All you say is true. My point is only that an employer should not have to make special accommodations regarding clothing. Should Playboy be required to have a centerfold wearing a Burka? If a manufacturer says no jewelry (safety issue), should you be allowed to wear your St. Benedict Crucifix?
I know that this is politically incorrect on both sides of the aisle. But when you agree to work for someone, you agree to their rules and their morals. If you don’t like that, join/start a union where the employees have more control or find another job.
Here is where your view does not match with federal law and employees rights.
I would like to direct you to the EEOC and specifically “Religious Garb and Grooming in the Workplace: Rights and Responsibilities”
eeoc.gov/eeoc/publications/qa_religious_garb_grooming.cfm
“Examples of religious dress and grooming practices include wearing religious clothing or articles (e.g., a Muslim hijab (headscarf), a Sikh turban, or a Christian cross);…In most instances, employers are required by federal law to make exceptions to their usual rules or preferences to permit applicants and employees to observe religious dress and grooming practices.”
Regarding my wearing my St Benedict crucifix in a manufacturing job.
First they have to prove that my crucifix and necklace does indeed pose a safety hazard.
From the EEOC link
"Clothing Requirements Near Machinery
Mirna alleges she was terminated from her job in a factory because of her religion (Pentecostal) after she told her supervisor that her faith prohibits her from wearing pants as required by the company’s new dress code. Mirna requested as an accommodation to be permitted to continue wearing a long but close-fitting skirt. Her manager replies that the dress code is essential to safe and efficient operations on the factory floor, but there is no evidence regarding operation of the machinery at issue to show that close-fitting clothing like that worn by Mirna poses a safety risk. Because the evidence does not establish that wearing pants is truly necessary for safety, the accommodation requested by Mirna does not pose an undue hardship."
"May an employer bar an employee’s religious dress or grooming practice based on workplace safety, security, or health concerns?
Yes, but only if the practice actually poses an undue hardship on the operation of the business. The employer should not assume that the accommodation would pose an undue hardship. While safety, security, or health may justify denying accommodation in a given situation, the employer may do so only if the accommodation would actually pose an undue hardship. In many instances, there may be an available accommodation that will permit the employee to adhere to religious practices and will permit the employer to avoid undue hardship."
Regarding my St Benedict crucifix, what would an accommodation for my crucifix possibly look like? I may not be able to work around specific machines that pose a risk of me being strangled. But, there may be other areas within the company down the processing line where that risk would be mitigated. This would be an example of an accommodation made by a company to accommodate my religious beliefs.
