Muslim Truck Drivers In EEOC Religious Discrimination Suit.

[pr126]

Jury Awards $240,000 to Muslim Truck Drivers In EEOC Religious Discrimination Suit

CHICAGO - A federal jury in Peoria, Ill., has awarded $240,000 to two Somalian-American Muslims who were fired from their jobs as truck drivers at Star Transport, an over-the-road trucking company, when they refused to transport alcohol because it violated their religious beliefs, according to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which brought the case. The trial started on Oct. 19, and the jury returned its verdict the next day after 45 minutes of deliberation.

Judge James E. Shadid, the chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois, found in favor of EEOC after Star Transport admitted liability in March 2015. The resulting trial was to determine compensatory and punitive damages and back pay. The jury awarded Mahad Abass Mohamed and Abdkiarim Hassan Bulshale $20,000 each in compensatory damages and $100,000 each in punitive damages. Judge Shadid awarded each approximately $1,500 in back pay.

EEOC alleged that in 2009, Star Transport fired Mohamed and Bulshale after they were required to transport alcohol. Both men told Star Transport that they believed doing so would violate their religious beliefs under Islamic law.

EEOC also alleged that Star Transport could have but failed to accommodate the truckers' religious beliefs, as required by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. EEOC filed suit (EEOC v. Star Transport, Inc., No. 13-cv-1240) in U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois in Peoria in May 2013.

"EEOC is proud to support the rights of workers to equal treatment in the workplace without having to sacrifice their religious beliefs or practices," said EEOC General Counsel David Lopez. "This is fundamental to the American principles of religious freedom and tolerance."

The case was litigated by EEOC Trial Attorneys Aaron DeCamp and June Calhoun and Supervisory Trial Attorney Diane Smason.

Calhoun said, "This is an awesome outcome. Star Transport failed to provide any discrimination training to its human resources personnel, which led to catastrophic results for these employees. They suffered real injustice that needed to be addressed. By this verdict, the jury remedied the injustice by sending clear messages to Star Transport and other employers that they will be held accountable for their unlawful employment practices. Moreover, they signaled to Mr. Mohamed and Mr. Bulshale that religious freedom is a right for all Americans."

Smason stated, "We are pleased that the jury recognized that these - and all - employees are entitled to observe and practice their faith, no matter what that might be."

Bulshale commented, "This case makes me proud to be American."

EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. Further information about EEOC is available on its website, www.eeoc.gov.

I am glad it all turned out to be as planned. Nice work if you can get it.

Judge James E. Shadid.  Hmmm. 

[facebook164]

Bad law. Needs to be corrected.

[Shiranu]

It's consistent. Baptists here get exemptions from handling. It and other jobs where you have to deal with alcohol as well. Italic names and nationalities won't change that...

As for should it be a law... yeah, sure, why not. If Muslims and Baptists are that insecure that even moving alcohol will corrupt them, go ahead and let someone else get paid to do it for them.

[facebook164]

It's consistent. Baptists here get exemptions from handling. It and other jobs where you have to deal with alcohol as well. Italic names and nationalities won't change that...

As for should it be a law... yeah, sure, why not. If Muslims and Baptists are that insecure that even moving alcohol will corrupt them, go ahead and let someone else get paid to do it for them.

No it should not: what if they where firemen on duty refusing to put out a fire in a brewery?

[Johan]

I work for a trucking company and part of my job is keeping up with these sorts of things so we can make/change policy to help protect ourselves when required. Needless to say, my boss emailed this to me earlier this week.

Everyone already knows this case is bullshit but here's what most of you probably don't know. Their claim was that they could not take the load because their religion forbids them from coming into contact with alcohol. That may be a valid angle to work legally speaking if your job is a bar tender or flight attendant. But as someone who hauled quite a few beer loads back when I was still a driver I can assure you, the driver of the truck most definitely does NOT come into contact with alcohol. EVER. Not with the alcohol itself. Not with the container the alcohol is in. Not with the cardboard box the alcohol container is in. Not with skid or shrink wrap the cardboard box which contains the container which contains the alcohol is in. You don't touch it. You don't handle it. You don't go anywhere near it. You barely even see it. EVER.

If you're a driver for the alcohol distributor itself then yes, you do come into regular contact with it. Those are the guys who haul the product from the distributor to the stores, bars and establishments where it is sold to the public. They load their trucks themselves, drive to their deliveries and then hump the product on hand carts into whatever establishment they're delivering to. Grueling back breaking work for not nearly enough pay. Nobody retires from that gig because they all end up with career-ending low back injuries before they're 10 years in but that's another story.

But these muslim dudes? They weren't doing final mile distribution as its called. They were working for a general freight trucking company that hauls all kinds of loads for all kinds of customers. So they would have been hauling the product from the brewery to the distributor or from a large regional distributor to a smaller local distributor. As I said, I've done quite a few of these loads. They are what is known as a high value load in the industry which means lots of special procedures exist for keeping the load safe from getting damaged or stolen.

At the pickup end, you back an empty trailer to a loading dock and sit in your truck and wait to be loaded. You are generally not allowed on the loading dock at all so you never get anywhere near the product. When the trailer is loaded, you are given the paper work and a door seal. You pull the trailer off the dock and you then close the trailer doors. Then a numbered door seal is installed on the door. Sometimes you do it while the person who loaded the trailer stands as a witness, other times you stand as a witness while the person who loaded the trailer installs the door seal. Just depends on the policy of the place shipping the load. Either way, you never get within 5ft of the actual product. I'm pretty sure both of these jackasses frequent supermarkets and convenience stores where they are routinely within less than 2ft of tons of alcohol packaging.

At the delivery end, things are a usually a little more laid back but still pretty uptight as trucking goes. Most local distributers will allow you to stand on the dock while they unload the trailer. But you're still not allowed to touch anything. They go on the truck and unload it. You can stand by and witness the unloading or you can sit in your truck and listen to an audio book, perhaps a nice atheist title for instance, but I digress. Either way like I said, you don't get near the product ever.

This is a bullshit case. These guys couldn't have come into contact with the alcohol if they wanted to. At least not legally. Yes they were hauling alcohol which promotes its consumption at least on some level. But I don't believe promoting its consumption by others is against their faith. And if it is, then they'd better not ever watch TV, go to a professional sporting event or drive down a highway. Because alcohol vendors advertise in every one of those venues. And by putting themselves into a position where they are exposed to that advertising, they are in effect doing just as much to support the consumption of alcohol by others as they would be doing if they had delivered the load their company tasked them with hauling.

Its a bullshit case and nothing good for any one of us will come from the fact that they won.


Edit to add: Typing all that has made me suddenly realize something. I am not aware of a religion that one can be faithful to without also being a hypocrite. I won't say such a religion doesn't exist because I don't know of every religion that exists. But there are none that I know of which allow for devoted faith without hypocrisy.

[Baruch]

It's consistent. Baptists here get exemptions from handling. It and other jobs where you have to deal with alcohol as well. Italic names and nationalities won't change that...

As for should it be a law... yeah, sure, why not. If Muslims and Baptists are that insecure that even moving alcohol will corrupt them, go ahead and let someone else get paid to do it for them.

Shabbos goy during Pesach.

Johan ... I once worked at Coors.  But I was safe, since I don't drink beer.  A whiskey distillery might have been more tempting ;-)  I also once worked at Jolly Rancher on the graveyard cleanup crew ... but I have never enjoyed eating their candy since then ... thank G-d it wasn't a chocolate factory with Lucy in it!

[Johan]

Johan ... I once worked at Coors.  But I was safe, since I don't drink beer.

You'd have been safe even if you did drink beer. I mean we're talking about Coors. That ain't beer.

[pr126]

I am guessing that the Somalis who "won" the case will not keep the money.
They were only the "middle men" for the litigation.

The money is already marked for another purpose.
Think about it.
Unskilled immigrant Somalis with that windfall, what will they do with it? Buy an expensive house, cars, a rich lifestyle? I don't think so.

For a Somali that is a fortune beyond his wildest dreams.
No, they will get a small cut for a job well done. The rest goes to the people who put them up to it.

This kind if "litigation jihad" is not an isolated case, there were many more examples. And not the last.
It is planned, organized and executed by professionals.
Follow the money. The infidel is taken to the cleaners. 

Looks like Quran 9:29 to me. Paying the jizya with willing submission.
Google "Muslims sue employers".  Quite few.

Multicultural Windfall: Judge Awards $240,000 to Muslim Truckers Who Refused to Deliver Beer

“equal treatment in the workplace.”
It establishes Muslim truckers as having a special right to choose what they transport and what they do not, a privilege that other truckers do not have.

In short, one law for Muslims and another law for the rest. Get used to it.

[FinalSomnia]

I work for a trucking company and part of my job is keeping up with these sorts of things so we can make/change policy to help protect ourselves when required. Needless to say, my boss emailed this to me earlier this week.

Everyone already knows this case is bullshit but here's what most of you probably don't know. Their claim was that they could not take the load because their religion forbids them from coming into contact with alcohol. That may be a valid angle to work legally speaking if your job is a bar tender or flight attendant. But as someone who hauled quite a few beer loads back when I was still a driver I can assure you, the driver of the truck most definitely does NOT come into contact with alcohol. EVER. Not with the alcohol itself. Not with the container the alcohol is in. Not with the cardboard box the alcohol container is in. Not with skid or shrink wrap the cardboard box which contains the container which contains the alcohol is in. You don't touch it. You don't handle it. You don't go anywhere near it. You barely even see it. EVER.

If you're a driver for the alcohol distributor itself then yes, you do come into regular contact with it. Those are the guys who haul the product from the distributor to the stores, bars and establishments where it is sold to the public. They load their trucks themselves, drive to their deliveries and then hump the product on hand carts into whatever establishment they're delivering to. Grueling back breaking work for not nearly enough pay. Nobody retires from that gig because they all end up with career-ending low back injuries before they're 10 years in but that's another story.

But these muslim dudes? They weren't doing final mile distribution as its called. They were working for a general freight trucking company that hauls all kinds of loads for all kinds of customers. So they would have been hauling the product from the brewery to the distributor or from a large regional distributor to a smaller local distributor. As I said, I've done quite a few of these loads. They are what is known as a high value load in the industry which means lots of special procedures exist for keeping the load safe from getting damaged or stolen.

At the pickup end, you back an empty trailer to a loading dock and sit in your truck and wait to be loaded. You are generally not allowed on the loading dock at all so you never get anywhere near the product. When the trailer is loaded, you are given the paper work and a door seal. You pull the trailer off the dock and you then close the trailer doors. Then a numbered door seal is installed on the door. Sometimes you do it while the person who loaded the trailer stands as a witness, other times you stand as a witness while the person who loaded the trailer installs the door seal. Just depends on the policy of the place shipping the load. Either way, you never get within 5ft of the actual product. I'm pretty sure both of these jackasses frequent supermarkets and convenience stores where they are routinely within less than 2ft of tons of alcohol packaging.

At the delivery end, things are a usually a little more laid back but still pretty uptight as trucking goes. Most local distributers will allow you to stand on the dock while they unload the trailer. But you're still not allowed to touch anything. They go on the truck and unload it. You can stand by and witness the unloading or you can sit in your truck and listen to an audio book, perhaps a nice atheist title for instance, but I digress. Either way like I said, you don't get near the product ever.

This is a bullshit case. These guys couldn't have come into contact with the alcohol if they wanted to. At least not legally. Yes they were hauling alcohol which promotes its consumption at least on some level. But I don't believe promoting its consumption by others is against their faith. And if it is, then they'd better not ever watch TV, go to a professional sporting event or drive down a highway. Because alcohol vendors advertise in every one of those venues. And by putting themselves into a position where they are exposed to that advertising, they are in effect doing just as much to support the consumption of alcohol by others as they would be doing if they had delivered the load their company tasked them with hauling.

Its a bullshit case and nothing good for any one of us will come from the fact that they won.


Edit to add: Typing all that has made me suddenly realize something. I am not aware of a religion that one can be faithful to without also being a hypocrite. I won't say such a religion doesn't exist because I don't know of every religion that exists. But there are none that I know of which allow for devoted faith without hypocrisy.

I work as an actual trucker for Millis Transfer. We carry beer and paper as a total of about 75% of our loads. I can say this with absolute certainty: if they picked up a load of beer from MillerCoors, Anhueser Busch, or Sam Adams, then they would have HAD to be within inches of that beer, as in touch the pallet closest to the trailer doors. Every single one of those companies requires that you place load bars or load straps on the last pallet/pallets to secure the load before you are allowed to leave the property. Several of the generic beer warehouses do the same.

Now, I don't know where these guys would have to pick up from, and to be honest I think this ruling is bullshit. However, to dismiss it as "they'd never be within five feet of the alcohol" is wrong.

[pr126]

Question:
Did the Somali truck drivers know what the job entails? That they will have to transport alcohol?
Did they declare at the job interview that certain goods such as alcohol they will not transport?

Was the interviewer aware of the restrictions Muslims have regarding certain substances? Was the  interviewer even aware that they are Muslims?

No, because such questions are "profiling". You cannot refuse employment on grounds of religion.
Catch 22.

In case you haven't noticed, Muslims are using your laws against you.

[Johan]

I work as an actual trucker for Millis Transfer. We carry beer and paper as a total of about 75% of our loads. I can say this with absolute certainty: if they picked up a load of beer from MillerCoors, Anhueser Busch, or Sam Adams, then they would have HAD to be within inches of that beer, as in touch the pallet closest to the trailer doors. Every single one of those companies requires that you place load bars or load straps on the last pallet/pallets to secure the load before you are allowed to leave the property. Several of the generic beer warehouses do the same.

Now, I don't know where these guys would have to pick up from, and to be honest I think this ruling is bullshit. However, to dismiss it as "they'd never be within five feet of the alcohol" is wrong.

And yet, you would still never be 'in contact' with the actual product. Again, grocery stores sell booze in Illinois. Where to do these asshats buy their food?

[Baruch]

American idiocy = file a lawsuit

Same as Christian pharmacies that won't sell me a condom ... I will vote with my feet, and my middle appendage.  I can't wait for "Catholic only" stores that only sell to Catholics ... that have been approved as such by their local bishop ... idiocy knowns no bounds.

[Poison Tree]

It is long standing US law that employers must make reasonable accommodations for, among other things, religion.  Switching these two drivers to different loads seems like a reasonable accommodation. In fact, The court noted that Star Transport had indeed often “swap[ped]’ loads between drivers,” and Star Transport conceded that it could have easily accommodated this request, too,. Considering that court documents say that "in 2007, Star Transport carried 66,130 total loads, with no loads containing alcohol. In 2008, only one load out of a total of 61,138 loads contained alcohol. In 2009, Star Transport carried 15,636 loads, of which 474 contained alcohol." It should have been a simple matter to let these drivers have one of the 97%+ of non-alcohol loads except that human resource manager "received no training on anti-discrimination laws, was not aware of any exceptions to the “at will” employment policy, had never heard of Title VII, and had no understanding of the company’s obligation to accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs".

Any argument about if the drivers come into contact with the alcohol is irrelevant. No court in the land is going to delve into whether a person's stated religious belief is actually required by their stated religion--nor should a court enter into such a topic.

[Johan]

So here is what these two asshats have accomplished. They have single handedly insured that any and all muslim truck drivers will have a much more difficult time finding driving jobs than they already did. Hope it was worth it.

[facebook164]

It is long standing US law that employers must make reasonable accommodations for, among other things, religion.  Switching these two drivers to different loads seems like a reasonable accommodation. In fact, The court noted that Star Transport had indeed often “swap[ped]’ loads between drivers,” and Star Transport conceded that it could have easily accommodated this request, too,. Considering that court documents say that "in 2007, Star Transport carried 66,130 total loads, with no loads containing alcohol. In 2008, only one load out of a total of 61,138 loads contained alcohol. In 2009, Star Transport carried 15,636 loads, of which 474 contained alcohol." It should have been a simple matter to let these drivers have one of the 97%+ of non-alcohol loads except that human resource manager "received no training on anti-discrimination laws, was not aware of any exceptions to the “at will” employment policy, had never heard of Title VII, and had no understanding of the company’s obligation to accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs".

Any argument about if the drivers come into contact with the alcohol is irrelevant. No court in the land is going to delve into whether a person's stated religious belief is actually required by their stated religion--nor should a court enter into such a topic.

Lot of bullshit.
the actaul facts matter. Or do you really want to live in a society where peoples fantasies dictates what is right and wrong?