Best Toy Ever Company
Mr. Charles Smith CEO
Dear Charles, My findings for the claim filed against Best Toy Every Company in regards to changing the work schedule policy is as follows: A. Constructive Discharge: A discriminatory constructive discharge occurs when the employer discriminatorily creates working conditions that are so difficult, unpleasant, or intolerable that a reasonable person in the aggrieved person's position would feel compelled to resign. In other words, the aggrieved person is essentially forced to resign under circumstances where the resignation is tantamount to the employer's termination or discharge of the employee. (eeoc.gov) As a company we need to ...view middle of the document...
Religious discrimination includes failing to reasonably accommodate an employee’s religious practices where the accommodation does not impose undue hardship (EEOC- Self Print Document). Our previous employee is claiming that the changing of schedule is imposing on their religious practices. An item relevant to titles VII is that accommodation needs to be reasonable, but does not pose business hardship. More details to this scenario are not known, but if the employer can prove a hardship would have occurred, denial of requested days would not be against Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. An example of a hardship would be to need to hire more employees to cover the day, which would amount to an more profit money being used to pay salaries.
Best Toy Ever Company
C. If the employee intends on taking the company to court there are cases below which support our previous actions with the employee. I believe we should “litigate” the case against with out previous employee. CI.Recommend how the company should respond to the employee’s charge of constructive discharge. a. Neal vs. Comfort Inn Oceanfront South in Nags Head, N.C.- After a management change, the employees request of not working on her Sabbath was refused and she was fired. The case was settled in Ms. Neals favor. The difference between this case and our previous employee is that Ms. Neal was discharged due to religious reasons, and our employee electively quit. This case went to court, (they were unable to reach a settlement before going to court) which resulted in being ordered to pay $45000.00 and implement and train employees on anti discrimination policies. i. Unlike this case, our employee was not fired. I believe with all data involved our company went through the proper process in changing our employees scheduled work times. Our employee choose not to accept the accommodations made for them (transfer to office department) and left electively due to the company needed to amend schedules for increased production. b. Spalding vs. Senior Living Properties, LLC. - a similar event took place in this case. New management shifted in, and did not accommodate the items (of religion) the last management did. We need to make sure that in all current employees and future employees that accommodations were offered for religious beliefs. This case was settled in Spaldings favor due to the manner the management acted. The district judge signed a consent decree for a payment of $42500.00, annual training for three years on the laws against religious discrimination in the workplace, amended the companies anti discrimination policy to include Title VIIs prohibition on religious discrimination. i. This case looks as if the employee discussed with management, her commitment to her religion. Management was going to make no accommodations for the employee. Our scenario is different due to the ability to transfer the employee to the office area. If our employee chose not to take the...