Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Are employers required to grant Muslim employees prayer breaks? [View all]Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)59. US law mandates reasonable accommodation.
https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/religion.cfm
However it does not provide that an employer must impair its basic business efficiency:
It is a paradox under US law, but a "reasonable accommodation" for a small group of religious workers may become an "undue hardship" if the proportion of workers needing the accommodation rises enough, which is probably what happened here.
However it does not provide that an employer must impair its basic business efficiency:
The law requires an employer or other covered entity to reasonably accommodate an employee's religious beliefs or practices, unless doing so would cause more than a minimal burden on the operations of the employer's business. This means an employer may be required to make reasonable adjustments to the work environment that will allow an employee to practice his or her religion.
Examples of some common religious accommodations include flexible scheduling, voluntary shift substitutions or swaps, job reassignments, and modifications to workplace policies or practices.
...
An employer does not have to accommodate an employee's religious beliefs or practices if doing so would cause undue hardship to the employer. An accommodation may cause undue hardship if it is costly, compromises workplace safety, decreases workplace efficiency, infringes on the rights of other employees, or requires other employees to do more than their share of potentially hazardous or burdensome work.
Examples of some common religious accommodations include flexible scheduling, voluntary shift substitutions or swaps, job reassignments, and modifications to workplace policies or practices.
...
An employer does not have to accommodate an employee's religious beliefs or practices if doing so would cause undue hardship to the employer. An accommodation may cause undue hardship if it is costly, compromises workplace safety, decreases workplace efficiency, infringes on the rights of other employees, or requires other employees to do more than their share of potentially hazardous or burdensome work.
It is a paradox under US law, but a "reasonable accommodation" for a small group of religious workers may become an "undue hardship" if the proportion of workers needing the accommodation rises enough, which is probably what happened here.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
60 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

Sorry, but I would oppose this strenuously, as I would for any Christian or Jewish-based allowance
Tarc
May 2016
#1
I know, but it appears they had gotten into the habit of taking two extra breaks.
Yo_Mama
May 2016
#21
Actually, I worked in a place that did allow Prayer breaks and Bible study groups on company time
Midnight Writer
May 2016
#13
If it caused work stoppages, it is an undue hardship. That's pretty much established law.
Yo_Mama
May 2016
#10
If you're working them enough that all 5 prayers would be on the clock, then there's a deeper issue
Scootaloo
May 2016
#18
when they rise in AM, before work, lunch break, after work, & bedtime. That's 5 prayer times?
Sunlei
May 2016
#27
If you are at work then work you lazy bums- Play with your mythical sky creatures on your own time
snooper2
May 2016
#34
I would agree in giving them the breaks but they shouldn't have to pay them for the time
ButterflyBlood
May 2016
#51