EBS Consulting Blog

“Religious holidays in September?  You have got to be kidding me!  No, you cannot have time off, we have orders to ship!”  That was the response from one of my clients department supervisors last week when one of his employees requested time off to observe a religious holiday.  What the supervisor did not know was that there are several holidays that occur each September. The Jewish New Year, called Rosh Hashanah, begins at sundown, continuing with major prayers through Friday. It’s the first of the High Holy Days. The other High Holy Day, Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, starts at sundown on Friday, September 21. Wednesday is also the first day of Ramadan, the holiest month of the Islamic calendar. Devout Muslims fast most of the day and say special prayers. Either group may be asking you for time off for religious observance, or other accommodations to the normal routine. Federal law protects every worker’s right to practice their religion. “Title VII of the Civil Rights Act requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations to employees who request time off for religious holidays unless doing so would cause an undue hardship,” says EEOC attorney Elizabeth Grossman, as reported on the website, Newsday.com. Employees have been fired or disciplined for taking time off for prayer, or even praying on the worksite, or for wearing religious garb or symbols. And employees have fired right back in the courts and through the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The path to avoiding conflicts is a combination of policy and flexibility. Many employers have a policy about religious expression in their organizations, but a policy is not enough.  While courts have not come out and said it, cases show that merely pointing to the policy may not be good enough.

Instead, human resource experts advise employers to talk with workers about their need for accommodation as they would talk with persons with disabilities about what they need to meet their special needs while getting the job done.  While judges might not be very familiar with religious accommodation, they will be familiar with the interactive process under the Americans with Disabilities Act (
ADA.) Employers need to be in a position to tell the judge that they have done everything required for accommodation under
ADA, even though the duty to accommodate religion is narrower.

 Our solution to our client: Develop a policy and consistent human resource practice that allows employees time off by using flexible time off, unused vacation or sick leave.  Reasonable accommodation along with management training and communication programs go a long way in avoiding lawsuits, and builds more positive employee relations. Count the time off as a sick day or vacation day and plan ahead in order to meet production schedules.  Obviously this supervisor did not know the law and will be attending our next management development class.

How late is too late?  Seems one of my clients wants to terminate an employee for theft.  Seems she has been cheating on reporting her work hours for at least 6 months.  The company has convincing proof that she falsified company records and has been paid for time not worked.  Upon questioning the employee in question is female, 53 years old and has been employed in her position for 7 years.  NO WRITTEN COMPANY POLICY or employee handbook is in place.  The problem was discovered 2 months ago and nothing has been said to the employee.  So, I ask why now?  Well, the employee has accumulated considerable medical expenses due to a major health  problem and has been approved for long term disability benefits under the company’s long term disability benefit.  So, thats why action has not been taken and now that the company is about to feel the effects of medical and disability claims, they want to avoid these expenses.  Ok, now that you have the picture, what would you do?  Is it too late to terminate the employee for wilful misconduct?  Provided there is adequate documentation of the theft, it is not too late, and even though there is no prior warnings, the incident is severe enough and so obvious that extreme disciplinary action is warranted, regardless of the time delay and other extenuation circumstances of medical leave etc.  Although most of the medical expenses are unavoidable up to the time of termination and eligibility for LTD benefits cannot be denied, termination of employment is necessary and recommended. Lesson learned; don’t delay disciplinary action.  It may cost you more to delay, as in this case, than dealing with a problem in a timely fashion.

Got a call today from an irrate employee who was complaining the his health insurance carrier was denying claims incurred by his newborn child.  Since he was already enrolled in family coverage and was paying his required employee portion of the premiums, he did not understand why his newborn child, now 4 months old, was having claims denied.  What was also troubling was that previous claims incurred immediately after birth were paid in full.  Upon investigation, I found out that the employee had failed to enroll the newborn child within 30 days immediately following birth and despite the fact that he had family coverage, new dependants MUST be enrolled.  Otherwise, they must wait until the next open enrollment period.  Not happy with my response, the employee immediately filed a grievance with his union representative, who, of course, agreed with the employees position arguing that “someone” should have told the employee of this requirement AND the was no specific language in the contract that states such a requirement.  The employee did attend new employee orientation and signed an acknowledgement form taht he had received, reviewd and had the opportunity to ask questions concerning his fringe benefits.  The medical plan documents he received clearly state that newly eligible dependants are required to enroll within the first 30 days of becoming an eligible dependant.  FOOTNOTE: By statute, health plans are required by law to cover newborns for the first 30 days, which explains why the childs initial medical bills were paid.  However, after 30 days all claims were properly denied because the employee failed to enroll.  We are headed to a formal grievance soon, just another day in Human Resources.