Some [Minnesota] Muslim cashiers had declined to scan products such as bacon because doing so would conflict with their religious beliefs. They would ask other cashiers to ring up such purchases, or some customers scanned the items themselves.
Minneapolis-based Target Corp. (TGT) has offered the cashiers the option of wearing gloves, shifting to other positions or transferring to other stores.
"We are confident that this is a reasonable solution for our guests and team members," Target spokeswoman Paula Thornton-Greear said in a statement e-mailed to The Associated Press on Saturday.
Is this a fair compromise? Yes. Religion-workplace law essentially dictates that employers must make "reasonable accommodations" for their employees' religious beliefs. Federal law mandates this for employers with over 15 workers; however, individual state laws may add further stipulations.
If an employer claims that he cannot accommodate an employee (or employees), he would have to demonstrate that the potential accommodation would harm his business. And, the employer does not have to agree to an accommodation asked for by an employee. (Ansonia Board of Education v. Philbrook, 479 U.S. 60 [1986]). Target's accommodations are clearly reasonable; wearing gloves or taking a different position within a store certainly fall into the "reasonable" criteria. (I'm a bit confused, however, about how "transferring to another store" would solve the issue at hand.) If I were the manager of a Target where some of my cashiers were asking customers to check some items themselves and/or requesting other cashiers to handle certain items, I'd absolutely make use of the above accommodations. The two "pre-accommodation" options utilized by the Muslim cashiers are obviously bad for business. And Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison, 432 U.S. 63 (1977), would back up my position as it noted "that an employer need not incur more than minimal costs in order to accommodate an employeeÂ’s religious practices." (My emphasis.) However, one recent development -- the "Workplace Religious Freedom Act of 2005" -- seems to be in conflict with this, but is unlikely to hinder Target's accommodation plan.
