Do you think there is a discrimination issue as well as an accommodation issue 
in cases like this, Eugene. Suppose a bank in a southern state insists that all 
employees have confederate flags on their desks or work stations? Does an 
African-American employee have a claim under Title VII? What about displays 
that proclaim the superiority or virtue of the "white" race?

Alan

From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu 
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Volokh, Eugene
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 4:19 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Federal regulators apparently force bank to take down 
religioussymbols

                It's possible that the question has not arisen, and that if a 
non-Christian employee objected to having an item displayed on his workstation, 
the bank would accommodate him.

It's not clear to me, by the way, that a non-Christian employee would find such 
a display objectionable, if it appears to be part of the overall décor, and is 
thus likely to be seen by patrons as the bank's message and not the employee's. 
 After all, what is in one sense "the employee's" desk or workstation is also 
in another sense "the bank's" desk or workstation.  (I take it, though, that 
for Title VII religious accommodation purposes the threshold question would be 
whether the employee sincerely believes that it is religiously improper for him 
to work at a workstation that has a particular religious symbol attached to it.)

Incidentally, for a similar issue that arose as to free speech, rather than 
religious accommodation, see Cotto v. United Technologies Corp., 251 Conn. 1 
(1999), holding that an employee had no "freedom from compelled speech" right 
to refuse to have an American flag on his workstation.  (Connecticut by statute 
extends First Amendment restrictions to private employers.)

Eugene


From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu 
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Brownstein, Alan
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 4:10 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Federal regulators apparently force bank to take down 
religioussymbols

The Bank President's message is also confusing. He is quoted as stating that 
"The bank publishes a Bible verse on its website and tellers display crosses 
and other Christian-themed items in their workplace." Does that mean that 
non-Christian employees are required to display crosses and other Christian 
symbols and messages from their desks  and workstations?


Alan Brownstein


From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu 
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Volokh, Eugene
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 3:37 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Federal regulators apparently force bank to take down 
religioussymbols


            Very interesting, thanks!  But I'm a bit confused by the Kansas 
City Fed chairman's statement, 
http://www.kansascityfed.org/publicat/newsroom/2010pdf/press.release.12.17.pdf 
.  It suggests that the regulation "does not apply to jewelry or other personal 
items displayed in the workplace"; but the materials, especially on the Web 
site, don't seem like "personal items" - they seem like statements from the 
bank management itself.  Is the claim that employees may put up their own 
decorations and statements, but that the bank can't put up decorations and 
statements endorsed by the management?  Or is it something else?



            Eugene



 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Tim Todd

December 17, 2010 816/881-2308

timothy.t...@kc.frb.org<mailto:timothy.t...@kc.frb.org>

STATEMENT FROM FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF KANSAS CITY

PRESIDENT TOM HOENIG

"The Federal Reserve's interactions with supervised institutions are subject to 
strict confidentiality. However, we have become aware of substantial confusion 
and misinformation related to the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City and one 
of the banks it regulates in Oklahoma. The Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City 
and the bank are working cooperatively and closely to clarify this issue.

"There have been references made to Regulation B (12 CFR 202 et. seq.), which 
implements the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and prohibits discriminatory 
creditor practices. Regulation B, as interpreted by the Board of Governors of 
the Federal Reserve System, does not apply to jewelry or other personal items 
displayed in the workplace.

"As the regional headquarters for the nation's central bank, the Federal 
Reserve Bank of Kansas City's officers, management and staff recognize the 
critical importance of community banks and the freedom under which they can 
serve their communities by providing financial services and fair access to 
credit."
As the regional headquarters of the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve 
Bank of Kansas City and its branches in Denver, Oklahoma City and Omaha serve 
the seven states of the Tenth Federal Reserve District: Colorado, Kansas, 
Nebraska, Oklahoma, Wyoming, northern New Mexico and western Missouri. The Bank 
participates in setting national monetary policy, is responsible for 
supervising and regulating numerous commercial banks and bank holding 
companies, serves as the bank for the U.S. government and for commercial banks, 
and provides other payment services to depository institutions.

From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu 
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Kevin Pybas
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 3:31 PM
To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'
Subject: RE: Federal regulators apparently force bank to take down 
religioussymbols

This story from the Oklahoma City newspaper indicates that the Federal Reserve 
has changed its position about the bank and the items in question.

http://newsok.com/feds-relent-on-oklahoma-banks-display-of-christian-themed-items/article/3524584?custom_click=headlines_widget


Kevin Pybas

________________________________
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu 
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Volokh, Eugene
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 3:09 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Federal regulators apparently force bank to take down religioussymbols

Any thoughts on this story?  See also Sen. Inhofe & Rep. Lucas's response, at 
http://inhofe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=f5d51d96-f7ff-cb88-e863-3b8dfc32eacc


http://www.koco.com/r/26162860/detail.html

A small-town bank in Oklahoma said the Federal Reserve won't let it keep 
religious signs and symbols on display.
Federal Reserve examiners [who came for a regularly scheduled inspection visit] 
deemed a Bible verse of the day, crosses on the teller's counter and buttons 
that say "Merry Christmas, God With Us." ... inappropriate. The Bible verse of 
the day on the bank's Internet site also had to be taken down....
Specifically, the feds believed, the symbols violated the discouragement clause 
of Regulation B of the bank regulations. According to the clause, "...the use 
of words, symbols, models and other forms of communication ... express, imply 
or suggest a discriminatory preference or policy of exclusion." ...

_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

Reply via email to