Page 101 of 103 FirstFirst ... 519199100101102103 LastLast
Results 1,001 to 1,010 of 1026

Thread: Christian Woman Fired from Burger King for Wearing Skirt Instead of Pants

  1. #1001
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    El Monte, California
    Last Seen
    07-05-13 @ 11:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,471

    Re: Christian Woman Fired from Burger King for Wearing Skirt Instead of Pants

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    I'm not refusing to see anything. She was arbitrarily seeking to ignore the dress code of the employer. She voluntarily applied for a job which she knew had a dress code that did not conform to her religious beliefs. You refuse to acknowledge this fact. She expects the company to accomodate her religious beliefs. Other than a law...why should they have to?



    From someone who did not have the authority to make such an accomodation. The right thing for him to have done is to confirm that it was OK to do such a thing from his superiors.



    He was just enforcing BK policy. Should he really be condemned for that?
    1. When does one first see a "dress code"? Not when she "applied for the job" like you stated
    2. How did she "ignore" the dress code? Source?
    3. There you go trying to remove a key piece of this puzzle again. IT IS A LAW and/or regulation. As a condition for BK to do business in the USA, they must attempt to follow it or face litigation.

    What is your point in trying to say, "Well why can't they, if it was not a law?" That is the very point of this whole thing

  2. #1002
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    El Monte, California
    Last Seen
    07-05-13 @ 11:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,471

    Re: Christian Woman Fired from Burger King for Wearing Skirt Instead of Pants

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    So in otherwords you have nothing more than "its the law".
    LOL what is your point? IT IS THE LAW. Are you trying to argue "what if's"? What if it was not a law BK has to follow? Do you not agree with it? Again, what is your point?

  3. #1003
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,886
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Christian Woman Fired from Burger King for Wearing Skirt Instead of Pants

    Quote Originally Posted by hawke812 View Post
    1. When does one first see a "dress code"? Not when she "applied for the job" like you stated
    One would have to be deaf, dumb, and blind to not know that BK has a dress code. Are you attempting to say that she didn't know about it beforehand?

    Quote Originally Posted by hawke812 View Post
    2. How did she "ignore" the dress code? Source?
    Where did I say that she "ignored" the dress code? Source?

    Quote Originally Posted by hawke812 View Post
    3. There you go trying to remove a key piece of this puzzle again. IT IS A LAW and/or regulation. As a condition for BK to do business in the USA, they must attempt to follow it or face litigation.
    And you keep avoiding my question. Let me try and phrase it in a different way. Why should this law be followed as it applies to this case? Just because it is "the law" is not a good enough reason.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  4. #1004
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,173

    Re: Christian Woman Fired from Burger King for Wearing Skirt Instead of Pants

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    I'm not refusing to see anything. She was arbitrarily seeking to ignore the dress code of the employer.
    nothing arbitrary about her actions. she was quite deliberate and appropriate in her actions. when she became aware that she would not be able to conform to the pants requirement due to her religion, she advised the burger king representative of her religious edict which prevented her from wearing slacks

    She voluntarily applied for a job which she knew had a dress code that did not conform to her religious beliefs.
    she certainly applied for the job of her own free will. no one has asserted that she did so while under duress. so, what point are you trying to make about it?
    while it is very possible that she was aware of the dress code when she applied, there is nothing i have read which establishes that to be a fact
    but either way, she understood her obligation to communicate the religious beliefs that would prevent her from wearing the standard issue pants. and she so advised the hiring authority, who extended to her the appropriate religious accommodation

    You refuse to acknowledge this fact.
    i will stipulate that she did apply for the job of her own free will
    i cannot stipulate that she knew of the dress code. if you are able to document that she did, please proffer a cite to evidence it

    She expects the company to accomodate her religious beliefs.
    under title vii that is a reasonable expectation ... for one's religious needs to be reasonably accommodated in the work place. her expectation was not unreasonable

    Other than a law...why should they have to?
    other than the law, there is no other obligation
    but then there is the legal obligation you appear to want to discount ... probably because its requirements absolutely obliterate your debate position
    now, beyond the legal obligation, there is a sound business reason to want to accommodate an employee's religious views: it makes excellent business sense to hire and maintain employees who are not disgruntled by the employer's capricious and unreasonable work rules

    From someone who did not have the authority to make such an accomodation.
    what evidence do you have to prove that the same agent of burger king, who possessed the authority to hire her was also without the authority to sanction a reasonable religious accommodation. i am guessing none - but prove me wrong

    The right thing for him to have done is to confirm that it was OK to do such a thing from his superiors.
    which would first compel a showing that what he did was inconsistent with the expectation of those higher up the organizational chart. as burger king now knows, not providing a legally required religious accommodation can cause the company to have to defend its actions in court

    He was just enforcing BK policy. Should he really be condemned for that?
    then you are telling us that it is burger king's policy to refuse to subscribe to the law, title vii, and offer a reasonable accommodation due to one's religious practices? again, show us the proof that causes you to believe something so ridiculous on its face. i'm willing to bet you cannot do so
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    once you're over the hill you begin to pick up speed

  5. #1005
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    El Monte, California
    Last Seen
    07-05-13 @ 11:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,471

    Re: Christian Woman Fired from Burger King for Wearing Skirt Instead of Pants

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    One would have to be deaf, dumb, and blind to not know that BK has a dress code. Are you attempting to say that she didn't know about it beforehand?



    Where did I say that she "ignored" the dress code? Source?



    And you keep avoiding my question. Let me try and phrase it in a different way. Why should this law be followed as it applies to this case? Just because it is "the law" is not a good enough reason.
    1. During the application process, she did not know the specifics. So no, she did not know what the dress code was at that time. This is in reference to your statement, "she voluntarily applied knowing the dress code".

    2. Originally Posted by Kal'Stang: I'm not refusing to see anything. She was arbitrarily seeking to ignore the dress code of the employer.

    3. Your 1 million dollar question is: "Why should the law be followed?" AND, I can't use, "because it's the law."

    Did I get that right? I don't know where to go with that one. Again, are you saying, IF it was NOT the law, should BK be able to send her home? In which case it will be a non-issue, since BK can do that without legal repercussions? Again, not avoiding the question, seeking clarification.

  6. #1006
    Professor
    Sig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    11-29-13 @ 11:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,179

    Re: Christian Woman Fired from Burger King for Wearing Skirt Instead of Pants

    Quote Originally Posted by Sherman123 View Post
    I agree, but just for the sake of equality would you feel similarly if it was a Jew seeking to wear a yarmulke or a Muslim woman asking to wear a hijab?
    Interesting question that brings us face to face with the ultimate reasoning behind the concept of separation of church and state. Ultimately, neither the Jew, nor the Muslim, nor the Christian should be allowed to claim discrimination under such circumstances, lest they open the door for eventual hypocrisy and further discrimination when religious customs of one group are obliged while those of another are not. What if the employee in question belonged to a Christian sect which believed that clothing was an affront to God and insisted that she be allowed to work in the nude?

    "That's just ridiculous!"

    Not really. Certainly not anymore ridiculous than a Muslim bank teller wearing a hijab that covers her face, since a great many non-Muslim customers would loathe having to conduct business with someone whose face was deliberately veiled in a manner similar to that of a bank robber.
    It's like you're dreaming of Gorgonzola when it's clearly Brie time, baby. Step into my office.

  7. #1007
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Illinois
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    3,335
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Christian Woman Fired from Burger King for Wearing Skirt Instead of Pants

    Quote Originally Posted by hawke812 View Post
    LOL what is your point? IT IS THE LAW. Are you trying to argue "what if's"? What if it was not a law BK has to follow? Do you not agree with it? Again, what is your point?
    Actually it is a good point. Just because its a law doesnt make it right. Although I think in this case the law is right.

  8. #1008
    Guru
    Aberration's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 08:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,699

    Re: Christian Woman Fired from Burger King for Wearing Skirt Instead of Pants

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    BS and you know it.

    One: My stance has nothing to do with her religion (or any other relgion for that matter). I could care less what her religion is. You'll note that unlike some other posters in this thread I haven't once said anything negative about her religion. So keep your bigotry comments to yourself.

    Two: Twisting what I said does nothing for your arguement. Indeed all that it shows is that you cannot stand on your own two feet and argue this honestly.
    Its not BS. Her skirt in no way effected her performance, nor did it present any hardship for BK. They had no reason to not accommodate her.

    The only BS is thinking this was anything but discrimination.
    “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.”
    ― Thomas Jefferson

  9. #1009
    Guru
    Aberration's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 08:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,699

    Re: Christian Woman Fired from Burger King for Wearing Skirt Instead of Pants

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    And why shouldn't they be able to? Other than it being from a law.
    Because discrimination based on religious grounds, just like on racial grounds, is ugly. We have no place for such discrimination and intolerance in a civil society
    “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.”
    ― Thomas Jefferson

  10. #1010
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,886
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Christian Woman Fired from Burger King for Wearing Skirt Instead of Pants

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    nothing arbitrary about her actions. she was quite deliberate and appropriate in her actions. when she became aware that she would not be able to conform to the pants requirement due to her religion, she advised the burger king representative of her religious edict which prevented her from wearing slacks
    You're right, she was deliberate. Appropriate though? That is quite debateable. Would it have been appropriate for any other religion to ask for such accomodation? Inculding the ones that you think are ridiculous to bring up? IE Pastafarians? Its funny how this womans religion and what she asks for is perfectly fine because its based on a mainstream religion but if its one that isn't mainstream and generally accepted? It's "ridiculous" to bring up.

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    she certainly applied for the job of her own free will. no one has asserted that she did so while under duress. so, what point are you trying to make about it?
    This should be obvious. If someone willingly goes into something knowing the requirements before hand then going in and then making a big fuss about those requirements is just plain selfish and smacks of arrogance.

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    while it is very possible that she was aware of the dress code when she applied, there is nothing i have read which establishes that to be a fact
    Can we at least TRY to keep to reality here. Besides the fact that she brought it up in the interview should show you that she knew about the dress code.

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    but either way, she understood her obligation to communicate the religious beliefs that would prevent her from wearing the standard issue pants. and she so advised the hiring authority, who extended to her the appropriate religious accommodation
    Bold: Which by itself shows that she knew about the dress code.

    Rest: Who doesn't have the authority to change BK policy.

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    under title vii that is a reasonable expectation ... for one's religious needs to be reasonably accommodated in the work place. her expectation was not unreasonable
    Did you ever consider that Title VII is unreasonable?

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    other than the law, there is no other obligation
    but then there is the legal obligation you appear to want to discount ... probably because its requirements absolutely obliterate your debate position
    Do you say the same thing when it comes to marijuana? If you just want to go by "because its the law" then that works perfectly well with your stance on the marijuana law. Funny how "its the law" works for something that you support but when it comes to something you don't support? ......

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    now, beyond the legal obligation, there is a sound business reason to want to accommodate an employee's religious views: it makes excellent business sense to hire and maintain employees who are not disgruntled by the employer's capricious and unreasonable work rules
    And there is also sound buisness reason to want everyone to follow a dress code. Indeed by making an exception you can create disgruntled employees also. So this arguement holds no water. Especially when you consider the fact that if you didn't allow one employee to follow thier religious dress codes that would only be one disgruntled employee whereas if you let them then its possible that you would have multiple disgruntled employees.

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    what evidence do you have to prove that the same agent of burger king, who possessed the authority to hire her was also without the authority to sanction a reasonable religious accommodation. i am guessing none - but prove me wrong
    The only ones that can change any companies policy are the owners. Everyone else has to follow them or ask THEM for exceptions. Duh.

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    which would first compel a showing that what he did was inconsistent with the expectation of those higher up the organizational chart. as burger king now knows, not providing a legally required religious accommodation can cause the company to have to defend its actions in court
    So are you saying that an employee shouldn't ask thier employers permission to change or make an exception to a company policy?

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    then you are telling us that it is burger king's policy to refuse to subscribe to the law, title vii, and offer a reasonable accommodation due to one's religious practices? again, show us the proof that causes you to believe something so ridiculous on its face. i'm willing to bet you cannot do so
    Never said that did I? In fact I would imagine that if things had gone through proper channels the first time around this thread wouldn't even exist.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •