

If you did not support Kim Davis, then you should have stated such.

No, actually, it wasn't rational at all to assume Renae supported Kim Davis based on his post. In fact, it's a safer assumption that she doesn't support someone refusing to do her job based on religious beliefs given that she made it clear that there is no logical legal argument to be made in a court of law for this Muslim lady to get what she wants.

 

[B'smith]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal complaint - The Washington Post


For a while, all went well: “The requested accommodation does not interfere with Ms. Stanley’s performance, is a reasonable religious accommodation and has not caused any undue hardship upon ExpressJet,” according to her complaint.

[break]

The airline, as explained in Stanley’s complaint, told her “it was revoking its religious accommodation of excluding service of alcohol from her duties.” Stanley was placed on administrative leave without pay for 12 months — “after which her employment would be administratively terminated.”


This is a nearly perfect Kim Davis mirror as both agreed to do a job then refused when circumstances changed. (The SSM ruling is no different from Stanley's conversion regarding non material changes)

They should both resign if they are not willing to do their jobs and it is not the responsibilities of governments or private corporations to make sure the people who apply will not encounter a personal religious crisis as part of their duties. From what I understand, Saudi Arabia has several openings.

What will be the most interesting aspect is how Kim Davis supporters will react to this case. Maybe we can send Kim Davis and her supporters an e-vite to support Charee Stanley? Unfortunately and quite sadly my fellow Americans have not inspired much confidence regarding equality in this arena but maybe we will be surprised.

I like your Kim Davis comparison. If someone knows beforehand what their job description will be & then refuses to fulfill their responsibilities, they have only themselves to blame.

I've lived in other countries & didn't expect them to speak my first language etc


When in Rome......

 

[Visbek]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

All to accommodate a recent conversion to Islam. Seems she knew she may have to serve alcohol. She had to before the conversion.

I would explain how ludicrous your claim is, but I don't have to.

Both legally and ethically, there is absolutely no requirement for her to know every single religious obligation before she converts.

Both legally and ethically, she is entitled to request a reasonable accommodation for her religious beliefs.

Again, she is not making unreasonable demands here. She is not demanding that the airline bar all customers from consuming alcohol. She is not demanding that the airline point towards Mecca 5 times a day. She is not imposing her views on anyone else. She is simply asking for some consideration for her religious beliefs, by trading one specific duty for another. Her request is not costing her employer any money. It's not delaying the flight. She is not demanding that the pilot serve alcohol.

It's a trivial request. And I'm pretty sure if she was a Mormon instead of a Muslim, some of the discussion would be quite different.

What she does on her own time is her business. When she is at work, the duties of the job come first. If not, get a different job.
That is what many are asking govt employees to do.

Their ignorance does not excuse anyone else's.

The relevant law in the stewardess case is Title VII, which extends civil rights protections to both private and government employees.

What Title VII does NOT do is protect the civil rights of elected officials. They are not employees, and as such are excluded from Title VII, the ADEA (age discrimination) and EPA (Equal Pay Act).

It also does not change the obligations by a specific government office. If the law requires that an office be open on Saturdays, and everyone who works in the office is an Orthodox Jew or a Seventh Day Adventist, the office still has an obligation to be open on Saturday. It's the responsibility of whoever operates the office to follow the law.

Someone who is an elected official doesn't have a choice. Their only option is to ask the legislature to modify the law to adapt to their religious beliefs.

 

[Bodi]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

I am rather explicitly stating that, from what we know of it (which is limited), the complaint itself is quite trivial, and potentially discriminatory. E.g. it should not matter that Ms Stanley wears a hijab and reads a book of "foreign writing" (neither of which interfere with her duties) yet that was included in the complaint.

She was not refusing to serve all food, asking the airline to ban all alcohol sales while she was on board, or point towards Mecca 5 times a day, or read the Koran over the PA system, or even change her schedule (as you erroneously asserted).

She asked other employees to handle one task, and in exchange took over other tasks. This request did not incur any costs for the employer, or block customers from receiving their precious alcohol, nor did it ask the other stewards and stewardesses to perform a duty they would never do otherwise.

Irrelevant. Her job is to sometimes serve alcohol. Could you imagine a waiter who refused to do so? Fired. She should be as well.

 

[Visbek]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

I like your Kim Davis comparison. If someone knows beforehand what their job description will be & then refuses to fulfill their responsibilities, they have only themselves to blame.

The comparison is incorrect.

Kim Davis is not an employee. She's an elected official. She is not covered by the same anti-discrimination protections as Ms Stanely.

"Fire Kim Davis!" is a non sequitur. She can't be fired. The only option would be to remove her from office, and neither the governor nor legislature seems interested in doing that at this time.

It doesn't matter that the law changed midway through Ms Davis' term. Her office has an obligation to issue marriage certificates to same-sex couples. It's up to her to deal with it; and if she doesn't want to do it, ultimately her only option is to ask the legislature to fix it, in a way that complies with Obergefell.

I've lived in other countries & didn't expect them to speak my first language etc

AFAIK: If speaking a specific language is a requirement of a job, and you can't speak that language, you are not protected by Title VII.

And of course, other nations have completely different laws, and willingness to enforce whatever laws are on the books.

 

[Visbek]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

Irrelevant. Her job is to sometimes serve alcohol. Could you imagine a waiter who refused to do so?

Yes. Easily.

First of all, not every restaurant has a liquor license.

Second, the idea of a dedicated waiter is merely convention. If it wasn't for the bizarre and ridiculously inefficient custom of tipping, a restaurant could easily have multiple waiters working on a single table.

Third, Stanley's request for accommodation was not preventing anyone from ordering and consuming alcohol. (Neither would a waiter who doesn't want to handle alcohol.)

Fourth, serving alcohol is a small part of a flight attendant's job, and probably one of the least important. A flight steward is not just a waiter in the sky.

Fifth, apparently it was working just fine, until someone filed a complaint with discriminatory elements, such as discussing her head scarf and reading a book with "foreign words." Hence, she seems to have good grounds to pursue a lawsuit.

 

[mike2810]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

I would explain how ludicrous your claim is, but I don't have to.

Both legally and ethically, there is absolutely no requirement for her to know every single religious obligation before she converts.

Both legally and ethically, she is entitled to request a reasonable accommodation for her religious beliefs.

Again, she is not making unreasonable demands here. She is not demanding that the airline bar all customers from consuming alcohol. She is not demanding that the airline point towards Mecca 5 times a day. She is not imposing her views on anyone else. She is simply asking for some consideration for her religious beliefs, by trading one specific duty for another. Her request is not costing her employer any money. It's not delaying the flight. She is not demanding that the pilot serve alcohol.

It's a trivial request. And I'm pretty sure if she was a Mormon instead of a Muslim, some of the discussion would be quite different.



Their ignorance does not excuse anyone else's.

The relevant law in the stewardess case is Title VII, which extends civil rights protections to both private and government employees.

What Title VII does NOT do is protect the civil rights of elected officials. They are not employees, and as such are excluded from Title VII, the ADEA (age discrimination) and EPA (Equal Pay Act).

It also does not change the obligations by a specific government office. If the law requires that an office be open on Saturdays, and everyone who works in the office is an Orthodox Jew or a Seventh Day Adventist, the office still has an obligation to be open on Saturday. It's the responsibility of whoever operates the office to follow the law.

Someone who is an elected official doesn't have a choice. Their only option is to ask the legislature to modify the law to adapt to their religious beliefs.

we will agree to disagree.

If her complaint went to trail and I was on the jury, she would loose.

I don't care if the what religion a person is.

Why you bending over for this person.

 

[SheWolf]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

The problem here is even after she converted she continued to serve alcohol. So evidently she didn't feel that it conflicted. Even so the air line could move her into a position to not serve alcohol. It was one of her colleges that file a complaint.

Which means she couldn't be a flight attendant.

So what. People are allowed to become more devoted and devout to their faith at any point in their life.

 

[mike2810]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

I would explain how ludicrous your claim is, but I don't have to.

Both legally and ethically, there is absolutely no requirement for her to know every single religious obligation before she converts.

Both legally and ethically, she is entitled to request a reasonable accommodation for her religious beliefs.

Again, she is not making unreasonable demands here. She is not demanding that the airline bar all customers from consuming alcohol. She is not demanding that the airline point towards Mecca 5 times a day. She is not imposing her views on anyone else. She is simply asking for some consideration for her religious beliefs, by trading one specific duty for another. Her request is not costing her employer any money. It's not delaying the flight. She is not demanding that the pilot serve alcohol.

It's a trivial request. And I'm pretty sure if she was a Mormon instead of a Muslim, some of the discussion would be quite different.



Their ignorance does not excuse anyone else's.

The relevant law in the stewardess case is Title VII, which extends civil rights protections to both private and government employees.



What Title VII does NOT do is protect the civil rights of elected officials. They are not employees, and as such are excluded from Title VII, the ADEA (age discrimination) and EPA (Equal Pay Act).

It also does not change the obligations by a specific government office. If the law requires that an office be open on Saturdays, and everyone who works in the office is an Orthodox Jew or a Seventh Day Adventist, the office still has an obligation to be open on Saturday. It's the responsibility of whoever operates the office to follow the law.

Someone who is an elected official doesn't have a choice. Their only option is to ask the legislature to modify the law to adapt to their religious beliefs.

I don't care what religion a person is. If they know going in or after conversion what the job requires, they are making a choice to keep working.

No, she is just saying I don't want to do my job.

Putting politics/law aside, should everyone (private, govt, elected) be entitled to job accommodations based on religions beliefs?

Seems in fairness the law should be equal for everyone.

What if there is not enough employees to keep the govt office open due to religious beliefs. Should some get fired and then hire employees where Saturday work is not a problem?

Why should someone be forced to work Saturday because another employees religion does not allow it. Seems your being unfair to the employee forced to work Saturday.

 

[Visbek]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

I don't care if the what religion a person is.

Why you bending over for this person.

I don't care about the person. I care about the principle.

We, as a society, have an obligation and have made a choice to respect and protect the civil rights of our citizens.

Sometimes, those rights and protections come into conflict. Ms Stanley has the right not to be fired just because of her religion; her request for a reasonable accommodation is an extension of that.

The law, in turn, protects the employer, and customers, and fellow employees from unreasonable requests.

I see no indication that her request is unreasonable. She is not preventing any customers from consuming alcohol. She is not foisting new duties on her co-workers. She is not in any way jeopardizing the safety of the plane. She is not shirking her duties, as she is doing other duties in exchange. Last but not least, selling alcohol is a trivial task, and certainly not her primary function; it's a peripheral one.

 

[Visbek]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

I don't care what religion a person is. If they know going in or after conversion what the job requires, they are making a choice to keep working.

They are also entitled to protection from getting fired on the basis of their religion.

No, she is just saying I don't want to do my job.

No, she is not categorically refusing to do her job. She is not shirking. She is willingly taking up other tasks in exchange for this exemption. And she is not a bartender; serving alcohol is not the core purpose of her job. Air stewards are not waiters on airplanes; serving alcohol is merely one component of one part of her job.

Putting politics/law aside, should everyone (private, govt, elected) be entitled to job accommodations based on religions beliefs?

Legally and ethically, employees are entitled to REASONABLE accommodations.

Elected officials are NOT entitled to those protections. They are not employees, they cannot be fired, and their job duties are mandated by law. They can ask legislators to make accommodations for them, but they cannot request an accommodation that violates the law, and cannot unilaterally command their entire office to violate the law because of religious beliefs.

Seems in fairness the law should be equal for everyone.

I'd say the law is fair. It has to be flexible, because there are too many religions and too many jobs to specify every possible accommodations. And as noted, there are good reasons to distinguish between employees and elected officials.

What if there is not enough employees to keep the govt office open due to religious beliefs. Should some get fired and then hire employees where Saturday work is not a problem?

Again: Such requirements are determined by the law. If the law stipulates that the office must be open, then whoever runs that office has a legal responsibility to find someone to work on that day. That doesn't necessarily require firing anyone.

Further, there are some conditions in which what is a reasonable accommodation in one context is unreasonable in another. It is reasonable for an air steward to request not to serve alcohol; it is unreasonable for a bartender to make the exact same request.

 

[mike2810]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

I don't care about the person. I care about the principle.

We, as a society, have an obligation and have made a choice to respect and protect the civil rights of our citizens.

Sometimes, those rights and protections come into conflict. Ms Stanley has the right not to be fired just because of her religion; her request for a reasonable accommodation is an extension of that.

The law, in turn, protects the employer, and customers, and fellow employees from unreasonable requests.

I see no indication that her request is unreasonable. She is not preventing any customers from consuming alcohol. She is not foisting new duties on her co-workers. She is not in any way jeopardizing the safety of the plane. She is not shirking her duties, as she is doing other duties in exchange. Last but not least, selling alcohol is a trivial task, and certainly not her primary function; it's a peripheral one.

The principle is not fair in application.

ex: forcing one employee to work Saturdays because employee two religion states they shouldn't

A small town with 1 pharmacists who' religion beliefs says they should not fill birth control orders. Should the pharmacists be forced to provide the birth control.

see post 45.

 

[Bodi]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

Yes. Easily.

First of all, not every restaurant has a liquor license.

Second, the idea of a dedicated waiter is merely convention. If it wasn't for the bizarre and ridiculously inefficient custom of tipping, a restaurant could easily have multiple waiters working on a single table.

Third, Stanley's request for accommodation was not preventing anyone from ordering and consuming alcohol. (Neither would a waiter who doesn't want to handle alcohol.)

Fourth, serving alcohol is a small part of a flight attendant's job, and probably one of the least important. A flight steward is not just a waiter in the sky.

Fifth, apparently it was working just fine, until someone filed a complaint with discriminatory elements, such as discussing her head scarf and reading a book with "foreign words." Hence, she seems to have good grounds to pursue a lawsuit.

1st. I am obviously making an analogy to ones that do.
2nd. There is nothing wrong with tipping and if people refused to tip menu items would drastically increase to offset the tips as professional waiters are very well trained and know their stuff.
3rd. Irrelevant. Part of her job is to see to customer's wants
4th. Only relevant point? It is part of her job and she is refusing to do it.
5th. It obviously was not working fine if somebody filed a complaint.

As a teacher should I be allowed to not teach gay students? Should students be forced into a classroom where the teacher is ok with that?

Sometimes, those rights and protections come into conflict. Ms Stanley has the right not to be fired just because of her religion; her request for a reasonable accommodation is an extension of that.

Once a person takes on a government job or one open to the public, such as the wedding cake bakers, then they have VOLUNTARILY given up any notion of hiding behind discriminatory practices. They must serve the public and everybody that resides within it.

 

[Visbek]

Re: Muslim flight attendant suspended for refusing to serve alcohol files federal com

forcing one employee to work Saturdays because employee two religion states they shouldn't

I hate to break it to you, but: That's about as fair as it's going to get.

The law is fairly clear that a reasonable accommodation cannot impose significant costs on the employer. If the employer is going to lose money because it's closed on a Saturday, they have a good case for requiring employees to work on Saturday.

The reality is that there is no one single universal standard that applies to all situations, and no absolutely perfect way to resolve all conflicts of rights. Even if you tried to develop such a standard, you'll screw over more people than you protect. As such, these things are typically handled on a case-by-case basis using general principles.

Thus: "Fairness" does not mean that a rule or law is applied exactly the same way, in complete and willful ignorance of all context.

A small town with 1 pharmacists who' religion beliefs says they should not fill birth control orders. Should the pharmacists be forced to provide the birth control.

Yes.

In that case, the pharmacist is not making a reasonable request. He's imposing a cost on his employer and the customers. He's potentially endangering the health of the customer, and certainly blocking the customer's rights.

FYI, the law varies from state to state, and polls indicate that the public generally shares my opinion.