Settlement awarded in religious discrimination case

If a person is unfairly discriminated against for religious reasons during an application process, that person can deploy a Kansas City attorney to help seek justice
If a person is unfairly discriminated against for religious reasons during an application process, that person can deploy a Kansas City attorney to help seek justice

If an individual believes that he or she was the victim of religious discrimination in the process of applying for a job, an experienced Kansas City discrimination lawyer can assist that person prepare the best case possible to pursue justice and reach a settlement based on unfair hiring practices.

According to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, if an employee or job applicant has firm religious beliefs, employers are required by law to make special provisions for that person as long as it does not place significant burden onto the company.

This issue surfaced in the greater Kansas City area recently after global customer management company, Convergys Customer Management Group, was found to be in violation of the Civil Rights Act.

According to reports, a Missouri citizen of Jewish faith named Shannon Fantroy applied for a position as a customer service representative at a Convergy's call center in Hazelwood, Missouri. Fantroy reportedly expressed during his interview that he would be unable to work on Saturdays in observation of the Jewish Sabbath. The recruiter then allegedly ended the interview immediately because Fantroy was unwilling to make concessions to work Saturdays.

After the abrupt termination of Fantroy's consideration for employment, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed a religious discrimination civil suit against Convergys, according to reports. Ultimately, Convergys had to settle for $15,000 and had to implement mandated training programs on discrimination and accommodation law.

"Mr. Fantroy never had a chance to discuss accommodation options because the recruiter simply cut him off once he stated that because of his religious beliefs he could not work on Saturday," said EEOC attorney Barbara A. Seely, of the St. Louis District Office in a press release. "Giving an employee an alternate schedule where hundreds of employees are available to cover the shift was not an unreasonable request … Other call center employers around the country should take note of these requirements."

Related posts:

  1. $6.5 million dollar settlement reduced in race discrimination case
  2. Preparing Your Workplace Discrimination Case
  3. SB592 threatens established workplace discrimination laws in Missouri
“Court rules limiting pretrial publicity and our obligations to our clients to keep confidential their matters restrict our ability to post news reports regarding cases filed and results obtained by The Meyers Law Firm. For this reason, most of our news reports are of cases filed by other firms representative of the kinds of matters we handle.”

2 thoughts on “Settlement awarded in religious discrimination case

  1. Follow the money and you will learn every time. -I’ve studied wage gaps off and on for 20 years. When there is a real wage gap the fealme offended sue. In reality, when very closely studied, due to affirmative action, there is most often a reverse wage gap. Most wage gap suits are not successful because despite earnings differences, other factors more fully account for them. Males are not a protected category and it is more difficult for them to sue and get an award. Because of societal double standards, males know they would likely never get a montetary award if the offending company president got on the stand and proved they company purposely and for malicious motives underpaid men.The reason women seldom win wage gap suits and why the Dept of Labor has quit looking for them is simple. Every time they did an in depth analysis they found out that men and women act the same. It’s supply and demand. Following the money nearly always explains the difference. Males or fealmes who are economically subsidized place less value on earning more money for themselves and show it by their actions at the workplace.The bottom line is that men earn most of the money because women value men who make the most money so men work harder at it. In the US, males make most of the money and women spend or have control or direct the spending of most of the money. In the US, women effectively spend as almost as much of what men earn as the men who earn it spend. It’s a huge subsidy. It’s economic fact. It works the same way for males that are subsiized by fealmes. There is just far fewer dollars going fealme to male. Give anybody something and they will not work as hard to get more of it. Its true with anything. In the US, by far men earn cash and give it to women to spend, or direct the spending, effectively subsidizing. The proof is in advertising rates. Media shows that have the same % of the 18-49 fealme market have rates far greater than those who have equal % of male 18-49. TV shows and ads blatently glorify women and degrade males because they pander to fealme buyers.Follow the money. It works every time. People can spout all types of rhetoric. Follow the money trail and your undestanding will increase.Those of you who are now angry with this writing are angry because the truth grates on your feminist agenda. No one will ever be able to convince you of anything. Your minds made up , you’re just looking for selective antedotes to justify your anger at life. This author just put a dose of common sense reality into this sites pot of boiling bitterness.

  2. Princess Leia / July 16, 2011You mention this haeppned on “tribal” grounds and deals with a “tribe.” I assume you mean a Native American / American Indian tribe. If so, this usually means they have various immunities (sovereign immunity comes to mind) and various laws do not apply to them (that’s why, at least in California, they can have smoking in their casinos).It is VERY hard to sue an Indian tribe. If EEOC has already told you that they can’t help, then it will be hard to find an attorney who can help you, especially one that offers a free consultation. There may be an attorney that offers a low-cost consultation ($100 for 30 60 minutes).You will need to find an attorney who knows the law as it deals with Native Americans.Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*


*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>