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

Hatuey said:

Sure you are. Again, read the article. It'll help you a ton. She claims she was told 1 thing. When she went to the training - she was corrected. She refused to change. She was fired. Do you not understand that much yet?

Click to expand...

I do understand that much, I would ask you to read your own post and realize that she was told 1 thing and was acting in accordance with what she was told. She made it clear (according to her story) that she must wear a skirt for religious reasons and that it isn't negotiable. For them to tell her that it was alright to do so and then reverse that during her first day and fire her then they are in the wrong.

digsbe said:

I do understand that much

Click to expand...

Still citing what she claims she was told as fact? Here digsbe - I'll make it easier for you:

1. She claims she was told one thing.
2. We know for a fact she was told to wear pants when she got to training.
3. Verbal contracts - specially the unverifiable kind - DON'T trump company policy.
4. You can't claim monetary damages from a place where you didn't work at.
5. The company has zero obligation to honor a verbal contract made by somebody who did not represent the company's HR department.

/end thread.

What ends the thread is the elitism of exploiting how people aren't born with video cameras out of their eyes and microphones out of their ears. It compels the vulnerable to assume the risk of information overload such that they become intimidated due to an inability to record evidence.

All the more reason for a socially conservative society where people are only treated as adults (and can work or employ others) after graduating a rite of passage.

Hatuey said:

Again, she never even WORKED there. Did you read the article? When she was found to be wearing a dress right before training she was told she could not because of what she was wearing. She didn't even do the training. You're still reaching.

Click to expand...

I think it would be hilarious if Burger King gave her a Catholic Bible for compensation. A King James version would be too faux pas.

Your Star said:

False, business's can not discriminate against race, gender identity ,religion, sexual orientation, they can't have a sign outside that says "Blacks enter through the back", they'd be shut down faster than Steve Downie trying to deke around Nicklas Lidstrom.

Click to expand...

Let's say you take a job as a dancer at a strip club. Three months later you become a born again Christian. You want to keep your job, but at this point you are dancing without stripping because of your religious beliefs. The owner of the strip club fires you. Do you file a lawsuit based on religious discrimination?

Your Star said:

I have family that are like this, it's rather annoying.

But this isn't any different than a muslim working wanting to wear a hijab, there's no reason she should have been fired over this.

Click to expand...

Yes, I agree. She should be allowed to wear the skirt.

Hatuey said:

How is having a signature on a forum shoving your religion in people's face? I wonder what you think of courthouse displays of the 10 commandments.

Click to expand...

Really Hatuey, I think you know.

johnny_rebson said:

Let's say you take a job as a dancer at a strip club. Three months later you become a born again Christian. You want to keep your job, but at this point you are dancing without stripping because of your religious beliefs. The owner of the strip club fires you. Do you file a lawsuit based on religious discrimination?

Click to expand...

Strawman. There is no comparison between the two.

I actually know a stripper who became a born again Christian. She quite the job.

MaggieD said:

I don't think it's ridiculous. Unless they have a dress code? They're interfering with her religious freedom. What? A liberal on the other end of a "freedom" argument?

Click to expand...

They only want freedom when they agree with it, lol. Of course I know some Republicans that are exactly the same.

Blackdog said:

They only want freedom when they agree with it, lol. Of course I know some Republicans that are exactly the same.

Click to expand...

Goshin already tried this. :shrug:

johnny_rebson said:

Let's say you take a job as a dancer at a strip club. Three months later you become a born again Christian. You want to keep your job, but at this point you are dancing without stripping because of your religious beliefs. The owner of the strip club fires you. Do you file a lawsuit based on religious discrimination?

Click to expand...

She wouldn't be fired for religious discrimination. She would be fired for not doing the job she agreed to do. Her reason for not wanting to strip is irrelevant.

Furiounova said:

She wouldn't be fired for religious discrimination. She would be fired for not doing the job she agreed to do. Her reason for not wanting to strip is irrelevant.

Click to expand...

In this hypothetical case she was hired as a dancer and she is still dancing.

Companies can legally discriminate against those with certain religious views. I know of many retail establishments that won't hire those who refuse to work on Sundays.

johnny_rebson said:

In this hypothetical case she was hired as a dancer and she is still dancing.

Companies can legally discriminate against those with certain religious views. I know of many retail establishments that won't hire those who refuse to work on Sundays.

Click to expand...

They don't discriminate against them because of their religious views, they fire people who DON'T want to work on Sundays. The difference is really big here. Again, this lady is not being singled out because she's a zealot. She's being singled out cause she refuses to abide by dress code. Just as anybody else who did the same for any reason - religious or otherwise - would be.

johnny_rebson said:

In this hypothetical case she was hired as a dancer and she is still dancing.

Companies can legally discriminate against those with certain religious views. I know of many retail establishments that won't hire those who refuse to work on Sundays.

Click to expand...

Can't change conditions mid stroke man. You specifically stated she was hired to dance and strip. After three months of employment she cannot renege on the duties she voluntarily accepted for any reason.

Here is the way to perform a neutrality test:

Can grounds for termination be applied regardless of the specific claimed infringement on EEO protected rights?

In your hypothetical she is not being fired for discrimination against her religion, race, gender, marital status, etc.

She could not sue her employer on the basis of discrimination because she is being fired for refusing to do the duties she agreed to do when she was hired.

hazlnut said:

Sure. Just not in the United States. We're more advanced.

Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what your opinion of advanced is. Leave people alone.

Hatuey said:

Why is it foolish? People are fired daily because they don't conform with dress codes. Again, I've made the case that I myself have tattoos and earrings and I've made sure my employers know for a fact that I will not remove them in order to please them. Why should she be any different? It's pretty reasonable for an employer to expect all employees to conform to a dress code.

Click to expand...

I say its foolish because it has no bearing on whether I will purchase my food there or not.

I agree with dress codes, but I don't care about pants vs. skirts.

Again though, they have the right to fire her.

Bigfoot 88 said:

I say its foolish because it has no bearing on whether I will purchase my food there or not.

Click to expand...

It's not foolish because companies establish dress codes in order to track inventory (for uniforms), uniformity, similar images across different markets etc.

Hatuey said:

It's not foolish because companies establish dress codes in order to track inventory (for uniforms), uniformity, similar images across different markets etc.

Click to expand...

Again, pants vs. skirts wouldn't be part of my business model. I guess there is no point in arguing about this.

johnny_rebson said:

Let's say you take a job as a dancer at a strip club. Three months later you become a born again Christian. You want to keep your job, but at this point you are dancing without stripping because of your religious beliefs. The owner of the strip club fires you. Do you file a lawsuit based on religious discrimination?

Click to expand...

In that scenario her religious beliefs are interfering with her job performance.

It all depends on what she signed when she took the job. For the record, though, dresses, skirts, or any loose or hanging style clothing is generally not legal in food service, and for good reasons.

I am confused.

Goshin said:

Again... there is no reasonable justification for a business refusing to make MINOR accomodations to dress code for the sake of deeply held religious beliefs that will not impede someone's ability to do their job.


There's no reason to refuse a Jew the right to wear a yamulka if it won't impair his ability to work safety.

There's no reason to deny a Penecostal woman the right to wear a long skirt if it won't impair her ability to work safely.


No reason at all.... other than just hateful dick-ishness.

Click to expand...

I tend to agree with your posts more often than not, but this is one where I do not agree,

When it comes to employment and employers/employees, My opinion is that an establishment should not feel they are forced into making exceptions for people for any personal expression. I feel that a person who wants to alter the uniform or dress code for their personal reasons is being selfish. Oh, here I am, look at me, I am special and I am gonna wear a skirt... BS. If wearing the skirt is so important than do so where the job does not have a uniform or a set dress code.

When on the clock, you are a representative of the establishment, and you are getting paid to be just that, and nothing else. If that establishment has a uniform or specific dress code, it should be enforced with conformity for all who work there. Making minor exceptions for someone is just inviting trouble. It's always going to be subjective, and when one worker sees another worker getting an exception, they are going to push for their own. Then it will become a battle of who gets the biggest exception to the rules. Then it will get even more muddy when someone will attempt to sue because THEY were being denied their right to self expression while others did get the right.

Personal expression should be done on personal time IMO. Or find the employment where they can do just that if it is so important that they need their personal expression 24/7. Making employers bend rules just sets off firestorms and we see this all the time. I do only agree with the woman who was at 1st told that she could, then later denied. But she never should have felt the need to ask because when you go into a job like fast food, you already know full well that you are expected to wear the uniform and maintain the dress code. Still selfish on the part of people to ask for exceptions.

KevinKohler said:

I am confused.

Click to expand...

Why?

It's simple...she brakes the dress code + she is rightfully fired + she doesn't like it + she wants money + she sues.

That's it in a nutshell

Hatuey said:

Goshin already tried this. :shrug:

Click to expand...

Ahh, not trying anything. Just what I have observed from far right and left extremest. Hell Hatuey, you have seen it as well. God knows you have been here long enough.

Mya said:

Why?

It's simple...she brakes the dress code + she is rightfully fired + she doesn't like it + she wants money + she sues.

That's it in a nutshell

Click to expand...

What would your thoughts be if this was a store owned by a Muslim and the owner required all women employees to wear a hijab and dress below their knees?