Ex-RCA gets $1 Million after SCOTUS Religious Bias decision

[blamethesub]

How will this work when someone can't get their religious holiday for a different religion????

It's been awhile, but I seem to remember this guy was hired before Amazon Sunday delivery was a thing. Sunday delivery was not part of the job description. When his office began Sunday delivery, they tried to force him to participate, and he refused on religious grounds.

He won essentially because USPS changed the job description, not so much over religious freedom. These days, the RCA description lists Sunday delivery as a job requirement. If you won't work Sundays, you would be expected to not apply for the job in the first place.

That's how USPS will prevent another one of these lawsuits in the future. They don't care about your religion, no matter what it is.

 

[ATCBigE]

It's been awhile, but I seem to remember this guy was hired before Amazon Sunday delivery was a thing. Sunday delivery was not part of the job description. When his office began Sunday delivery, they tried to force him to participate, and he refused on religious grounds.

He won essentially because USPS changed the job description, not so much over religious freedom. These days, the RCA description lists Sunday delivery as a job requirement. If you won't work Sundays, you would be expected to not apply for the job in the first place.

That's how USPS will prevent another one of these lawsuits in the future. They don't care about your religion, no matter what it is.

Yeah but then ok so now if job description changes on a job after I was hired, now anyone can just sue and win??? Don't think that is how it works.

 

[hunchback]

It's been awhile, but I seem to remember this guy was hired before Amazon Sunday delivery was a thing. Sunday delivery was not part of the job description. When his office began Sunday delivery, they tried to force him to participate, and he refused on religious grounds.

It not only was NOT part of the job description, but the Contract we were working under when Amazon Sunday was created said (paraphrase) "Every reasonable effort will be made to ensure that RCA's are not required to work Sundays"

The settlement has been agreed to.... But I really wonder if the money will actually be paid.
I wonder based on historical evidence.

READ THIS STORY

Guardsman fired from the Postal Service in 2000 for military service receives notice to return to work

“This is the most egregious case of USERRA violation in the history of the federal government.”

www.militarytimes.com

 

[ATCBigE]

It's been awhile, but I seem to remember this guy was hired before Amazon Sunday delivery was a thing. Sunday delivery was not part of the job description. When his office began Sunday delivery, they tried to force him to participate, and he refused on religious grounds.

He won essentially because USPS changed the job description, not so much over religious freedom. These days, the RCA description lists Sunday delivery as a job requirement. If you won't work Sundays, you would be expected to not apply for the job in the first place.

That's how USPS will prevent another one of these lawsuits in the future. They don't care about your religion, no matter what it is.

But still it solved nothing.

Also job description can change over time. Example I work at hospital as ATC and every year I'm given job description to sign off on. So say USPS did decide to change job description and even said we have updated job description.

Another example you work at factory that produces some part. Let's says it is 5 days week job. The company takes off and all of sudden they can't meet the demand. They say to employees we are going to start working now 6 days. Now all of a sudden employee can say well not in my job description I'm sorry only 5 days.

Again this whole thing did absolutely nothing to resolve anything. If he claims religious beliefs then you can't discriminate now. This whole thing all it does is open more cans of worms than anything else IMO.

 

[btdtret]

All -- Most likely the "reward" will be paid when "administratively practicable".

 

[hunchback]

But still it solved nothing.

I completely disagree.
This was a "Reasonable Accommodation Case" based on Religious Beliefs.
BUT
This can be a bellwether case for all Reasonable Accommodation Cases, whether they be about Religious beliefs or Reasonable Accommodation for those with disabilities.
In this case the reasonable accommodation requested, was ironically, asking for the USPS to honor the contract they willingly entered into with the NRLCA.
In this case, and the case of the fired Army Master Seargent, it appears the USPS didn't believe the laws Congress passes applied to them. Hopefully that will change with multimillion dollar awards

 

[ATCBigE]

I completely disagree.
This was a "Reasonable Accommodation Case" based on Religious Beliefs.
BUT
This can be a bellwether case for all Reasonable Accommodation Cases, whether they be about Religious beliefs or Reasonable Accommodation for those with disabilities.
In this case the reasonable accommodation requested, was ironically, asking for the USPS to honor the contract they willingly entered into with the NRLCA.
In this case, and the case of the fired Army Master Seargent, it appears the USPS didn't believe the laws Congress passes applied to them. Hopefully that will change with multimillion dollar awards

Disagree for 1 reasons.

They settled before decision was made. If the Supreme court made the decision, I would 100% agree with you, but in this case, they settled.

 

[hunchback]

Disagree for 1 reasons.

They settled before decision was made. If the Supreme court made the decision, I would 100% agree with you, but in this case, they settled.

If memory serves me correctly, The Supreme Court overturned a lower Court ruling that the cost of The Reasonable Accommodation was too high. I believe the Supreme Court ruled the cost should not be considered in the Reasonable Accommodation process, sending it back to the lower court, but making it clear how they would rule if this case made it back to them.

 

[hunchback]

“The court’s insistence that hardship on employers means substantial hardship and not de minimis hardship, puts real teeth into the law,” and it “also ensures you do not have to abandon your most deeply held beliefs as a condition for having a job,” he added. “There are those who insist that every aspect of public life must be governed only by secular rules and that people should leave their religious beliefs and practices at home. That is not the American tradition, and it is not the position embodied in Title VII.”

 

[hunchback]

Do you see a pattern here?

 

[hunchback]

post office apparently thought it was an undue hardship to accommodate Mr. Groff's Religious beliefs.
post office apparently think it is an undue hardship to purchase enough cloud storage for RRECS data
post office apparently thinks it is an undue hardship to pay enough EMA to cover the full cost incurred by POV carriers...

At least one of these has been addressed

 

[Surprise!]

How come our worthless union never posts anything like that!!?????

They have to pick their fights and our union prefers to fight us.

 

[Dominator]

Yep keeping switch religion when their holdiay come up. Gotta maximize my days off since I won't be getting a sub anytime soon

Why not just hit it Pokémon style and catch 'em all into one mega-faith?

 

[Dominator]

They have to pick their fights and our union prefers to fight us.

Both collectively and individually!

 

[RollinRural]

The important thing here is that he got nowhere filing grievances. He had to sue to get the right result. Union= worthless

 

[Surprise!]

"Having seen how [committees] work in this [organization]... they usually get captured by the interests they're supposed to regulate. They usually get controlled by the people they're supposed to be watching. I mean, that's just been our history..."

Yes, I remember a Management Book applauding this because the regulators and companies could work together. The problem is it works to well, for them but not for the people that are supposed to be protected.

 

[hunchback]

Where is the real change for ALL Postal Employees? I'm glad this guy won but they need to codify religious rights in law

Allready done.
1st Amendment to the Constitution
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

or union contracts to protect people's freedoms. You shouldn't have to sacrifice your religious beliefs for a government job.

It's funny, others on here seem somewhat offended that someone (Mr. Groff) didn't give up, but continued to fight for his religious rights.
I wonder if those offended are anti God, anti Religion, soulless beings like most of management and most of the post office legal team seem to be.
Or is it just their Stockholm Syndrome kicking in, "how dare anyone stand up to our captors."

 

[Surprise!]

The important thing here is that he got nowhere filing grievances. He had to sue to get the right result. Union= worthless

I assume the money and legal support were waiting for someone that had a chance of winning this issue. It was suggested I try something similar for a slightly different issue. Allies and support may be found.

 

[Wilco183]

I assume the money and legal support were waiting for someone that had a chance of winning this issue. It was suggested I try something similar for a slightly different issue. Allies and support may be found.

Lawyers can be found, especially if they like the odds. Goff's lawyers received 600K as part of the total settlement.

 

[She mails rural]

I just want the name if his lawyer lol