Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/muslim-flight-attendant-expressjet-airlines-alcohol/

...For religious reasons.
I'm always on the fence in these cases.
There are things i wont do due to certain reasons, so, i've never actively sought out a job where the issue would come up for me. Why would i? Why would anyone?

If part of her job description is to "serve alcohol to customers", then she should be fired. Really that simple.

Fire her. This really shouldn't be a question.

Thats not as bad the the county clerk currently jail for not giving homosexuals marriage license.

Life is wacky that way, before we had the muslim woman upset they wouldn't serve her a certain thing on a plane, and now we have a muslim woman upset they wouldn't let her not serve a certain thing on a plane.

But anyways, this really should be an open and shut case..she either does her job or is fired, but why do I get the feeling because she did it over religious reasons..it won't be so open and shut?

Yup fire her. Don't take a job that may ask you to go against your religious beliefs.

K.
Thought it might just have been my old man crankiness acting up.

I'm on the "fire her" bandwagon. Or at least a warning. Maybe a suspension? It doesn't seem too bad a violation, so I'd likely err on the side of less punishment, but a job is a job. As with the marriage story recently, it's not someone being barred from practicing their religion, it's someone imposing their religious beliefs on others in a non-religious setting. Any of these people are free to hold their convictions, just not to illegally impose them.

Btw, marriage lady was jailed for contempt of court, not strictly because of the initial refusal. A subtle, but legally and, imo, ethically important distinction.

Originally posted by riv6672
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/muslim-flight-attendant-expressjet-airlines-alcohol/

...For religious reasons.
I'm always on the fence in these cases.
There are things i wont do due to certain reasons, so, i've never actively sought out a job where the issue would come up for me. Why would i? Why would anyone? ...yea... i'm not on that fence. call me an *******. but i think discriminating against people who can't perform the job description they're hired on for should be allowed.

example: the broad that won't give out same sex marriage licenses based on her religion... fire her ass. you have every right to be as religious as you want. it just might mean you can't do certain jobs. just like if i decide to become a vegan and go try to work at a restaurant, and say oh but i won't serve meat... they would be smart to either not hire or fire me.

another example... the muslim broad that sued abercrombie... she should have lost. they're a fashion based business... if you can't conform to the fashion, then you have no business working there. **** outta here with that bullshit.

edit- just realized the clerk is in jail.... that's pretty funny lol. serves her right imo... maybe next time that cow will think twice before making so much noise

She should be given a warning, and written up, and if that doesn't work, the company should terminate her employment.

Did she sign the dotted line?

^^^To get the job? One would think so.

Originally posted by Robtard
If part of her job description is to "serve alcohol to customers", then she should be fired. Really that simple.


Or arrange a compromise. Set up to pass orders to someone else, transfer to other tasks like handling border passes maybe... not staying in that position.

But if they can't? Well, it *is* the job.

I am for religious exemptions on a number of things, like dress code, but if the job description is drink server of drinks you won't serve, then they should not be in that job.




The problem with that one is County Clerk is elected (which is why she's in jail for contempt of court after the court ordered her, rather than fired like someone in a fire-able job might be). The other problem is she's disallowing anyone else in the office to give 'em out either....

So I'm going to somewhat play devil's advocate here. I say somewhat because I do wish everyone would just be able to follow the same set of rules. Yet there is precedence in our country for allowing accommodations based on religious or culture differences. I also understand there are so many diverse cultures out there that finding one specific set of rules that is fair to everyone is hard. So REASONABLE cultural allowances are something that is okay with me.

For instance allowing Native American kids to keep their hair long in schools that require long hair be cut. Or allowing certain men to not have to shave their beards in work places.

I'm okay with this stuff as long as it doesn't pose or hurt other people. So to some degree if this story is correct than this lady has a case to make. And if her claim is correct that she got suspended over a complaint about a head scarf for 12 months then that is probably a case she will win. Of course getting suspended for just a head scarf is fishy so there could be more that comes to light which shows the muslim women was expecting unreasonable accommodations to her faith.

Now I'm sure some people here are going to want to jump on me and call me a hypocrite. Like how can you defend this Muslim Woman but be against the Kentucky woman. Simple they aren't the same to me.

According to this article the muslim flight attendant said she was doing things so that customers were still receiving their alcoholic beverages. She also wasn't only serving the beverages to certain people while refusing service to others. I'll be honest if the Kentucky lady simply said that she refused to issue the marriage licenses personally but still allowed her deputies to issues the licenses I doubt anyone here would have cared much. I mean Kim Davis is still a bigoted person against same sex couples but if her office was still issuing the certificates no one would have complained or filed suit against her.

Once again my defense of the muslim woman hinges on her making reasonable accommodations for her faith. If it turns what she was asking for was unreasonable in the context of her job by all means she needs to be terminated from her position. Personally I don't have enough information on how a flight attendants job works to know if her demands are reasonable. Although I'm sure some people here will tell me.

Also according to the article the woman didn't become a muslin until a month after she joined.

Hm, if she was taking orders and then having her fellow attendants actually deliver them and generally made arrangements so no-one is unduely inconvenienced, then, yea, that's *not* a problem.

Originally posted by Newjak
Once again my defense of the muslim woman hinges on her making reasonable accommodations for her faith. If it turns what she was asking for was unreasonable in the context of her job by all means she needs to be terminated from her position.



Good distinction. I don't think this is playing devil's advocate so much as it is clarifying your response. Most who are for some punishment for her (warning, suspension, firing, etc.) would probably agree with this if pressed.

I don't think she necessarily needs to be fired, but she shouldn't be distributing beverages. Plenty of other jobs in an airline.

She needs to be fired if they intend to have her doing this again, since obviously she won't do it.

My question is why she even agreed to take a job in the first place that she thought would encroach on her religious beliefs? There are plenty of jobs out there.

Giving someone a special exemption for religion when it comes to school is one thing. School is a thing every child needs. Flight attendant jobs are not in the same category.

Originally posted by Surtur
She needs to be fired if they intend to have her doing this again, since obviously she won't do it.

My question is why she even agreed to take a job in the first place that she thought would encroach on her religious beliefs? There are plenty of jobs out there.

Giving someone a special exemption for religion when it comes to school is one thing. School is a thing every child needs. Flight attendant jobs are not in the same category. The article does say she didn't convert to a muslim until after a month into her job. So she may not have thought it would interfere at the time.

But then the second she converted should of set off a light bulb in her head...because she would of *had* to of served alcohol at this job at some point. She had to know it was a thing.

But what you just said makes it even worse to me and sets a weird precedent. Who wants an employee that *after* you hire them..a month later they suddenly up and decide "yeah I can't do certain things required of me because of religion".

You are kind of stuck because since it has to do with religion if you take any action...we are going to have to hear about it. In a normal job if a person refused to do their job they'd get fired, it's not news. But toss religion into the mix..

Biggest problem I see is if they did give her an exemption then..well, what about the clerk refusing to marry people due to religious reasons? She is in jail, she wasn't giving any exemption. I mean just like the whole "she wasn't muslim when she took the job" gay marriage was not legal when this clerk took the job.

I'm not even entirely sure if the Quran forbids serving other people alcohol if they're not Muslim. She might just be taking it to an extreme because she's a new convert.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I'm not even entirely sure if the Quran forbids serving other people alcohol if they're not Muslim. She might just be taking it to an extreme because she's a new convert.

I don't even get that at all. I was a Christian so I went through the whole BS of "no meat on Fridays during Lent" and all that. I can see a person not being allowed to have certain things. But not being allowed to *give* them to other people? Why does it matter what someone else does?

Also the way you phrased it made it seem like they are allowed to serve alcohol to other Muslims? Or is it they are only forbidden to serve to Muslims?

Why does it matter? What's it to you exactly? If it doesn't agree with your viewpoints, you ask weird questions? If it DOES say that you aren't allowed to, I'm sure it also gives you a reason.

Originally posted by Surtur
But then the second she converted should of set off a light bulb in her head...because she would of *had* to of served alcohol at this job at some point. She had to know it was a thing.

But what you just said makes it even worse to me and sets a weird precedent. Who wants an employee that *after* you hire them..a month later they suddenly up and decide "yeah I can't do certain things required of me because of religion".

You are kind of stuck because since it has to do with religion if you take any action...we are going to have to hear about it. In a normal job if a person refused to do their job they'd get fired, it's not news. But toss religion into the mix..

Biggest problem I see is if they did give her an exemption then..well, what about the clerk refusing to marry people due to religious reasons? She is in jail, she wasn't giving any exemption. I mean just like the whole "she wasn't muslim when she took the job" gay marriage was not legal when this clerk took the job. I think I addressed this in my first post.

The article makes it sound that she said she made sure accommodations were made so people were served the beverages they ordered.

I also think I mentioned some of the distinctions between this case as stated in the article vs what the Kentucky woman did. For instance the Muslim woman did not discriminate against people by only offering alcoholic beverages to certain adult citizens only and ignoring everyone else. The Kentucky woman also told her entire office not to issue the licenses. I doubt we would be hearing much if Kim simply had her other deputies issue the same sex marriage certificates while she only administered heterosexual ones.

Like other people said based on the what the article says I don't know if she should be fired. If she is still fulling most of her duties and this is the only thing she needs someone else to do I'm not too concerned about it. If there are things she can do instead of serving the drinks so that she is still being productive to the company it's not that big of a problem.

The issue becomes if the requests she is making to the company are unreasonable for them to fulfill. Like if she is asking for to not serve any alcohol on flights she is on. That would be unreasonable. Or if she were causing disturbances by being rude to people that are drinking.

Originally posted by Q99
Hm, if she was taking orders and then having her fellow attendants actually deliver them and generally made arrangements so no-one is unduely inconvenienced, then, yea, that's *not* a problem.
Actually its as big a problem as the airline/her co-workers choose to make of it.
If just one other flight attendant complains about having to do that woman's job, and nothing is done about it, the airline then opens itself up to legal action from THAT person.
Its just a big ol' can of worms.

Fire the County Court Lady.

Fire the Flight Attendant Lady.

And get rid of the American Civil Rights act (and perhaps create a newer and more relevant version that fixes the problems with the ACRA1964).

Problems are easy to deal with if you get rid of the no-nonsense approach.

Cant help but think there are some bugs in that plan.