Employment Law Information Network
Google
 
Web www.elinfonet.com
Main Navigation
Federal Law Articles
State Law Articles
HR Newsletter
HR Guidebook
HR Policy
HR Seminars
Employment Contracts
Employment Law Forums
Employment Law Blog
Employment Laws
Employee Rights
Workplace Headlines
Federal Article Feeds Federal Article Feeds
State Article Feeds State Article Feeds
Get Our FREE Daily or Weekly Newsletter!
Email:
Over 8,300 Subscribers! More Information

Friday, September 23, 2005

Tattoos and Religion

Do you think it is okay for an employer to refuse to hire applicants with visible tattoos because the employer wants to promote a wholesome image?  Think again . . . .

Red Robin Gourmet Burgers, Inc., whose former CFO stated that the restaurant chain seeks out “that all-American kid from the suburbs” for its server positions, has (maybe I’d better make that “had”) a dress code policy for servers that prohibited visible tattoos.  Understand—the policy did not prohibit having tattoos, but did require that the server conceal them with clothing while at work.

Edward Rangel, a server in a Bellevue, Washington Red Robin, requested an exception to the dress code.  According to Mr. Rangel, he is a follower of the Kemetic Orthodoxy religion, a modern practice of ancient Egyptian traditions, founded in the late 1980s.  Mr. Rangel asserted that he believes it would be a sin for him to conceal the religious inscriptions that encircle his wrist (in the form of tattoos.)  Red Robin declined to allow an exception to its dress code, and terminated Mr. Rangel’s employment when he refused to wear clothing that would conceal his tattoos.

The EEOC filed suit against Red Robin for religious discrimination.  The Court held that Red Robin had to support its defense that the dress code exception would create an undue hardship on its business with more than hypothetical hardships based on unproven assumptions.  In other words, the Court rejected Red Robin’s “wholesome image” argument without concrete evidence that the dress code exception would hurt its business.  After that ruling,  Red Robin agreed to settle the lawsuit by paying Mr. Rangel $150,000 and changing its policies to allow for accommodation of religion.

So if you are served by someone with tattoos, do not assign responsibility (either blame or credit—depending on your perspective) to the employer.  Instead, you can thank Mr. Rangel, the EEOC and a federal district judge in the Western District of Washington.

I wonder when the First Church of the Harley-Davidson will be founded . . . .

Posted by Suzanne H. Stenson on 09/23 at 04:18 PM
(1) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink
Page 1 of 1 pages
 
Terms of Use  |  Privacy  |  Advertising  |  About  |  Contact  |  For Law Firms  |  Partners

Copyright © 2009 elinfonet.com, llc.
All Rights Reserved.

The use of this site, and the terms and conditions for our providing information, is governed by our Terms of Use, including the disclaimers contained therein. By using this site, you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Use and that you accept and will be bound by the terms thereof.

This site is designed for lawyers concentrating in employment law and human resource professionals who specialize in employee relations.  As more fully set forth in the terms of use, the information provided on or through this site is for general information purposes; it is not a determination of your legal rights, nor your responsibilities under the law.  None of the information contained on this site is, or should be construed as, legal advice.  The information should not be relied upon for legal advice.  We are not engaged in the practice of law and no attorney-client relationship is being created.  Any information communicated to any lawyer via this site does not have the confidentiality protection of the attorney/client privilege.  If you are seeking legal advice, find a qualified lawyer in your area.  If you need help finding a lawyer, call your local, county or state bar association.

All logos and trademarks on this site are property of their respective owners.