Can a Jewish person be required to work Hanukkah?

[Rigamarole]

If a person of Jewish background works for a private, non-government business in the US, and let’s say they signed an employment contract stating they would be required to work holidays, can their employer legally force them to work throughout Hanukkah? If not, and they were fired for it (refusing to work when scheduled), what would their legal recourse be?

Also, what is the general application of US law for religious holidays? In case state matters, I’m in California.

[FatBaldGuy]

IANAL, but AFAIK there is no state or federal law that governs whether an employee can be required to work or not work on any holiday, religious or not.

It is entirely a matter between employer and employee. If the employee signed a contract indicating he was available/willing to work on holidays, it is certainly within the employer’s right to require him to work on a holiday.

Many, but not all employers do try to take employee requests into account when making up work schedules, but they are under no legal obligation to do so.

[bordelond]

@Rigamarole

Also, what is the general application of US law for religious holidays? In case state matters, I’m in California.

… my understanding is that there is no federal law at all concerning this kind of thing, except that the employer is compelled to pay extra overtime for holiday work. That may only apply to working during federal holidays, though, as opposed to religious ones.

[Punoqllads]

Hanukkah is a very minor holiday, really. There are no religious restrictions from working on those days, so I’m not sure how one could use that to win a legal ruling.

[IvoryTowerDenizen]

@Rigamarole

If a person of Jewish background works for a private, non-government business in the US, and let’s say they signed an employment contract stating they would be required to work holidays, can their employer legally force them to work throughout Hanukkah? If not, and they were fired for it (refusing to work when scheduled), what would their legal recourse be?

Also, what is the general application of US law for religious holidays? In case state matters, I’m in California.

Hanukah is a secular-type holiday on the Jewish calendar. It doesn’t have the weight or significance of Rosh Hashana or Yom Kippur, which are major religous holidays. The only tie to anything religious is the “miracle” that allowed the oil to remain lit for the eight days, when it should have run out in one. For the most part, Hanukah celebrates a historical event, rather than being a religous mandate.

Many people over inflate the significance of the holiday, due to the timing near Christmas.

That being said, IMHO there are few Jews who would concider working on Hanukah an imposition. I don’t know the legality of requiring people come to work on any religous holidays, but I know people who are required to work on Christmas and that is holiday with much more religous significance than Hanukah.

[Jelymag]

Chanukkah is relatively minor in the Jewish faith. It only receives so much publicity for its nearness to Christmas. Many Jews do request leave for Yom Kippur or Rosh Hashanah, which are of much more importance both religiously and familialy.

I see I’ve been beat to this a number of times…

[RealityChuck]

First of all, Chanukah is a very minor Jewish holiday.* I don’t know anyone who takes holiday time off for Chanukah; if people take off for it, they use up vacation time. And it’s rare indeed for anyone to take the entire eight days off.

I believe US law requires employers to allow workers off for religious holidays (though the workers need not be paid for it). It would be like a Catholic wanting a day off for a saint’s feast day: you can ask, and the employer must make reasonable accomodation, but you still can be required to work.

*Around 1900, it was only celebrated by the most observant of orthodox Jews and was widely believed to be on the way out. But it became an acceptable alternative to Christmas celebration, so more Jews began to rediscover it.

[Harriet_the_Spry]

First of all, in the US it is rare for someone to sign a contract related to their employment. Is that really what happened? In the rare cases where this does happen, it almost always takes precedence.

For normal employment not involving a contract, a business is required to allow employees time off for religious reasons if it does not cause an undue hardship. This law covers most but perhaps not the very smallest employers. But even moderately small employers can sometimes argue that it is a hardship. These things are determined on a case-by-case basis, and the employer and the employee are expected to show they have made reasonable attempts to work out a compromise.

[Alessan]

@RealityChuck

*Around 1900, it was only celebrated by the most observant of orthodox Jews and was widely believed to be on the way out. But it became an acceptable alternative to Christmas celebration, so more Jews began to rediscover it.

It’s a popular holiday here in Israel too, not because of Christmas, but because it’s a celebration of Jews Kicking Ass And Eating Jelly Donuts. Not a work holiday, though.

[Rigamarole]

OK, some people are saying employers are required to give time off for religious holidays (we can use examples other than Hanukkah, I just use that since we are presently near to it, although I am still interested in it) and others say that they aren’t. Looks like we’re going to need some cites…

[Harriet_the_Spry]

Or maybe you are going to need to use some google? And answer the question about whether there really is a contract involved?

[Rigamarole]

Harriet, why do you think US employees “rarely sign contracts related to their employment”? At my particular place of work, yes, there was a contract, or at least a written agreement (isn’t that a contract?) signed upon hiring that stated, among other things, that employees may be required to work holidays.

[Exapno_Mapcase]

Probably because it’s true that relatively few U.S. have written contracts. My guess, but based on decades of looking at business issues, is that the percentage is in the single digits.

And if you signed a contract, then you’ve voluntarily given up the right to refuse to work on a religious holiday. As several posters have already said, there is no federal legislation that this would violate.

[Gfactor]

@Rigamarole

OK, some people are saying employers are required to give time off for religious holidays (we can use examples other than Hanukkah, I just use that since we are presently near to it, although I am still interested in it) and others say that they aren’t. Looks like we’re going to need some cites…

What **Harriet ** said. http://www.kutakrock.com/publications/employmentlaw/ea_0506.pdf
http://www.barran.com/shownews.asp?Show=18

[Gfactor]

@Exapno Mapcase

Probably because it’s true that relatively few U.S. have written contracts. My guess, but based on decades of looking at business issues, is that the percentage is in the single digits.

I’d say that’s true, unless you count collective bargaining agreements. Even then it’s a low number.

And if you signed a contract, then you’ve voluntarily given up the right to refuse to work on a religious holiday. As several posters have already said, there is no federal legislation that this would violate.

I’m pretty sure Title VII would trump a written agreement, at least to some extent.

(a) Employer practices
It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer—
(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; or
(2) to limit, segregate, or classify his employees or applicants for employment in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode42/usc_sec_42_00002000---e002-.html

(j) The term “religion” includes all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief, unless an employer demonstrates that he is unable to reasonably accommodate to an employee’s or prospective employee’s religious observance or practice without undue hardship on the conduct of the employer’s business.

42 U.S. Code § 2000e - Definitions

But see, http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=432&invol=63 (Employer’s religious accommodation obligation does not require accommodations inconsitent with collective bargaining agreement).

[FatBaldGuy]

@Exapno Mapcase

Probably because it’s true that relatively few U.S. have written contracts. My guess, but based on decades of looking at business issues, is that the percentage is in the single digits.

I think it depends on how you define “contract.” Many firms have a written “policies and procedures” handbook which an employee is required to sign that he has received and agrees to follow. This could be construed as a contract in most cases.

[Voyager]

@Punoqllads

Hanukkah is a very minor holiday, really. There are no religious restrictions from working on those days, so I’m not sure how one could use that to win a legal ruling.

In fact, when I was a kid we had Hebrew School during Hanukkah.

[cmkeller]

There’s no reason that even the most observant of Jews can’t work a normal workday on Hanukkah.

However, it is inaccurate to say that the only thing religious about the holiday is the miracle of the oil. The Jewish sages added extra text to the prayer services for Hanukkah, and practically the entire extra prayer is praising G-d for their upset victory over the Greeks in the battle. True, a war is a historical event, but the victory of the small force over the large one had been seen by many religious sages as miraculous.

[Duckster]

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of l964 prohibits employers from discriminating against individuals because of their religion in hiring, firing, and other terms and conditions of employment. Title VII covers employers with 15 or more employees, including state and local governments. It also applies to employment agencies and to labor organizations, as well as to the federal government.

-snip -
[ul]
[li] Employees cannot be forced to participate – or not participate – in a religious activity as a condition of employment.[/li]
[li] Employers must reasonably accommodate employees’ sincerely held religious practices unless doing so would impose an undue hardship on the employer. A reasonable religious accommodation is any adjustment to the work environment that will allow the employee to practice his religion. An employer might accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs or practices by allowing: flexible scheduling, voluntary substitutions or swaps, job reassignments and lateral transfers, modification of grooming requirements and other workplace practices, policies and/or procedures.[/li]
[li] An employer is not required to accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs and practices if doing so would impose an undue hardship on the employers’ legitimate business interests. An employer can show undue hardship if accommodating an employee’s religious practices requires more than ordinary administrative costs, diminishes efficiency in other jobs, infringes on other employees’ job rights or benefits, impairs workplace safety, causes co-workers to carry the accommodated employee’s share of potentially hazardous or burdensome work, or if the proposed accommodation conflicts with another law or regulation. [/li][/ul]

Source: http://www.eeoc.gov/types/religion.html

[Random]

@FatBaldGuy

I think it depends on how you define “contract.” Many firms have a written “policies and procedures” handbook which an employee is required to sign that he has received and agrees to follow .

Yes.

@FatBaldGuy

This could be construed as a contract in most cases.

Most cases? No. Not even without the disclaimer (this is not a contract) that appears on the front of 99% of such handbooks these days.