Company's faith-based holiday policy doesn't fly
Q: My daughter works for a car dealership that employs 19 people. The owner, an Orthodox Jew, gives every employee two paid holidays a year: Thanksgiving and Christmas. He personally observes every major Jewish holiday and insists his five Jewish employees take those days off with pay. The owner and Jewish employees also clock out early on Fridays to observe Shabbat, but in the winter, when Shabbat starts earlier, they do not come in earlier to make it an eight-hour day. Morale is low for the rest of the workers, who have just two paid holidays and work a full eight-hour day on winter Fridays.
This does not seem good policy, but is it illegal discrimination based on religion?
A: The owner has the right to decide what paid holidays to grant, says employment attorney Jonathan Segal of Duane Morris: "The problem is when you mete out benefits or pay based on religion." Not only is it "indefensible" to give extra paid holidays only to members of a particular faith, but it's also illegal to require employees who share your faith to observe the same practices as you.
To avoid discrimination, the owner could grant an equal number of floating paid holidays to all - including those who have no dogma in this fight. Allowing workers flex or unpaid time to observe their faiths would be a reasonable accommodation, as long as that doesn't disproportionately burden co-workers.
Workers can complain directly to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, but Segal recommends approaching the owner first, bringing fact sheets from eeoc.gov to explain why his lopsided holiday policy is illegal.
-
Q: A colleague, the regional director of multiple businesses in my field, contacted me regarding an opening, scheduled the interview and forwarded my résumé to the hiring manager.
The day of the interview, my colleague called, sounding embarrassed, to tell me the interview was canceled. He said the manager had tossed my résumé aside and stated, "I'm not interviewing anyone American-born."
Is there any recourse?
A: Even well-meaning employers have been known to speak carelessly while trying to increase diversity, Segal notes. But rejecting an applicant because of national origin is "blatant discrimination," says Segal - yes, even if the nation of origin is the U.S. of A.
If you can confirm that's what happened to you, Segal suggests you - or better yet, your colleague - ask the supervisor to reconsider interviewing you, because "American-born" is not a legal criterion for rejection. And your director colleague should be urging everyone in his sphere of influence to ensure their hiring practices are unbiased. Blind applications and diverse interview panels would be an excellent start.
---
Ask Karla Miller about your work dramas and traumas by emailing wpmagazine@washpost.com.