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?

But would that cover all eventualities? Her female colleague is in the stockroom/lunch break and a male delivery driver arrives and needs a hand unloading or the delivery checked and signed for. What does she do? .The shop Is quiet and she is the only person on the shop floor. A lone male customer comes in. Can she refuse to serve them?

It isn't a simple or straightforward adjustment.

Surely if her request not to be rostered on alone with a male member of staff could be easily accomodated, the OP would have done it, monicalewinsky - she's already shown herself willing to accomodate other requests from this member of staff.

I would suggest that the fact she is asking about it means she's probably already looked at the practicalities of fulfilling this request, and doesn't think it will be possible. And unless we are privy to the exact skills her staff have, and the skill balance needed in the two locations, as well as the hours (and any restrictions on those hours) that the staff currently work, it's impossible for any of us to say catagorically that there IS room to accomodate her request.

Grennie I realise my opinion doesn't agree with the current law. But I think the current law is a bit dodgy.

"Flowery did I say something about your post?"

I have no idea, did you? Which post do you think you might have said something about? Sorry, I'm confused!

You make yourself look a bit daft spouting that opinion in my view

Ermm no I don't it's the most popular opinion on this thread.

This is a sexist request by the employee and needs to be dealt with as such.

Perhaps you don't understand the AIBU section.

So, like SGB, I am just saying what I think about the situation, rather than offering legal/employment advice etc. I realise that's not what was asked for! But I do think it's an issue worth discussing, as it is being on here.

I don think you could have someone who had to be there is a male colleague was present but not if a female colleague was present.

chaperones is the UK don't work because we don't generally have them other than for children. thank goodness!

National Secular Society

This thread has inspired me to join them ^

It's £29 pa for an adult or £45 for joint membership. Well worth it if it can help to get rid of this kind of nonsense.

They are also campaigning to stop DC being denied access to schools because of their parents' religious beliefs.

needsasock the trouble is i bet there are other members of staff who would like to be permantly based at one site, but aren't allowed because of the staffing issues (about which i have no idea).
It could quite be seen as unfair to everyone else.

Grennie and Flowery make valid points about tribunals involving massive expense, especially for a small company, which is perhaps why so many posters have urged OP to take careful advice

That said, it surely can't be denied that knowing this, employees sometimes "try it on" hoping for a payout in lieu of a costly hearing - and that applies to many types of folk, of all religions and none

As I said before, I really do hope that OP doesn't have such an employee on her hands ...

Compo, you don't have to cover all eventualities.

You answer the request, in writing, making clear that you will accommodate where possible, but cannot guarantee that she will never be alone with a man due to the nature of the job and staffing levels.

That is called making reasonable adjustment, without 'giving preferential treatment'.

OP should get proper advice about law and make sure not to put herself in trouble.In normal circumstances ,employer can have some exceptions but to shift everyone else because of one person religion or rather her violent and controlling husband or brother it's a step too far .
This thread really made me to think about my situation at work.I always thought my employer is scared but I am not sure now???

Just wondering if posters think other special treatments for other religions is also wrong e.g. christianity? Personally I do.

Oh, because it's popular therefore it's not daft?

Interesting logic!

However I also disagree with your assessment that your view that Grennie's advice to the OP to follow the law is wrong is "the most popular opinion on the thread". Many people on this thread are either ignorant of the law or disagree with it, but I can't see queues of them lining up to advise the OP to disregard it. Because they are not daft.

And if you could advise me how I am not understanding the AIBU section I'd be most grateful.

Did OP knew her requests prior to employing her???

Just wondering if posters think other special treatments for other religions is also wrong e.g. christianity? Personally I do.

I certainly think religion shouldn't need any special compensation with regards to work or indeed school.

Grennie, as an atheist I think it's wrong too.

But it is the law, and so I am duty bound to ensure that e&d is practised at all times.

So schools shouldnt have to have a collective act of worship with a broadly Christian nature? This is the law by the way, even if all schools dont comply.

This thread makes me so upset...Why when it comes to Islam everyone have to bend over--I need female nurse,female dr,only female side of the coffee shop...it goes on and on.What about rest of the religions or people with no religions????Where does it stop???????????????????????????????

I don't agree with any religion even Christianity having access to childrens thoughts through school.

So schools shouldnt have to have a collective act of worship with a broadly Christian nature?

Dead right they shouldn't. And the CofE should be disestablished, and no bishops in the HofL. Get rid of faith schools.

So schools shouldnt have to have a collective act of worship with a broadly Christian nature? This is the law by the way, even if all schools dont comply.

Of course they shouldn't

Are you trying to turn the prevailing view on this thread into an anti-Muslim one? Get a grip.

I dont agree religions should be given special consideration either. But Christianity long has, so it is not surprising as other religions grow in the UK, that they too want that extended to them.

It's not an anti-Muslim but it's anti stupid requests...

Of course religion has no place in school (except as a topic to learn about) because school is a place for education, where realities and facts are transmitted to students.

I have never for the life of me seen how and why it can be OK to transmit creation dogma, not based on any evidence or reality, and for which there are conflicting versions depending on who you talk to/where you were born, in the same context. It's just ludicrous.