Will Supreme Court allow workers to skip shifts for religious reasons?

[Hoosierhawkeye]

I don’t have an issue with getting high holy days off. Disagree that sundays should be included. Rare is the church that doesn’t have services on other days of the week so it’s not like Sunday is the sole opportunity this guy would have to attend mass.

Some Christians believe that you explicitly arn't allowed to work on Sundays. I think that is a very incorrect interpretation of scripture but they are free to interpret scripture as they like.

 

[Aardvark86]

I don’t have an issue with getting high holy days off. Disagree that sundays should be included. Rare is the church that doesn’t have services on other days of the week so it’s not like Sunday is the sole opportunity this guy would have to attend mass.

Realistically, while religion is the cultural reason we have Sundays off, the practical/political reason is the labor movement.

 

[sober_teacher]

Some Christians believe that you explicitly arn't allowed to work on Sundays. I think that is a very incorrect interpretation of scripture but they are free to interpret scripture as they like.

I’m not okay for making religious exemptions for every distinct belief like that. There are too many flavors of Christianity to do that with.

If it’s that big a deal, find a different job.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

I’m not okay for making religious exemptions for every distinct belief like that. There are too many flavors of Christianity to do that with.

If it’s that big a deal, find a different job.

The employer is suppose to make exemptions as as they don't constitute a substantial cost to his business. For the postal service having one employee who can't work Sundays isn't a substantial cost.

This was a 9 - 0 decision so IMO not very controversial except specifically among people who hate religion.

And I actually agree with the 2 liberal justices concurrence opinion more as I believe the standard for accommodation should be similar to the standard for the ADA. I think the conservative justices go too far in requiring that the standard be even higher than that of the ADA.

 

[Joes Place]

This guy is mad the USPS made him work Sundays because they contracted with Amazon. Boo-hoo.

If he gets his way. It would create a nightmare for employers.

But with this clown car court, I would not rule it out.

Sabbath Showdown

You really think the guys that pay Alito and Thomas are gonna let "religious" views get in the way of their cheap labor?

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

You really think the guys that pay Alito and Thomas are gonna let "religious" views get in the way of their cheap labor?

Umm are you aware that the court already found in favor of the postal employee in a 9-0 decision???

 

[sober_teacher]

Umm are you aware that the court already found in favor of the postal employee in a 9-0 decision???

Yes. I disagree with the decision however.

 

[gohawks50]

Umm are you aware that the court already found in favor of the postal employee in a 9-0 decision???

Actually he didn't win, the court simply said USPS has to demonstrate more than a de minimis burden to avoid their otherwise mandated obligations to provide reasonable religious accommodations. The case was sent back to the lower court to determine the individuals case.

In other words USPS will have to provide more proof of harm in order to deny the worker Sundays off, but Mr. Groff hasn't won yet.

In a unanimous decision, the top court reversed decades of precedent in determining that employers like USPS have to demonstrate more than a de minimis burden to avoid their otherwise mandated obligations to provide reasonable religious accommodations. The justices sent the case back to a lower court to determine whether, given the specifics of the case, the Postal Service could come up with other means to keep a letter carrier on the payroll without requiring him to work on Sundays.

https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2...ps-bid-require-employees-work-sundays/388095/

 

[Joes Place]

Actually he didn't win, the court simply said USPS has to demonstrate more than a de minimis burden to avoid their otherwise mandated obligations to provide reasonable religious accommodations. The case was sent back to the lower court to determine the individuals case.

In other words USPS will have to provide more proof of harm in order to deny the worker Sundays off, but Mr. Groff hasn't won yet.

In a unanimous decision, the top court reversed decades of precedent in determining that employers like USPS have to demonstrate more than a de minimis burden to avoid their otherwise mandated obligations to provide reasonable religious accommodations. The justices sent the case back to a lower court to determine whether, given the specifics of the case, the Postal Service could come up with other means to keep a letter carrier on the payroll without requiring him to work on Sundays.

https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2...ps-bid-require-employees-work-sundays/388095/

Actually, SC Overlords would love to hamper USPS government employees with religious accommodations. Just as long as it doesn't apply to their private sector workforces....

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

Actually, SC Overlords would love to hamper USPS government employees with religious accommodations. Just as long as it doesn't apply to their private sector workforces....

Except all the justices even the ones you disagree with are smart enough to know that their precedent applies to the private sector as well.

Actually he didn't win, the court simply said USPS has to demonstrate more than a de minimis burden to avoid their otherwise mandated obligations to provide reasonable religious accommodations. The case was sent back to the lower court to determine the individuals case.

In other words USPS will have to provide more proof of harm in order to deny the worker Sundays off, but Mr. Groff hasn't won yet.

In a unanimous decision, the top court reversed decades of precedent in determining that employers like USPS have to demonstrate more than a de minimis burden to avoid their otherwise mandated obligations to provide reasonable religious accommodations. The justices sent the case back to a lower court to determine whether, given the specifics of the case, the Postal Service could come up with other means to keep a letter carrier on the payroll without requiring him to work on Sundays.

https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2...ps-bid-require-employees-work-sundays/388095/

Fair enough, he hasn't full out won his case but it's a big victory in his case. Postal service needs to show that they can't afford to make the deliveries without him.