-
South African election results renew debate over identity-based voting
-
Post-election pressures complicate US and Israeli decisions on Iran
-
South African voters report smoother local election but declining IEC trust
-
UN members approve talks on treaty protocol against environmental crime
-
Dolly Parton museum and Nashville hotel open after singer’s death
-
Family-run West Sussex beach café prepares for first winter season
-
George and Amal Clooney attend New York political-comedy reading
-
CT scans reveal health and burial clues from Egypt’s Braided Lady mummy
-
British buyers pay substantial premiums for period-home appearance
-
Oxford faces complaints over lecturer’s classroom attire
-
Thomas Markle released to house arrest after child-abuse-image charge
-
Kyren Wilson and John Higgins reach International Championship snooker final
-
Dawn of War 4 developers chose Adeptus Mechanicus for tactical variety
-
New Zealand and Tonga meet for place in Rugby League World Cup final
-
Italy face unbeaten South Africa in Turin Nations Championship match
-
Reports of unsafe AI-toy responses renew calls for child-safety rules
-
ChatGPT interactive interface feature tested across six custom tools
-
Juneau food network combines difficult supply routes with deep sharing traditions
-
Freshways milk-price cut deepens pressure on UK dairy farms
-
India climbs green-transition ranking after first emissions decline in 25 years
-
Labour and National remain virtually tied as New Zealand vote count advances
-
Trump names Stephen Miller as White House chief of staff after midterm losses
-
The Good Daughter adapts Karin Slaughter thriller with Rose Byrne and Meghann Fahy
-
Restored Albanian tower houses anchor new rural tourism trail
-
Heavy-lift drone evacuates wounded Ukrainian soldier from frontline kill zone
-
Sonia Gandhi reflects on family tragedy and reluctant political career
-
Morrison says West Brom recovered after pressure from successive derby losses
-
Pope Leo begins three-country South American tour in Uruguay
-
Britain considers 2027 state visit for Ukraine’s Zelensky
-
Khawaja says entire Australia camp knew of 2018 ball-tampering plan
-
Arizona Democrats Secure Historic Trifecta with New Legislative Leadership
-
Anna Miltina Confronted with Racism Allegations on ProSieben Show
-
Carney Welcomes U.S. Trade Reversal After Democratic Midterm Victory
-
Microsoft Xbox App Update for PC Promises 60% Faster Startup
-
Armenian FM Discusses EU Accountability for Palestinian Rights in Madrid
Sacred Sundays: US high court debates religious rights at work
The US Supreme Court opened debate Tuesday on the rights of a Christian mail carrier who refuses to work on Sundays, in a case that could force employers to do more to accomodate religious beliefs in the workplace.
The high court, which has been sensitive to religious rights since Donald Trump placed three conservatives on the bench during his 2017-2021 presidency, will hear the case of evangelical Christian Gerald Groff.
As a result of a contract between the US Postal Service and Amazon, Groff, who began working for USPS in 2012, was required to work on Sundays to process packages at a mail sorting center.
Citing his religious beliefs, Groff asked for an accommodation so that he would not have to work on the Sabbath.
His postmaster tried to oblige him, including transferring him to a smaller facility.
But in 2017, he again was asked to start delivering Amazon packages, and the postmaster was not always successful at finding colleagues to cover Groff's Sunday shifts.
Groff was disciplined for abandoning his job, and in 2019 he resigned and filed a complaint against the US Postal Service for religious discrimination.
After losing his initial case and an appeal, Groff turned to the Supreme Court to weigh in.
By agreeing to take up the case the high court suggested it was not satisfied with the lower courts' views of his religious rights.
- 'Minimal cost' -
Experts say the nine-justice bench could use the case to review its existing law on religion in the workplace.
A 1964 federal law, amended in 1972, prohibits religious discrimination in the workplace and requires employers accomodate employees' beliefs as long as it does not "unduly burden" their business.
In 1977, in a case involving an airline employee who did not want to work on Saturdays, the Supreme Court ruled that accommodations should not require the employer "to bear more than a (negligible) cost."
The ruling was strongly criticized by religious rights advocates, who want believers to have stronger protections in such cases.
Harvard law professor Joshua McDaniel wrote that, as it stands, the law "let businesses avoid accommodating religious practices in most cases."
In asking the Supreme Court to revisit the issue, Groff said the existing standard amounted to an "egregious and consequential error."
In a separate filing, however, the powerful AFL-CIO labor confederation urged the court to consider the "burden" imposed by religious accommodations on all coworkers, not just the employer.
Arguments from the parties will run for about an hour Tuesday and the justices must make its decision by June 30.
C.Meier--BTB