Occasionally, we run into stories that make us slap our foreheads and ask, “What were they thinking?” Here are a couple of examples.
Case No. 1: Said no to the Speedo
A Long Island man says he lost his job as a lifeguard at a state-run beach because he refused to wear a Speedo for his annual swim test in 2007.
Roy Lester, then in his late 50s, took a pass on the, uh, form-fitting beachwear, saying he preferred to wear a pair of biking shorts.
He wasn’t rehired for the job he’d had every summer for four decades.
A New York Daily News story quoted Lester: “I wore a Speedo when I was in my 20s. But come on. There should be a law prohibiting anyone over the age of 50 from wearing a Speedo.”
He sued the NY Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation for age discrimination in 2008 and 2009; both cases were dismissed on technicalities. But earlier this month, a state appeals court reinstated his case.
Lester, a bankruptcy attorney, is representing himself in the age bias suit. “They were just trying to get rid of the older guys,” he told the Daily News. “To me the whole key to being a good lifeguard is experience. An older guy sees a save before anyone else. You know the water.”
Case No. 2: Fired for facial hair
Our second head-smacker comes out of the Great Northwest, where a security guard claims he was fired because of his facial hair.
According to a recent story in the Seattle Times, Abdulkadir Omar, 22, began working for American Patriot Security in May 2009. He said no one told him when he was hired that he would have to shave his beard, which he keeps closely trimmed and said is part of his Islamic faith.
But six months after he was hired, he was told he’d have to shave his beard to comply with company policy.
He asked to be able to keep the beard as a religious accommodation, but the company refused.
Omar also noted that other security guards at the company sported beards.
He filed a discrimination lawsuit in federal court in July.
As you’re aware, companies don’t have to grant workers’ religious accommodation requests when doing so would provide an undue hardship for the employer.
So we’re wondering: Where’s the hardship in allowing an employee to grow a beard? And what about those other security guards who allegedly have facial hair?
By: Tim Gould
This article was syndicated via RSS from: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/hrmorning/~3/01AEpT9uTl4/
