Amazon’s contract is probably devastating to the USPS, monetarily.
Does every single postal worker have to work Sundays?
Every single delivery driver has to work some Sundays.
The plantiff in this case refused to work any Sundays.
1 Like
he was hired back when sundays weren’t a possibility. and the employer was originally able to accommodate it. this one is not so easy to me.
2 Likes
From the article
Groff’s absences, meanwhile, created a tense environment, led to resentment toward management and contributed to morale problems, officials said. It also meant other carriers had to work more Sundays or sometimes deliver more Sunday mail than they otherwise would. One carrier transferred and another resigned in part because of the situation, Groff’s supervisor said.
If that’s not an undue burden on the Employer, what is?
it is a relatively small employer in this locale. and the employer may not have managed the situation well. goff said he’d swap with other shifts elsewhere to avoid sundays - were the resentful employees made aware of that?
anyway, i don’t think this one is obvious to me on undue burden.
Precedent here:
Details here:
Basically, in 1974, they decided “undue hardship” has a very low bar. However they didn’t really explain or defend that decision very well, and as all know, the current SCOTUS <3s Christians almost as much as it <3s Guns so it’s a good time to overturn precedent.
1 Like
We all know that this court has complete disregard for stare decisis and they <3 their religion more than the constitution. However, they love big business and the free trips and bribery they receive from their “friends” even more.
I think it will come down to how their benefactors tell them to vote on this issue. Nothing else matters.
I’m going to guess that: Alito, Gorsuch, Thomas, Kavanaugh, Coney-Barret are going to vote for religion over anything else as long as that religion is Christian.
I’m not sure that other people grumbling is a good reason. I once worked in a job where coverage was an issue so there was a rule that no more than 3 people could schedule vacation at the same time. Was mostly an issue around Thanksgiving & Christmas.
But you didn’t need to get permission to take your one annual floating holiday… you only needed to give notice.
So there were 4 African Americans who all liked to use their floating holidays for MLK Day every year. Perfectly within the rules. And really not an undue burden, or even a burden, on the rest of us as it tended to be a slower day anyway and no biggie to be down 4 people (out of 20).
And it wasn’t definitionally a black/white thing either. Any of the white folks could have used our floating holiday for MLK Day too if we’d wanted. It wasn’t like they were getting an iota’s worth of special treatment because they were black.
Yet there was grumbling. Oh, was there grumbling.
So my initial response to “the other employees don’t like it” is “too bad”.
But if the other employees were forced to work more weekends then I can maybe see it being a problem. I’d want detailed info on the scheduling though.
How many employees total? How many work any given Sunday? Was this guy working extra Saturdays to accommodate his no-Sunday rule?
If an employee normally has to work 15 Saturdays and 15 Sundays a year and this guy’s existence means they now have to work 12 Saturdays and 18 Sundays… cry me a river.
But if it means they’re now working 12 Saturdays and 25 Sundays then I’m a little more sympathetic to the “not fair to everyone else” argument.
I have no idea what your trying to say but it doesn’t seem on point or relevant at all.
1 Like
I guess the TLDR version is:
It doesn’t matter if people complain. People are going to complain.
It matters if there is material impact. Are they getting extra Saturdays off in exchange for working more Sundays? How many extra Sundays are they working?
Part of the “material impact” was that two other employees transferred out of that post office, allegedly so they didn’t have to work extra Sundays, allegedly because of his insistence on not working any Sundays.
My feeling on the whole thing is that he quit, so tough luck. He wasn’t fired, which would make the suit a lot stronger.
My opinion on this is that the USPS fucked up when they went to bed with Amazon. USPS: your employees chose your business partly BECAUSE Sundays off. I’m guessing it is a factor with Chik Fil-A employees.
I mean, I don’t see any devout Christians suing the NFL because they won’t play on any Sunday. They either work it out with God (he’s actually very flexible on this and easy to talk to and to get your way), or they choose not to even discuss it with God and just stop playing football.
Eh. the only real question is whether the SCOTUS changes the standard of “undue burden” from de minimis to something else.
I don’t give any shits where this case falls on the spectrum, though I do hope a Justice points out that the Sabbath is actually on Saturday, and this whole so called Sunday thing is blasphemous bullshit.
3 Likes
2 Likes
having read a little more, with the de minimus threshold, the case should be decided for the employer IMO.
Of course. The SC settled this in the 1970s but this court might not care.
Though trying to read the tea leaves it sounds like they might just define what the standard is a little more clearly and remand to lower court.
1 Like
hmmm. odds on Alito leaking another draft ruling?
1 Like
Agree
I think the NFL or any team could certainly claim “undue hardship” if a player or coach refused to work on Sundays. And not just players, but a majority of positions working for the NFL or one of the teams.
but even with that unless they have a promise/contract never to have to work on such days, the business has a legit right and perhaps a business-driven need to change at some point.
1 Like