I don’t have a cite just at the moment. But I know a little while ago, there was this rather unique religious discrimination case.
Pakistani taxi drivers in New York claimed their religion forbade showering and bathing. So thus, when their bosses (and presumably other people) complained, they cried religious discrimination.
Now federal and state law does protect against religious discrimination. But not bathing and the body odor that would result. Is that a legitimate claim?
I know rights is always a balancing act. This person’s claim against another’s. You see why this would be a unique situation.
Oh, and I know that this is Great Debates. But I still have to ask. How did the situation ultimately turn out?
Your vague recollections are completely useless, and some fairly concerted searching, both in Google and a couple of legal databases, brings up no case involving Pakistani taxi drivers, New York, body odor, and religious accommodations.
About the only time I’ve heard about anything like this was back when I lived in San Diego. Sometime around 2013 or 2014, the authorities at San Diego Airport were using odor (including body odor) as part of their system for evaluating cab drivers. Some drivers complained, arguing that the test tended to reinforce stereotypes about immigrants, especially particular ethnic groups. I don’t think that religion was part of the argument, and I’m not aware of the cabbies filing a lawsuit.
As a general principle, Title VII requires reasonable accommodation of religious practices, as long as those practices do not unduly burden the employer or prevent the employee from performing his or her core duties. In the (unlikely) event that the OP’s alleged lawsuit actually exists, I doubt that body odor would be considered a reasonable accommodation, especially if it resulted in lost business for the taxi company. If the stinky body owns his own medallion and drives his own cab, he’s probably free to inflict his odor on his passengers, as long as they’re willing to put up with it.
.