If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MSNBC)   NYPD fires Orthodox Jewish recruit because they seder policy does not allow long facial hair   (usnews.msnbc.msn.com) divider line 8
    More: Interesting, Orthodox Jewish, N.Y.P.D., special meaning, NYPD fires  
•       •       •

4532 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Jun 2012 at 10:54 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-06-10 09:46:50 AM
4 votes:
Facial hair is a real problem with rescue breathers and filter mask. Its really a good way to get yourself killed if you don't have a good seal in a toxic environment.
2012-06-10 09:18:43 AM
4 votes:
Because how can long facial hair possibly be a problem when surrounded by extreme heat and flames?
2012-06-10 10:58:04 AM
2 votes:
Next time they see an application from an Orthodox Jew, hopefully the recruiter will know to passover it.
2012-06-10 12:41:34 PM
1 votes:

tukatz: ExcaliburPrime111: Unless the clean-shaven policy has a legitimate purpose (e.g. safety concern), then the recruit's religious requirements should be reasonably accommodated.



Disagree. Lets turn it around and ask "Why does he HAVE to have a beard for his religion?". If he didn't have a beard and could still practice his religion, then why doesn't the religion have exceptions? Does his god reject him for not having facial hair? That would be a pretty sad religion.

This is about facial hair. They're not telling him that he has to lose a kidney or chop off a finger. He just has to look presentable, be able to wear protective gear (mask) properly and be able to follow the rules set before him on his job contract. This means shaving his face.

The NYPD currently has about 34,500 uniformed officers. They have all signed the same papers upon employment and know that they can be fired if they don't. Coming in as a new recruit and stating that you're special and want to do things your own way is a really good way of getting a spot in the unemployment line.


But legally, that's generally not the standard- ExcaliburPrime111's is. Although the approach varies among jurisdictions, the analysis typically looks like:

1) Does the requirement have a disparate impact on members of a group - a no facial hair requirement does have a disparate impact in that it excludes men who do not shave for religious reasons

2) is it a bona fide job requirement? That has to be actually related to the performance of duties. For example, requirements that police officers be a certain height in order to project authority have been struck down, whereas requirements that pilots be a certain height because that's how the controls are set up have been upheld. With respect to the beard, if it's really about safety, it's a bona fide requirement - probably not so much if it's about "looking presentable" (an Orthodox Jew is not "unpresentable" by the standards of that community by virtue of having a beard.)

3) If the restriction is a bona fide job requirement, can the person be reasonably accommodated? Moving someone to another position is usually reasonable; entirely redesigning the cockpit of a plane likely wouldn't be.

As for whether he'd have to shave if other Orthodox Jews do, that's unlikely. Courts and tribunals don't like to get into discussions of whether a practice is actually required by a person's religion - they'd have one rabbi saying it's ok to shave and another saying no, and who is the court to determine which one more accurately describes the tenets of the faith? Instead, they look at whether a person sincerely believes the requirement is an essential part of their faith.

None of this may be the law in NY and I'm too lazy to look it up, but he may have a case. Even if the short beard is a bona fide job requirement for safety reasons, there are probably positions available where it's not an issue.

Also, the NYPD may be missing an opportunity. This guy could probably be more effective in Orthodox neighborhoods than an officer who shaves.

Unless we're going to go in the direction of not accommodating religious beliefs at all - fine with me, but forget Christmas as a common day off, etc - or banning outward displays of religious belief by public servants, like the French do, the bona fide requirement/ reasonable accommodation standard should prevail. Otherwise, you can discriminate insidiously by putting in place requirements with disparate impact (hmm. We don't want to say "no Asians", so we'll just require recruits to be 5'10". Even though we're hiring accountants.)
2012-06-10 11:29:07 AM
1 votes:

ExcaliburPrime111: Unless the clean-shaven policy has a legitimate purpose (e.g. safety concern), then the recruit's religious requirements should be reasonably accommodated.


It does. See Boobiess about respirator masks. He signed paperwork knowing he would have to shave. He was reprimanded once before for not shaving. He was fired for not shaving. And then he claims "hey, they knew I wouldn't be shaving." They may have known you weren't, and you probably knew that if you didn't you'd be fired. Hence, where are we today?
2012-06-10 11:26:26 AM
1 votes:

Mock26: If the Army is willing to allow Sikhs to have beards then why not the New York Police Department?



Because the Army is not the New York Police Department.

Why are rules so hard for people to understand? No matter where you look, companies/organizations have rules and policies. Key rule here: If you don't like or can't conform to what they require of you, don't apply.

There are different policies for different departments. If this guy is so determined to snub the NYPD rules, then perhaps he should seek out a dept. that will allow beards instead of starting a career by immediately rejecting the very rules he first agreed to...
2012-06-10 11:05:31 AM
1 votes:
Against God to cut your hair?? Where do they come up with this stuff?
2012-06-10 11:02:21 AM
1 votes:
Would somebody please explain the grammar of the headline? I don't get it.
 
Displayed 8 of 8 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report