Constructive Discharge

Toy Company Memo ToCEO FromKen Dilger CC Date1/22/2012 ReEmployee Lawsuit In 1964 Congress passed a Civil Rights law that outlawed major forms for discrimination against African Americans and women. One of the major features of this law was Title septette which prohibits discrimination by employers on the priming coat of race, color, pietism, sex or national origin. Title VII of the Civil Rights procedure of l964 prohibits employers from discriminating against individuals be bear of their religion in hiring, firing, and other terms and conditions of meshing.The basics of Title VII are that employers may not treat employees more or less favorably beca map of their religion and employees cannot be required to participate or refrain from take part in a apparitional activity as a condition of employment. In Title VII, employers moldiness reasonably accept its employees apparitional beliefs and practices unless doing so would create an un due hardship on the employer. A reasonabl e accommodation is one that eliminates the employees conflict between his religious practices and produce requirements and that does not cause an undue hardship for the employer (Rel, 2011).These accommodations range from the employee needing a day for their Holy Sabbath day, wanting to wear religious garb to work or having flexible work schedules to moderate religious vacations. When an employee asks for an accommodation the employer may not simply refuse to do so. If the request is not in best interest of the company because it would result in an undue hardship, the employer must prove the undue hardship that the company would incur. An undue hardship to the company would include anything other than minimal cost to accommodate the religious practice by the employee. Company ResponseMy testimony on how to respond is that it was never our intent to create a workplace environment so impermissible that our employees would release. If the employee thought that the change in schedu le was so intolerable why didnt they file a complaint with their manager? Our records show that there was never a verbal or a written complaint with anyone in management. We can also state the fact that no reasonable person would quit their job over a work schedule that allows them to pick which 4 days of the work week can work. This schedule should actually help them subdue a conflict with working on a religious holiday throughout the year.If the employee does not to drop the lawsuit, there are past precedents showing that their lawsuit, found on constructive discharge, will be very hard for them to win. An employee must prove, prima facia, that they father had their rights violated under the religious accommodation rules of Title VII. They must show that they had a bona fide religious belief that conflicts with an employment requirement, that their employer was made aware of the conflict and that they were subjected to an adverse action not complying with the employment require ment.In this lawsuit the employee did none of the three things mentioned above. Proving a constructive discharge claim will be very hard for the employee to do. There are legal precedents showing that like judicature suit Tepper vs Potter (2007) who have failed to show prima facie in their lawsuits when they claim constructive discharge over their religious holiday suits. C 1 heavy REFERENCE 1 In Cosme v Henderson, the employee asked for a Monday thru Friday work schedule for his mail route and it was granted by his foreman.When the schedule changed to add Saturdays to his mail route, his boss told him not to change his schedule due to his religious beliefs. The employee did change his schedule to work on Saturday and then filed a constructive discharge claim against the company. The courts govern in favor of the employer due to their reasonable efforts to accommodate the employee. This supports my recommendation that since the employee never filed a complaint then there was no way for us to accommodate a religious belief conflict. 2 In Brenner v Diagnostic Center Hospital, Mr. Brenner, an Orthodox Jew, was allowed to switch his work shifts with other employees to accommodate his Jewish Holiday schedule. Later that year Brener failed to exchange work shifts and did not appear for work when he was required to. He later resigned sighting constructive discharge due to the affect the company would not accommodate his Jewish Holiday schedule. The courts ruled in favor of the Defendant based on their effort to accommodate his schedule.The case supports my statement that the companys new work schedule is flexible enough to allow all employees to meet their religious holiday schedule. 3 In Goldmeier v AllState INS, the Goldmeiers who are Orthodox Jews could not work on Saturdays during the winter months when AllState changed their corporate policy on their work schedule. AllState did not allow an ejection when the Goldmeiers asked for one due to the new work sch edule. When the Goldmeiers informed AllState about the constructive discharge lawsuit, AllState then allowed them to work on Sunday to execute up for their religious conflict on Saturday.The court ruled in favor of AllState on the facts that the employee did not prove prima facia in their lawsuit and that AllState did not signify to create a hostile work environment when changing the work schedule. This supports my recommendation that since the employee did not file a complaint with upper management that they have no claim of constructive discharge. The case also supports my statement that we did not intend to create a hostile environment to make employees quit only if rather to accommodate production. C2 LEGAL RECOMMENDATIONMy first recommendation to avoid lawsuits in the future is to implement a formal complaint system for the employees to use to communicate to management about workplace conditions that they think are unfair. This will help the company correct any problems befo re they turn into lawsuits. Another recommendation that I would make is not to use a change in workplace environment or schedule to get employees to resign rather than having to harry them. Doing this can lead to a bad workplace environment for management employees who are in place to enforce this rule.My last recommendation is to have an slip by interview with anyone leaving the company. This will allow the employee to give insight on why they are leaving and to make sure there are no ill will towards the company. . References Brener v Diagnostic Center Hospital, 671 F. 2d 141, (5th Cir, 1982) Cosme v Henderson, 287, F. 3d 152, 158 (2d Cir, 2002) Goldmeier v AllState Insurance Company, 337, F. 3d 629 (6th Cir, 2003) Religious Accommodation in the piece of work Your Rights and Obligations, Anti-Defamation League, New York, New York, (2011).Constructive DischargeConstructive Discharge occurs when an employees working conditions are considered to be so bad due to a policy or enforce ment of that policy that the employee feels compelled to resign from the employer. This Constructive Discharge claim was filed under the section of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 after a work schedule policy change took place. The employee filed this claim post-resignation.This employee has claimed that the change is religious discrimination due to requiring that he work on a religious holy day. To make note to the case, please keep in mind that this employee resigned after the policy took effect at the beginning of the year. Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 it is prohibited for any employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. This is in regards to any current or former employee.The term religion includes all religious observances, practices, and beliefs. For this case to be proven as religious discrimination under Title VII, the employee must show that he (1) holds a devout religious belief that conflicts with an empl oyment requirement (2) has informed the employer about the conflict and (3) has been discharged, disciplined or subjected to discriminatory treatment for failing to comply with the conflicting employment requirement.Title VII states that it is the employers obligation to reasonably accommodate requests by staff members to practice their sincerely held religious beliefs and observances. For this case, Reasonably means that accommodating these practices would not cause hardship or conflict with normal business operations.