>From time to time over the years, I had Muslim students in an early evening
>class during Ramadan. Typically they bring some food and a bottle of water to
>class and inconspicuously eat something during class at sunset. I never had a
>student ask me to schedule a class break at sundown so he/sh
I realize that if the Muslim breaking of the fast after Ramadan is a
religious ritual like the Seder, or very close to it, then my question
becomes moot. But do we know that this is indeed so for Muslims?
Eugene
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailt
I think one problem you run into is that "breaking the fast" is an act with
significant religious and cultural meaning. I don't know if it can be
characterised as a religious rite -- but it is very, very close to one if not.
While taking an energy bar or water meets the physical need, that wou
Per the Naval Observatory (http://aa.usno.navy.mil/cgi-bin/aa_pap.pl),
sunset today in LA will be at 7:03pm PDT. I gather Ramadan ends at about
the end of September this year, when sunset will be at 6:37PDT. What if
the same break time is needed for all or nearly all workers (because
they are worki
Oops. My reference to free exercise/RFRA/RLUIPA was mistaken, since this is a
Title VII issue. Sorry about that. But I think the issues are similar. - Dan
Conkle
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Conkle, Daniel O.
Sent: Friday, Se
I appreciate Doug's practical point, but I was wondering whether
this is enough to make the breaking of the fast an "aspect[] of
religious observance and practice."
One more question: Assume that Swift doesn't offer a break, but
doesn't object to people's having an energy bar or drinking
I tend to agree with Doug (which is generally a safe position to take), but
Eugene's question is interesting. Is it fair to describe the question as
follows: Is conduct that *facilitates* religious exercise properly protected
no less than the religious exercise itself? Perhaps only if the fac
(There's also a Michigan Constitution religious freedom claim against
the Michigan Department of Agriculture.)
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/09/farmers-decryin.html
A group of community farmers, some of them Amish, are challenging rules
requiring the tagging of livestock with RFID chip
So if they have already passed the point where they have a mandatory lunch
break under federal law, even though none of them eat, a break at sunset would
be a second break, with more than de minimis cost, and therefore not required
under TWA v. Hardison, the leading case on Title VII accommoda
reasonable accommodation requirement is a federal law requirement. so the
question would be when the accommodation requirement of Title VII conflicts
with a labor standard, what happens.
But there is not necessarily a conflict here.
The accommodation requirement is almost, but not quite, toothle
Doug's analysis may well be quite right, but let me ask this:
Does it matter whether (1) the sunset lunch break is seen by Muslims as
a religious exercise or (2) the sunset lunch break is seen by Muslims as
a way of avoiding discomfort and possible health problems that may stem
from not eat
Swift also has a federal law and perhaps a state law problem.
Federal law requires that employees who work a shift longer than 6
hours must take a 30 minute lunch break. The lunch break cannot be
more than 5 hours 30 minutes after they start. (I ran into this many
years ago when i worked for
12 matches
Mail list logo
