To not accommodate a request by a female Muslim never to be in work "alone" with any male colleague?

[LibertyPrints]

"Sarah" has worked with our company since December. We have 12 staff (some of whom are part time) across 2 sites. All staff work between the 2 sites. They are retail outlets.

Sarah is Muslim and has recently contacted me to ask if I can ensure she is not ever scheduled to be alone with any male colleague at either site stating this is to do with her religious beliefs.

The manager is male and 3 staff are male. Different staff have different skill levels and they are scheduled where they are best utilised on any given day/week and so that all shifts are pretty equally shared out. It is not practical to agree to this.

For clarity I have no issue with making adjustments for her where I can. For example she asked at interview if she could reduce her lunch hour by varying amounts and then take that extra time out when she wanted to pray at varying times of the day. Even though we don't normally allow breaks to be taken in this way I agreed willingly.

I feel really awkward saying no but it's really far from ideal. AIBU to think if she can't expect this from us?

So it is important to do everything by the law and ignore those here who havent a clue what they are talking about.

This is an AIBU not an industrial tribunal!

Here here Grennie.

Caruthers - When it comes to emplyment, it matters not a jot what your personal opinions are. You can think that no woman should have paid maternity leave, or that statutory holiday requirements are too long. It doesnt matter. Employers have to follow the law.

Could you not just put her in the concession within the larger shop?

Let her know that the only practical way of accommodating her request as much as you can,is to make sure all her shifts are within the larger shop and whilst you apsolutly cannot guarantee that she will never be lone working with a male it does hugely minimise the likely hood of it happening.

If its a larger store the likelyhood of her being alone with another male is slim to none given most are fairly open plan so you can be fairly sure that there is not much at a chance of her being one of only two staff members in the entire shop

this is an AIBU as Caruthers says
Also in my opinion….sexism at its worst. Disguised as religion
OP you are NOT BU and have been extremely fair e.g. lunch break

A chaperone may well work in practical terms
but I would guarantee , other employee's noses would be put out of joint

If the employee was going to the storeroom, the male employee and the chaperone could stay in the shop
So in this scenario the male employee is being told - someone will be shadowimg your movements and making sure youu don't rush into the storeroom and molest a female colleague. I wouldn't be prepared to work under those conditions.

Caruthers - When it comes to emplyment, it matters not a jot what your personal opinions are.

Once again this is an AIBU NOT the employment law section.

Many posters are replying in that fashion.

For what it's worth I believe common sense will prevail and this woman trying it on will be shown the door because she already sounds unreasonable...or of course she'll leave offended.

No, OP, I would not bend over 'cause of her believes.You already did some exceptions and that's even more than what you had to do.
She is in UK ,and she has to respect law the same way we have to respect law when we go to UAE....

If se doesn't like ...well...her issue...

"Once again this is an AIBU NOT the employment law section.

Many posters are replying in that fashion."

Some are, but many are making completely inaccurate statements of "fact" about employment law with no basis for doing so, which is irresponsible and foolish.

Also, Grennie's point was that it is important for the OP to follow the law, and the fact that this subject is (rather unfortunately) being debated in AIBU makes absolutely no difference to that statement.

If this woman is shown the door, she may decide to take the employer to an industrial tribunal. If the employer has not looked at whether she could accomodate teh employees request, the employer will lose. It can be costly to lose an Industrial Tribunal case as an employer. Indeed the costs can finish a small business off.

Oh, and it absolutely would not be "common sense" to "show this woman the door" because she makes requests of this type. In fact it would be extraordinarily stupid.

Agreed flowery. Making pronouncements on employment law which are plainly wrong, helps no one. If you want to debate whether you think this employment law is right, that is different altogether. But you need to be clear that the law does support the fact that employers should try and make reasonable adjustments.

An adjustment is not unreasonable just because you and other employees think it is ridiculous or an insult.

If a potential employee has particular needs they want addressing then they're obliged to mention this at interview" NO. There is no specific obligation to do so

I was referring to the moral obligation, Flowery - my fault for not making that clear

In most of these things, surely the test is whether or not a decision is reasonable; as you rightly mentioned, "Sarah's" having left it out could well damage any claim, especially as the OP has already made a number of adjustments for her

I also agree with others that the "chaperone" idea could be an utter nightmare. Despite employing many muslims I've never experienced this personally, but a colleague certainly has, and trust me - you really, really don't want to know!!!

She will leave rather than get shown the door.....it sounds as absurd as it sounds.

AIBU is for opinions and it is stupid to think otherwise.

Chaperoning someone around a workplace because coming into contact with a lone man is against a religious practice I very much doubt would be a legal requirement of an employer.

This is sexism plain and simple.

Flowery,where I am working there is five of us + my employer.
My employer is bending back and forth for one of the employee because she is Muslim. We have to always work around HER needs and it's not fair.It actually causing big friction lately at work and my option is to walk away only 'cause I think we should be treated same.

Why are posters insisting on making it such a stark option.

Of course there is room to accommodate her request (which she has stated is for religious reasons, which is correct - thereby invoking a protected characteristic).

As an employer, all op needs to do is ask for request in writing, engage on 1 to 1 level as to how she will try to accommodate as far as is reasonably possible, but cannot guarantee all the time.
Put this in writing to employee and make the caveat that future staffing levels may also affect this arrangement.

Other members of staff do not need to know that she has made this request - her private dealings with manager are not their business.

Simple!

From an insurance perspective I don't think it would be a problem tbh. I'm a corporate underwriter and although i haven't come across this request I've had a think about the insurance implications.

If the chaperone was provided at the employee's expense then the chaperone would be covered by the shop's public liability insurance (she would be classed as a 'visitor'). I would want it stressed that the chaperone not undertake any sort of work in the shop (so no 'helping' with stock, etc) and would suggest she be taken through the shop's fire/H&S policy, etc but other than that I wouldn't charge any extra or alter the policy t&c's in any way.

If a company didn't tell us (the insurer) about a chaperone and one was then injured I'm pretty sure the policy would pay out (as i said i'm an underwriter though not a claims handler).

The chaperone is no more at risk than any other visitors we would expect to come onto the premises (e.g. delivery persons, an electrician, etc) and arguably only slightly more of a risk than a customer (because presumably the chaperone would access staff only areas).

The trouble is it's a slippery slope. If religion is grounds for allowing some special treatment, then it's hard to know where to draw the line. If all branches of a religion are OK, then do you have to accommodate the whims of extremists? For example a teacher who won't teach girls?

And how do you know what's a valid religion? Can you get special treatment if you're a scientologist or a druid? What about if you're a jedi or believe in the flying spaghetti monster? Because there is no evidence to support any religious beliefs, so if a Christian or Muslim can claim they have to do XYZ because of their evidence-free beliefs, then logically so can anyone.

Also if "Sarah" is being pressured by a male relative/partner and might get beaten up for failing to be preposterously sexist, then that's not her employer's problem, it's a matter for the police (and for Sarah to grow a feminist spine). (And like SGB I'm not not aiming at Muslims per se, it's aimed at anyone who allows their religion to trump their human rights and freedoms.)

The difference between religion and maternity leave is that religion is a choice, and it's not supported by science. If people are going to have babies at all (presumably someone has to), then someone has to bear them and it's women, so that has to be allowed for (similar to sick pay). It's essential, even if it doesn't affect everyone personally. Religion is not essential, so if you choose it, meaning you need to follow a set of arbitrary rules, you should simply avoid any job that would not allow you to stick to your rules. As has been said, just like a vegan working in a butcher's. If you're opposed to it in principle, then you can't do it.

So why wouldn't her being in the concession work, being a very simple solution.

With that in mind I would think the likelyhood of it being considered to be a reasonable fairly simple adjustment would be quite high

ROSERADISH I fully agree with you ...well said...

Who said AIBU is not for opinions caruthers? Grennie's opinion was that it would be sensible for the OP to follow the law. Your opinion was that she was wrong because she was saying so on an AIBU thread. You make yourself look a bit daft spouting that opinion in my view, but no one is trying to deny you your right to express it.

RoseRadish - Yes employers have to accomodate requests where reasonable. If it is not a single sex school, and classes are mixed, of course a teacher would have to teach boys as well as girls.

The courts and the law determines which religions are acceptable for this protection.

Interestingly certain beliefs that are not religious, as long as they can be shown to be a coherent worlview, are also protected under this legislation. For example a vegan who does not want to serve meat to customers, should be accommodated if they reasonably can e.g. if they can be allocated to work that does not involve handling meat.

Flowery did I say something about your post? Sorry if I came across not pleasant ,honestly sorry...

"Flowery,where I am working there is five of us + my employer.
My employer is bending back and forth for one of the employee because she is Muslim. We have to always work around HER needs and it's not fair.It actually causing big friction lately at work and my option is to walk away only 'cause I think we should be treated same."

Um. Ok. Not sure what to say to that really, or what your point is. I have no idea whether what your employer is doing is necessary or reasonable.