It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Muslim sues employer in US for giving him exactly what he asked for

page: 5
36
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 12:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
If he worked for someone else who chose to make wedding cakes for whomever, and he takes the job ... then it's the same thing. You knew what you were getting into. It you can't make the cakes the employer requires you to make, then you should have been up front about it from the start.


It is the same thing. A business owner knows what he's getting into when he starts a business. If he can't operate without disobeying the law, then he should have been up front from the start, which would have prevented him from getting a business license.

This kid didn't know he was going to be required to touch pork any more than a baker knew he was going to have to serve gay people.

If one is wrong, so is the other.




posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Oh well, then no one with religious beliefs ought to own or operate a business? Hello, Beast System. Sign of the End.

And you wonder why corporations are soulless profit machines ... When someone who tries to run their business according to their conscience does get into business and try to run their business according to their conscience and guiding principles, you don't like it because it means they might have "icky morals" that you don't agree with. How dare they seek anything except the almighty dollar?

Ah, irony.


edit on 2-3-2015 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 12:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kapusta
Another Muslim hating thread ! seems to be the thing around ATS these days !

Anything for a few cheap stars



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 12:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: PorteurDeMort
If anyone else tried that they'd be replaced.


Exactly! Anyone else would have been replaced! But just cuz this guy's a Muslim, he has to get special treatment, and be...replaced...



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

Maybe this guys just needs to learn to think outside the box. Maybe you use the little plastic divider we use to separate our stuff from the next persons in line to nudge the pork forward, or maybe another item of the customers lacking a divider. I had to say it was a bogus lawsuit trap he was trying to spring on Costco since it took me 2 seconds to arrive at 2 other options.
edit on 2-3-2015 by regor77 because: misspell



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: infolurker why do muslims like this guy feel so entitled? or was this guy just doing this to stick it to costco. i believe if i was judge here i would dismis case and make this guy pay costco and court for wasting there time.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 01:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
Oh well, then no one with religious beliefs ought to own or operate a business?


If they cannot obey the law, then no, they shouldn't operate a business. I'm sure there are thousands of religious people who operate businesses and manage to obey the law.



When someone who tries to run their business according to their conscience does get into business and try to run their business according to their conscience and guiding principles, you don't like it


It doesn't have anything to do with what I like or don't like. It's about the law, or in Costco's case, the rules.

I can say that when people use their religion to get special treatment, I don't agree with it.


... because it means they might have "icky morals" that you don't agree with.


You speak as if you know me and you don't. You couldn't be more wrong. I sympathize with people who have to choose between keeping their job and doing what they think is right. Here's what I said about the florist:


originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
I sympathize with her, because of how I was raised, and the fact that I understand how it feels to hold deeply religious views myself. ...



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 01:58 PM
link   
a reply to: rabbitpinch




that seems like a very unusual interview, where the applicant states the role he wants, usually interviews are for a specific advertised role...


Well considering he was working as a cashier, and presumably he attended an interview for the job, I think it would be fair to say he wanted that particular job....wouldn't it?



how do you know he decided he was too precious - where you there? have you seen a transcript?


Because he is claiming compensation for being asked to do a job he was hired to do....that's precious in my book.



it seems your response has tried to present opinion/conjecture as fact and is as misleading as the OPs title


Nope.....just my opinion.....nice try though



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: rabbitpinch
a reply to: infolurker

the heading of this post is misleading - it claims the worker was given what he asked for - yet the story states he asked for a job in electrical and was refused - ergo he was not given what he asked for.


He did get what he asked for: A transfer from Cashier position so he didn't have to handle pork.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 02:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: chuck258

originally posted by: rabbitpinch
a reply to: infolurker

the heading of this post is misleading - it claims the worker was given what he asked for - yet the story states he asked for a job in electrical and was refused - ergo he was not given what he asked for.


He did get what he asked for: A transfer from Cashier position so he didn't have to handle pork.


He got partially what he asked for, not 'exactly' what he asked for.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 03:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheJourney

originally posted by: chuck258

originally posted by: rabbitpinch
a reply to: infolurker

the heading of this post is misleading - it claims the worker was given what he asked for - yet the story states he asked for a job in electrical and was refused - ergo he was not given what he asked for.


He did get what he asked for: A transfer from Cashier position so he didn't have to handle pork.


He got partially what he asked for, not 'exactly' what he asked for.



They might not have had an opening in electronics, therefore they may not have been able to fulfill his complete request. They have placed him on carts temporarily until an opening became available and he became impatient. There's only so much a company can do.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 05:06 PM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

At what point do people realize their religion is batshxt crazy? Come on, do you really think a God is going to tell you to not eat a pig? You should think a God would impart some divine knowledge to you, but nope, don't eat pigs.

Give me a break!



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 05:11 PM
link   
He was disappointed because he wanted to move out pork and alcohol from the shop 'menu'.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 06:54 PM
link   
This whole "my religion forbids bla bla bla" is really BS in our modern society. In fact most of the Westernized countries have long abandon religion as a driving force - the US is one of these countries still holding onto to the "God gene" which always ends up into discussions like these here .. and speaking about the Muslim countries, well they are well behind - maybe by about 500 years.

However I don't believe religion is a reason to accommodate for anything. Religion is a personal choice and should be a private thing and definitely doesn't belong into a professional environment... and if you really have such an issue handling certain materials - there are actually people who have true medical issues - then don't choose a job where there is a high chance you will handle these materials. This has nothing to do with religion but poor judgement - or good judgement if you try to scam the system - I guess.

You have no entitlement to pick your job, other than the freedom to apply wherever you want! Or if you tired working for the man, just start your own business and set your own rules! Isn't that a nice thing in a free economy???

Now the whole Pork thing is/was a necessary means to prevent people getting sick from eating spoiled pork. If you go back in time, even the Bible forbids to consume pigs - interesting is that in both instances the prohibition was added later than the original text. Well, it doesn't take a historian to assume what happened - there was probably serious health issues going around after eating pigs, considering that they carry a lot of diseases including tape worms. Pigs were not as clean as they are breed and processed today. Pigs were literally pigs, dirt-and-feacy-eating animals. The whole don't eat pork thing is probably a result of preventing people to get sick - well that was 2-3k years ago. Today the world is not flat and we are not even the center of the universe...



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 07:29 PM
link   
The thing is, rounding up shopping carts is the lowest job there is at a place like Costco (or any big box store). He went from being inside where its sheltered and climate controlled to outdoors.

I know this, as I worked as a cart wrangler for a big box hardware store in the past. I *wanted* to work in a nice department like lighting, but no -- they stuck the fat kid outside in the searing heat all day with the other "reject" workers.

I'd be pissed if I asked to be assigned to another area and was stuck outside. I don't think I'd sue though -- I'd probably just quit and find another job.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 09:35 PM
link   
I would bet my next paycheck its a Somali.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 07:52 AM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

The difference is Costco pays workers a much better wage than any other "big box" store. They are known for stellar benefits and a very positive workplace culture. I personally know a few people that have worked there and have done the cart collection in the parking lot. Essentially, they get paid about the same as a cashier and actually have a lot of leeway as to the time they spend inside or outside, and their comfort, health and safety always comes first.

Sure, he didn't get what he wanted, but it isn't his business to run and, at the end of the day, not his decision to make. He essentially gave up a job that many people would feel lucky to have just because he wanted to act like an elitist jerk and thought his antiquated ideology was more important than providing for himself and his family.

And, yes, I don't see the difference between this and the baker/florist issues we have seen. They have been discriminatory against gays, he is being discriminatory against people that eat bacon.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 08:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
The titles of these kinds of threads really bother me.

Its just the way its a MUSLIM suing his employer is conveyed in the title and in the OP

This guy lets face it is a idiot who is pissed he never got the cool job in the electronics department so is using every excuse he can muster to get his own way and when that doesn't work he tries to sue.

He just also happens to be Muslim and even tried using that as a excuse.

I don't know, might just be me but I always find these threads that start with the line "Muslim/Jew/Christian....." says quite a lot about the intolerances that the individual posting may be harbouring.

It turns form a thread that should be about the lengths this guy will go to to make a life a misery for his employers to about him doing it because he is a Muslim and before we know it the debate is all about Muslims and not the unscrupulous lengths people will go to to get their own way.

Doesn't sit quite right with me.

I agree. The title is distasteful. The kids an idiot.

The media is doing a fine job at shaping our youth. What scares me is the person who convinced him to go through with it. They are reinforcing what children are hearing before they get a chance to grow up and form their own opinion.




posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 12:06 PM
link   
this guy should have the case thrown out of court and charged the court fees. there is no apparent discrimination on behalf of the company at all. in fact it would seem they even tried to accommodate the guy. he was hired as a cashier, or cashier's assistant (is it a separate job classification?). which means that he applied for it, or took it when it was offered (i did that once myself, applied for one job, but i was asked if i would fill another possession instead). therefore it was by his choice that put into a position of handling pork products and alcohol. it seems that an issue arose when some pork product came through. now it would be interesting to hear just how he handled that. did he outright refuse to touch it and demand the customer go to another cash register? or was he apologetic about refusing to touch it? did he cause a ruckus while refusing? did he try to demand at that point that no pork or alcohol be permitted in his line?

at any rate he was removed from working at a cash register. again i wonder about his reactions to that. they then worked to accommodate him by having him collect the shopping carts. a position that would not put him into contact with these items prohibited him. if Costco is like any other store being in electronics is no guarantee he will not come into contact with pork or alcohol. normally in stores, sales floor help needs to help other departments as necessary. i have even seen automotive technicians at Wal-Mart for example working in the food department when that department needed help, and there was no cars in the shop. in electronics he might even be required to take some pork a customer left and take it back to the correct department. and with products like meat (as well as any cold or frozen item), it has to be done immediately for health/food safety, it just can't sit around for someone else to do.

it's not like he was asking for a religious holiday off or was not hired or promoted etc. he decided he had an issue, after being hired for a job that that job would cause him to have to handle taboo things. and after being removed (not made clear if his choice or the company's choice, but it doesn't matter as it was his issue that caused it. and it is clear he was incapable of performing that job) from such an offensive (to him) position is upset that he did not get his pick of any other job he wanted. that is not religious persecution. if he were to win this case it would put in place a dangerous precedent that could be used later on to push further special treatment for Muslims.




top topics



 
36
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join