Key Decision Employer Discriminates Failing Accommodate Employees Sabbath Observance

Posted on: Jun 19, 2014

An employee whose religion required him to observe the Sabbath (in this case, from sunset Friday to sunset Saturday) was successful in the Human Rights Review Tribunal in his case of religious discrimination. He had obtained a job at AFFCO’s meatworks, being asked merely if he was available for overtime. In similar employment previously, overtime had been voluntary and the employee had been able to fit it around his Sabbath observance. So, when asked by AFFCO, he had merely answered in the affirmative.

When it became obvious that the employee would be required to work on the Sabbath — in spite of specifying that he was only available for day work, he had been assigned to nights — he raised it with his supervisor and his manager, who told him that doing overtime involved Saturday work and that, if he couldn’t perform it, he did not meet AFFCO’s needs and should leave.

The Tribunal concluded that religious belief was a material ingredient in the making of the decision to treat the employee the way he was treated and that the appropriate comparator was the person (or persons) in exactly the same circumstances as the employee but without the feature of holding a religious belief requiring observance of the Sabbath. There was unlawful discrimination.

The Tribunal considered that AFFCO had not discharged its obligation under s 28(3) of the Human Rights Act 1993 to accommodate the employee’s religious practice. The entire focus of AFFCO and its managers had been on the interests of the company without regard for the prohibition against discrimination and the requirement to accommodate religious practice, unless this would result in unreasonable disruption.

The cost to AFFCO of these errors was substantial: about $12,000 damages for loss of benefit (wages); $15,000 damages for humiliation, loss of dignity and injury to feelings; and a requirement for training for management on their human rights responsibilities.

Nakarawa v AFFCO New Zealand Ltd (2014) 10 NZELC

Disclaimer

This article, and any information contained on our website is necessarily brief and general in nature, and should not be substituted for professional advice. You should always seek professional advice before taking any action in relation to the matters addressed.

Disclaimer

This article, and any information contained on our website is necessarily brief and general in nature, and should not be substituted for professional advice. You should always seek professional advice before taking any action in relation to the matters addressed.

Subscribe to Newsletter

Changes

Changes

After recently assisting clients from different industries with different types of changes to their businesses, in both adding and removing roles or simply changing duties for some employees, I reflected on my own work history and the changes I had experienced over the last 40 years, including reference points at different stages of my life and how they impacted decisions I made or how I viewed change…

Read More
Modern Slavery Consultation Paper released

Modern Slavery Consultation Paper released

MBIE has recently released a consultation paper on Modern Slavery and are seeking feedback on a proposed legislative response to modern slavery and worker exploitation, forced labour, and people trafficking. The aim of the legislation is “to achieve freedom, fairness and dignity… and to address modern slavery and worker exploitation, both in New Zealand and internationally.” Submissions for consultation are open until 07 June 2022. Make sure you have your say.

Read More
The Great Merger

The Great Merger

Eight months ago, I joined Three60 Consult just as Auckland went into Lockdown. Like a lot of us, I thought it would be a short, sharp COVID battle and I remember optimistically suggesting to my boss that we push my start date out for a week.  Thank goodness she rejected my offer! Starting a new job in lockdown had its challenges, but returning to the office after an extended period, as many of us have found, presented just as many. It was a full six months after my start date before I finally sat at my desk. Even then, the emergence of Omicron meant the whole team was not able to come together. Rather, we worked in mini team bubbles. Today as I write, eight months have passed since my start date and I’m finally seeing the full team come together on a more regular basis.

Read More
PREV NEXT