Scenario:

2 SALARIED Support Personnel hired to do the same job.  One not religous the other shomer Shabbas.  So at Sundown Fri to Sundown Sat one is unavailable to provide the on-call support.  If there is a problem over the weekend it is most likely to occur in that time window.  Therefore the non religous employee will be stuck with that problem throughout the weekend because once engaged its hard to turn over to someone else.  Not to mention all the holidays that the religous employee will observe outside of weekend support.  There is also no compensation for salaried employees as this is part of the job responsibility to provide on-call support.

While I can appreciate religion and harbor no ill will to the religous employee for observing his beliefs, there is an unfair amount of work for the non religous employee.

There's a bit more to it than this but this is the general idea.  It's a tough situation.  Any thoughts?

Have the non religious employee start to observe certain holidays?

It can be tricky to work around the religion though because if the company doesn't want to discriminate, then to avoid any legal implications they have to allow the worker to observe his faith.

Usually though time off or year-end bonuses can help eleviate this situation. Since there are 52 weeks of the year, divide by 2 and each employee gets 26 weekends they have to do on call.

Unfortunately though most departments can be like that. Look at someone who may be a mother. If the school calls and her child is sick, then she has to leave work and go home, while the other "non-moms" are left at work.
 

That said, there is to me a world of difference between a mother attending to her sick child and the requirements of a religion, which is when all is said and done just a pattern for life, not an instinctive thing.

Quote (Alan Bennett):

I don't mind people who aren't what they seem. I just wish they'd make their mind up.

But what if the child had a disease of some sort, where the child was often sick? Then the parent would have to leave more frequently.

I'm not saying that both situations are the exact same. But with support and any type of work, you run into situations that seem unfair to one person.

From the religious guy's perspective, he probably finds it unfair that the business completely shuts down to observe Christmas or Easter, or other religious holidays while he may have to take vacation days or use personal time to observe his.

In response to LadySlinger, The office splits the Holidays pretty fairly and more so in favor of his religion since the Parent Company is Israeli.  Thats not really an issue.  However when it comes to weekends where he is only available on Sunday and most of the problems will occur from Fri to Sat, he pretty much has his weekends free while the other Employee will be swamped with work.

Its really nobody's fault, it just is what it is.  And bringing this situation to upper management in a company where that religion is dominant is very touchy.

according to law in the usa the company must be responsive to religious observations.     to not do so is considered relgious discrimination, and is actionable by law.   the company would put themselves in a position of possible legal action if it does not allow the employee to honor their religious tenants.   this includes honoring their sabath, holy days, religious practices.

that being said, the tenants must be valid to their faith, supported as tenants of their fiath by their religion, and they must demonstrate a practice of their religious tanants which they site.    

for instance, they can not say that they are unable to work on their holy day for reasons of practicing their religion, and then not do so, and remain valid.   if they say they must attend a service, and then do not it invalidates their claim of religious observation.    this goes for the unbeliever as well who claims a religious holiday, and then makes no religious observation.

http://www.aclj.org/Issues/Resources/Document.aspx?ID=867.  

check this link, good info on subject.  

Do they get paid for the Sunday?  If so, I'd consider practising their religion, too. /wink

Carlsberg don't run I.T departments, but if they did they'd probably be more fun.

actually upon further investigation, they have to have a firmly held religious belief for it to be valid.  it does not have to be supported by any official doctrine of a religion, and they do not have to attend a service on sabbath in order to claim they have a firmly held religious belief against working on the sabbath.     the workers religious life, and the fulfillment of their tenants of faith is not considered an evidence of their firmly held belief.   in other words, they do not have to appear to practice the religion or belief to qualify.   

While it's true that in order to be within the law you have to allow your employees to follow their religious tenets, what about the discrimination against the other employee who does not follow the same religion?  Isn't that person being discriminated against as well by being forced to give up all weekend hours because of someone else's religion?

Wouldn't it seem that for a support position the company would want to hire more people that have a higher degree of availability?  To lay all weekend support on one person just doesn't seem fair, religion or not.  Either that, or the person that's stuck with covering everyone else on the weekend should demand hourly pay.  That would partially compensate the inconvenience.

And yes, I work on the Sabbath quite a bit, and sometimes it's not by choice.  Not once have I stood up and screamed about religious persecution, however.

the person who has no religious tenets has no obstruction to working on any day.   inconvenience, yes, but every day of work is an inconvenience, or we would not get paid.  so those with no religious beliefs do not have the same substantiation for it being more than an inconvenience.  federaly in the usa, free practice of religion is contitutionaly protected from congressional law.  congress does not even have a right to make a law which restricts the practices of religion.    they do however have laws forbidding religious discrimination.   that pretty much means you just have to deal with it, or move on to another employer.   they may have a similiar situation though.  

most companies charge a premium for after hours work, or figure it in to the contract for service.   they do this to make some extra money for the employees inconvenience, even though the company has no inconvenience or additional cost.       
 

How would the company deal with the support issue if the person without religious tenets left?  This issue should be considered in order to find a way to avoid unfairly burdening that employee.  The other option is to avoid it, and deal with the question when the employee gets fed up and leaves.  Either way, it needs to be considered.

Also, how would the employee without religious tenets feel if the employee with the religious tenets left?  Would handling all of the support be an issue if they were the only employee?  Would they want extra compensation and consideration then, or would it simply be a part of the job?  The employee should consider these questions and use the answers as guidance for dealing with upper management.

The true issue here isn't an employee's religious beliefs.  The true issue is how a company is handling weekend support with only a single employee.  After all, when the weekend comes, that is what they have.

+1 to KornGeek.

Either find someone else to work part-time on alternate weekends to provide support, or simply don't offer support on those weekends.

Chip H.

____________________________________________________________________
If you want to get the best response to a question, please read FAQ222-2244 first

this is a $legal$ consideration first and foremost.   The position of legal liabilty of the company is huge if they do not allow the employee the time off for religious purposes.

This may not be desirable, but the compnay may possibly respond to a request for a change in the work week for an employee to make the other employees Sabbath day a regularly scheduled work day giving them a weekday off in its place.
     My request might be to work 4 ten hour days, having three days off per week, one on call, and two off consecutively.   In this case, Work Tuesday-Friday, on call Thursday-Saturday.  Sunday, and Monday no work, no on call.   I would love a three day weekend every week with one of the three days on call.   

I would recommend speaking to upper managment and HR.  While this is a legal issue it's also a problem the company should seriously review.  I'm not suggesting that the religious person work on Sabbath.  

Some of the ones listed above are sound.  If its a large company, perhaps there are people from other departments that can help out.

What I would do is clearly write down what the situation is.  Then define the problems or potential problems.  Provided tentative, reasonable solutions that can be reviewed, be open (non-defensive) to to alternatives that might be provided.  Be proactive and constructive.

Once you've done that sit on what you have a couple of days.  Then review it to make sure your really saying what you want to say.  

Setup a meeting with your boss, then HR and cross your fingers.  

That said, Companies don't want to lose good, productive employees.  Before you go out on a limb though you might want to make sure management thinks the non-religious employee is a valuable one.  

Spoke with a friend who has done legal work involving religious discrimination.    Turns out that even requesting the employee who has expressed his religious restrictions to work on their stated Holy days, sabbath, etc. can be easily framed as religious discrimination in a court of law.   The only legal approach is if the company chooses to prove and document that the accomodation of the religious belief would cause the business to be fiscaly unfeesible in the marketplace, and there is no one else who can do the work.    Fairness is not a legal consideration, other than to not discriminate against the religious practice.   He said that management employees with the skills to perform the job must even be considered as someone else who can do the work in place of an hourly wage employee.  Regardless of if it is their normal duties.  
   So sounds like, do not even ask the religious person to make concessions.    he says the legal liability in these cases is not just compensatory, but punitive damages are always sought and almost always awarded, in order to punish, or make an example of the employer.   The employee can simply quit upon the request if they have already made their religious tenets known, then bring suit against you.   He said he thought the employee wins in about 85% of cases taken to court, and most are settled out of court in the employees favor to avoid bad press, and no admition of guilt.   
Also, he said you can not pay, compensate, or promote the guy without the religious observances more because his religion does not get in the way.   According to him, that is the definition of religious discrimination.   

I would tread lightly, and do not be the point man, unless it is you that are working the weekends.   

You mention the non-religious guy will be "swamped with work" Fri-Sat on-call, sounds like you need to sort that out first especially if he isn't paid for on-call.

aarenot, duh!  ;)

I work closely with the religious community Christian, Jewish, Islamic, Buddhist….. and others.  My spouse deals with this from a senior management HR level regularly.  One of my closest friends is an attorney specializing in employment law and is of a non-Christian faith.  I have a strong management, financial and technical background.  We talk about this kind of thing a lot.

It's important to note this particular company sounds like its Islamically owned (was that a word?) and perhaps under Islamic management.  There’s potential for a strong legal argument that the non-religious employee is being discriminated against.

Not addressing a business issue is bad business.  There are always legal ways of constructively addressing this problem.  

Also, keep in mind that I stated, “I'm not suggesting that the religious person work on Sabbath. “  There are many ways this can be looked at to promote a solution that will not create a legal hassle and will actually prevent one.  That’s why tishimself needs to include management and HR in addressing it.  It’s also why tishimself needs to really think about the issue, document the problems related to the issue and provide potential solutionS for review.  It’s also why tishimself needs to determine how critical keeping the non-religious employee happy is to management before sticking his neck out.  tishimself should not try addressing this problem directly.

Surely the religious employee is simply unable to meet the requirements of the role for which they are employed, and unable to meet their contractual obligations, (for whatever reason).

Sorry, but I have no sympathy for anyone who cannot meet obligations they have freely agreed to as part of any contract. If someone is perpetually, consistantly and permanently unable to perform a role in a company for whatever reason then surely the company must be able to move staff positions around in order to meet its business requirements? Being unable to re-arrange its work force in this, (or any similar), situation is just plain silly.

Its got nothing to do with discrimination, but simply with getting employees to perform the roles they are conracted and being remunerated for. Basically the company should never have employed someone in a role which they are unable to perform in the first place as they were an unsuitable candidate.

Rhys
The use of COBOL cripples the mind; its teaching should, therefore, be regarded as a criminal offense Edsgar Dijkstra

Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

Interesting indeed.   However the reality of law is that your opinion while certainly you are entitled to it, is not legally defensable.    Disclosure of religious practices, or beliefs is not contractually required by law in the USA.   practice of such is also not legally grounds for dismissal, or negative job review, or negative consequences for such.   It is also not legal cause for breach of an employment contract, even if it disallows fulfillment of certain aspects of the contract.  

While it may not be reasonable to some, it is certainly precedent by law.  

That seems to be the case.

I do wonder though.... I would certainly not want to work on a Sunday, and for me that is a religious observance.

But I wouldn't apply for a job that mandated me to work on a Sunday.

Is it me?

Fee

The question should be Is it worth trying to do? not Can it be done?

Again, my take on this situation (and from the sounds of things, the only legally protected view) is that the religious employee is not a factor at all.  In terms of handling the on-call duties, this person is not available.  Thus, this person should be ignored from the discussion.

This leaves the company with the following issue:  There is only one employee to handle the on-call duties, and this employee receives an undue amount of calls on weekends.

Should this employee receive additional compensation for these duties?  Probably, but you would be hard-pressed to find a company willing to pay extra for work that was already agreed upon as part of the current pay rate.

Can something be worked out where hours spent handling on-call duties result in comp time to be taken at other points in the week?  Possibly, but again, the company already has an agreement in place.  They are unlikely to be motivated to provide any sort of additional compensation or consideration.

Should another employee (new hire, or current employee) be brought in to share the on-call duties?  Definitely.  Failure to do this simple action will inevitably result in the on-call employee burning out and/or leaving.  This will leave the company with nobody on-call.  It is better to find a second person while the first one is still there than to find a replacement when you have nobody to do the job.  Even if the on-call person doesn't leave, they might get sick, go on vacation, get hit by a bus, etc.

The religious person, the hours they work, and the amount they get paid are secondary and an unnecessary distraction to this issue.  What another employee in my company gets paid is between them and the company.  What I get paid is between me and the company.  If either of us is unhappy with our current wage, we should address it with management.  However, how much the other gets paid is really none of our business.

Slightly parallel to the main thrust;

I used to be in the military. Several places I worked at had Junior ranks rostered to do "Tea Bar Mechanic" - Key Orderly Duty.

The Tea Bar bit involved collecting money from the section troops for tea, coffee, cold drinks, snacks, etc. It also involved making up rolls, e.g. cheese & onion, cheese & tomato, ham, sausage, boiled egg, etc. (This was before Food Hygiene certification, of course!)

Some of the guys belonged to religious groups whose beliefs forbade them touching, eating or handling ham or any pork products. This meant that other people had to be rostered along with the Duty bloke to make sausage or ham rolls and serve them, hand out packets of bacon crisps, etc.

This caused resentment and frustration, leading to low morale and ostrascism of the pork-avoider(s)

What is the TT Group's take on this?

Chris

When his pin is pulled, Mr Grenade is not our friend - USMC Infantry Manual

Chris - if it's of any help, I have before me a bag of 'Roast Chicken' crisps (chips in the US I guess) which are apparently 'suitable for vegetarians'. Go figure.

Quote (Alan Bennett):

I don't mind people who aren't what they seem. I just wish they'd make their mind up.

Why not just give the guy that has to do the extra work a few extra days off if he has a busy weekend?  

JohnThePhoneGuy

"If I can't fix it, it's not broke!"

From the ACLJ's website
Title VII: How it Protects Employe
...
"The employer is also required to reasonably accommodate the employee's religious beliefs unless such accommodation would result in undue hardship to the employer.
16 "Accommodation" means that employer neutrality is not enough.
17 In general, an employer is required to accommodate an employee's adherence to the principles of his religion unless such accommodation will actually interfere with the operations of the employer."

Note the "reasonably" and "unless"s in there...
(since the company is hq in Israel, I would betcha it isn't owned by Muslems)

cheers
Jay

Also, religious beliefs are not above the law. For instance, the courts have upheld the need for Muslim women to display their face on Drivers Licenses even though their religion forbids female facial display and graven images (photos).

-------------------------
The trouble with doing something right the first time is that nobody appreciates how difficult it was - Steven Wright

There is existing law for religious observance in the work place.   It is not likely a company ID requiring picture would recieve the same judgement.  The difference is that what you mentioned is not a civil law matter, employment law is.   

While religious observance and practice is not above the law, the law does heavily favor the employees right to practice with huge protections.   The law is written such that if the employee makes known their religious objections, or practice requirements, the employer must demonstrate they have accomodated them, or prove undue hardship.   Undue hardship does not mean expense, but expense which makes the business financially unfeesible in the markerplace, with no other person who can perform the duties required.   This includes anyone qualified to do the needed duties, including management, and employees with other job titles, or descriptions from the employee involved.
The law is not a matter of what we think is fair, or equitable, it is however about compliance.     This is one case where the burden of proof is on the employer that they have undue hardship.  

I see what you are all saying, I just don't understand why someone who knows they cannot work on a Saturday ends up being employed in a job which requires them to work on a Saturday.

I wouldn't apply for a job that required me to work on a Sunday.

Fee

The question should be Is it worth trying to do? not Can it be done?

Fee,

Often times, the requirements for a job evolve over time.  The position you apply for, interview for, and accept may not be the job you are doing 6 months later.

I have seen one time an employee was hired, then a month later told he would be on call.   He said it was not part of the job offer he accepted, and he was not willing to take the new position which required on call service.   

They fired him, he did get his unemployment benefits.   

Oh I appreciate that the job may change over time, and if it does then that is a different issue. I had thought from this thread that two guys were hired to do this same job with full knowledge of the on-call requirements. That just seems almost negligent to me.

Fee

The question should be Is it worth trying to do? not Can it be done?

I only mentioned the lack of pre-knowledge of the on call duties in some situations because I wonder if this situation followed the same pattern.    The way it sounds with company policy, it may have been disclosed, and accomodated prior to the employment for the religious exemption.  Often this duty aspect is considered a negative, and glossed over, or is undisclosed until after the hiring.   
Personally, I would just not pursue a position for which the offer disclosed required work at times I was unwilling to work.