Whitehall Health Care of Ann Arbor Sued by EEOC for Religious Discrimination

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Press Release
12/9/11

Nursing Home Fired Jehovah’s Witness Because of Her Need to Attend Religious Services, Federal Agency Charged

DETROIT — An Ann Arbor, Mich., nursing home violated federal law when it fired a Jehovah’s Witness based on her religion and need for a religious accommodation, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit it filed today.

According to the EEOC’s suit (Case No. 2:11-cv-15407), filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Whitehall Healthcare terminated the discrimination victim, a Jehovah’s Witness from Ann Arbor, from her job as a certified nursing assistant due to her need to have Wednesdays and Sundays off to attend religious services.

Such alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which protects employees against discrimination based on religion and requires employers to provide employees with reasonable accommodations to allow them to practice their sincerely held religious beliefs. The EEOC filed suit after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process. The EEOC is seeking an injunction to prohibit the company from engaging in this type of discrimination in the future, as well as monetary relief on the behalf of the victim.

“An employer has a legal duty to accommodate an employee’s sincerely held religious beliefs, plain and simple,” said Lauren Gibbs, trial attorney for the EEOC’s Detroit Field Office. “Firing someone for asserting that right violates federal law against religious discrimination and only makes a bad situation worse.”

The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. Further information about the EEOC is available on the agency’s website at www.eeoc.gov.

http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/12-09-11.cfm

Related Post

December 18, 2011   Posted in: Affirmative Action News |

Fair Use Disclaimer

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Under the 'fair use' rule of copyright law, an author may make limited use of another author's work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights.

Fair use as described at 17 U.S.C. Section 107:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phono-records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

  • (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for or nonprofit educational purposes,
  • (2) the nature of the copyrighted work,
  • (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and
  • (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."