[NA] Burkha in the warehouse?

[MSmith]

Question:

A warehouse employee (near conveyor belts, lifting boxes, occasionally climbing on the racks) comes into work wearing a full burkha - cloth all the way to the ground. Employee is sent home because the garment is unsafe for warehouse.

Employee's religious authorities allow employee to wear just the headpiece without the face veil. She does so for a month. Then she points out that the warehouse has missed some people wearing open-toed shoes and starts wearing the burkha again. She is sent home, as are the open-toed shoes people (and a few others).

Employee finally files discrimination lawsuit.

Is there any discrimination here?

(This is a true story, but don't bother asking me where or what company.)

 

[AdamZ]

YES there is discrimination against the employer for trying to be safe and reasonable! IMHO it is BS!!

 

[Skip Miller]

Is there any discrimination here?

OF COURSE there is discrimination there. To discriminate is to make choices, and it is a necessary part of any manager's job. Your question is whether or not there is ILLEGAL discrimination. And no, I don't think there is illegal discrimination. Discriminating for reasons of on-the-job safety is legitimate.

-Skip

 

[Brian Austin]

Unsafe is unsafe. Period. If I came in wearing a cloak or something, I'd be sent home, too.

Compromising safety for "feel good" stuff only leads to someone getting hurt and later suing the company (along with all of the wonderful fines and bureaucratic stuff from OSHA, worker's comp, etc..). Safety is the priority, regardless of your background.

And the supervisors need a crash course if they've been letting open-toed shoes or other no-no's in the place, too.

 

[gkainz]

She is sent home, as are the open-toed shoes people (and a few others).

Just my opinion, good for the price paid, is no case for discrimination, since the other safety violators were sent home as well. If the bhurka wearer were sent home and the no safety shoe wearers were not, then I think there would be grounds for a discrimination case.

Not a lawyer, but my hunting partner is the OSHA inspector for a large
manufacturing company...

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Employee's religious authorities allow employee to wear just the headpiece without the face veil. She does so for a month. Then she points out that the warehouse has missed some people wearing open-toed shoes and starts wearing the burkha again. She is sent home, as are the open-toed shoes people (and a few others).

Sounds like she went fishing for this lawsuit.

However, were the open-toed shoes people sent home before she came back with the full garb? If not, it makes it look like the company ignored them initially and only sent them home to try to avoid the lawsuit.

Could probably point fingers in all directions here.

 

[SkyHog]

whether or not the open toed shoes were sent home to me, there is no case.

Maybe the company had made the determination that open toed shoes were not dangerous, but a garment that stretches below the body is dangerous. Who knows.

I wish society would go to a no fault personal injury system. If someone is stupid enough to wear something that could injure them at work, then they are responsible, not the employer. If I work in a place with open gears, and decide that I want to wear a tie and it gets stuck and breaks my neck, I should be responsible.

BAH!!!!! This irritates me.

 

[Brian Austin]

I wish society would go to a no fault personal injury system. If someone is stupid enough to wear something that could injure them at work, then they are responsible, not the employer. If I work in a place with open gears, and decide that I want to wear a tie and it gets stuck and breaks my neck, I should be responsible.

BAH!!!!! This irritates me.

I disagree. Open gears, pulleys, etc., shouldn't be reachable by someone using the machinery. Guards are NOT particularly difficult to make and install. I've done it as a machinist. It's more than a tie or long burkha. Long sleeve shirts, gloves, even rags in people's hands can draw a finger or hand into a bad place. It's fast when it happens.

Machinery owners need to keep safety as a number one concern for more than just monetary reasons. Public relations, production downtime, stockholder liability (in the form of dropping stock prices with an accident and bad publicity), higher insurance costs, etc., all contribute to the bottom line in different ways. If the employees feel the company is looking out for their safety, morale improves. I've seen it happen as both production and management.

 

[gkainz]

I disagree. Open gears, pulleys, etc., shouldn't be reachable by someone using the machinery. Guards are NOT particularly difficult to make and install.

"Not only a good idea, it's the law", according to my OSHA/Environmental manager buddy...

 

[MSmith]

How about roller conveyors? Where there are a series of rollers turning rather than a belt?

 

[Brian Austin]

How about roller conveyors? Where there are a series of rollers turning rather than a belt?

Depends on the product being conveyed.

Rollers are turned by belts on one side. A simple piece of 1/8" steel over the top of the roller pulley is enough to avoid getting anything caught in the pulley itself.

Distances between rollers matter, however. Big products don't need short distances so fingers, hands, clothing, etc., is easy to remove when under power. Smaller distances can present problems but the pulleys and belts (usually just big rubber bands essentially) are designed to slip with too much resistance. It will hurt but a well-designed conveyor system will slip before dismemberment occurs.

Very small products using vibrating conveyors. Steel runs with a slight slope and a motor under it that shakes it back and forth, causing the piece to go down the slope. No problems there since the mechanical components are underneath, out of reach.

 

[MSmith]

Different roller system here.

In our system, the rollers are freewheeling (no pulley at the ends) with just the axle attached to the frame. There's a 3-4" belt UNDER the rollers that runs the length of the "belt". At different points, there are servos that move the belt up and down, thus turning sections of the "belt" on or off.

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

Question:

A warehouse employee (near conveyor belts, lifting boxes, occasionally climbing on the racks) comes into work wearing a full burkha - cloth all the way to the ground. Employee is sent home because the garment is unsafe for warehouse.

Employee's religious authorities allow employee to wear just the headpiece without the face veil. She does so for a month. Then she points out that the warehouse has missed some people wearing open-toed shoes and starts wearing the burkha again. She is sent home, as are the open-toed shoes people (and a few others).

Employee finally files discrimination lawsuit.

Is there any discrimination here?

(This is a true story, but don't bother asking me where or what company.)

Sounds a little like the gal a few years ago that went into get her drivers license ID PIX and insisted on wearing the face veil...