Currently, I work in a public school district. One of my co-workers in this department has brought in a talking, singing Christmas tree which belts out “Merry Christmas!” and “Jingle Bells” every time someone walks near it. It’s loud and annoying, true, but since no one else (including the boss) has a problem with it, it’s been on for the past week.
I know that Christmas trees and Santa Claus (or, really I thought I knew—please correct me if I’m wrong) are considered secular in nature, and therefore aren’t considered improper to display in a government-funded entity. But Christmas itself is a religious holiday, so is the fact that the tree keeps blurting out “Merry Christmas” improper, legally, considering the setting?
Would I be backed up, legally, if I asked the co-worker to turn that off? If so, does anyone know the case law which would support me?
I don’t see how you are forced to have a Merry Christmas, and I doubt that a sign instructing the students to have an enjoyable holiday would be a problem.
The tree is basically an extension of the teacher’s right to free speech, and Merry Christmas does not violate what is appropriate for a teacher to say. If you wanted to, you could paint yourself green and go around griping about Christmas so the children can see both sides of the issue. After all, we wouldn’t want to brainwash them into enjoying the holidays.
Phage: I work in an office within the district, so the setting is not a classroom. Children don’t play into this, and even if they did, I wouldn’t, I believe, have standing to complain upon their behalf–unless one of the children was my child.
And just to clarify: it’s not a sign, which can reside quietly in, on or around someone’s desk. Instead, it’s a mehcanical tree which blurts out, in a loud voice, “Merry Christmas”.
If the phrase, “Merry Christmas” is considered secular, in the eyes of the current law, then the tree is simply annoying. If, however, the phrase is considered to be religious (because of its origin), then I don’t believe that it necessarily falls under protected speech within the work place. I could be wrong, of course; this is why I’m asking.
Legally? I don’t know whether you’d want to put it in those terms. I personally don’t know of any court rulings that directly address such issues. But really, employers, regardless of whether they are public or private institutions, have a lot of leeway in controlling the workplace environment, especially when it comes to asking people not to do something.
I don’t think it would be very helpful to get into an argument regarding whether playing “Merry Christmas” is a religious expression (especially if there aren’t any students around your part of the school district). If it’s a disruption in the workplace, then you might be better off just taking the chap aside and explaining very politely that this is the case and would he please shut it off or take out the batteries? Better yet, discuss the issue with a mutual supervisor.
And Christmas is not necessarily a religious holiday. It has also been defined as a secular holiday.
IANAL, but seperation of church-state does not generally mean that employees of goverment agencies cannot have religious items in their offices.
As far as turning it off, the strongest backing you would have would be organizational policy. If there is no policy prohibiting annoying Christmas decorations, and your boss or the co-worker will not agree to have it turned off, you may be SOL.
There is probably a lawyer that may take this case with the idea that it is a “hostile workplace”, playing up the religious angle, but this is probably far too much of a hastle to stop a christmas tree from screaming.
Thanks, acsenray! An answer such as yours was what I was hoping to see. (Thanks, also, to Phage, for replying.)
The co-worker refuses to turn it off, even though she’s been asked twice, politely, to do so. When she said, “No!” the second time, I started to wonder how far one could go with this particular situation.
The tree wasn’t singing the beauty of the Christ child, so I wasn’t ever planning on making any legal overtures. I was just curious.
Oh, and the boss thinks it’s amusing, so I am a minority of one in this place. (And it is amusing. The first time. Many times later, and it loses its chuckle value, IMHO.)
Thanks again!
On preview: aktep, you’re right in that it would have been a hassle to take this any further than asking the boss. But I wonder now about your separation of church and state thought; I mean, if the tree had been yelling out a blatantly religious, would that have been considered tantamount to creating a hostile work environment? It seems to me that it would, but as we can plainly see, IANAL, either.
There is not free speech right to disrupt the workplace with annoying novelty devices. Even if it was the guy just sitting at his desk shouting “Merry Christmas” in an annoying voice to everyone who passed, the employer (whether public or private) would be legally justified in asking him to tone it down in order to maintain a certain level of decorum in the workplace.
If the employer found the yeller to be amusing–such as with the tree–I’d pretty much have to suck it up, though. Right? I mean, if I’m the only grinch in the workplace, and unless it’s an obviously hostile message (or meant to annoy just me), I wouldn’t have any type of standing. Or is that just too vague and it’d depend on a case-by-case decision?
I think you might be out of luck. It’s the employer’s right to control the workplace environment. If the boss thinks it’s just dandy, well … . I doubt very much you have a strong constitutional argument. And the hostile workplace standard applies only to claims under employment discrimination law, such as sexual harassment claims. So the tree would probably have to say something like “Merry Christmas, you bitch.” You probably don’t really have a claim against someone who’s really just being annoying.
On the one hand…you seem to be saying that the annoyance factor is the noise that the tree makes…something unrelated to the Christmas component. (IOW, you seem as if you would be equally upset if it was a Billy Bigmouth Bass that sang songs everytime you walked past).
Yet you focus most of your post on the what you perceive to be the religious component of the tree.
I just find that odd.
If it’s the noise factor, complain about the noise.
If it’s the “religious” factor…does that mean you would be offended if I wore a Merry Christmas tie at your office?
I suggest coming in in the middle of the night and rigging things up so that you can plug it into the wall to save batteries. Oops, it’s fried, oh well.
Or better, have someone replace the voice chip with one from a Tickle me Elmo. Best would be to capture a sound clip from “Bad Santa” - “I’m an eating, drinking, f***ing Santa”
If annoyance at the noise is the major complaint, I’d suggest a compromise. A little duct tape over the speaker will allow you to control the volume so this person can keep their goofy toy without annoying everyone in the room. This trick is commonly used by parents[sup]*[/sup].
[sup]* Note that this is meant to imply that the duct tape is used to dampen the noise from kids’ toys, not the kids themselves. Using duct tape over a kid’s “speaker” would be dangerous and I’d never admit to it in public.[/sup]
beagledave: While I do find the tree to be annoying (as I would, like you suggested, with a singing rubber fish), I assumed, as acsenray later pointed out, that a mere annoyance wouldn’t give me standing in a court of law should–hypothetically speaking–I have wanted to take it that far.
This is why I wondered about how the courts would view the actual phrase, “Merry Christmas”. I focused on the religious part because that’s what had to do with my question; all else was just background information and opinion.
I didn’t mention being offended by the tree; however, I probably would be as annoyed with your tie should it be yelling out and singing to all passersby.
