Thought you AFF folks would like to see this

[Sister Alvear]

May 31, 2007 -- A bus driver is seeking redress from the MTA after getting fired for refusing to wear pants.
On her second week on the job, Tahita Jenkins, 33, explained to her new bosses that as a Pentecostalist, the standard issue NYC Transit bus-driver uniform is against her religion.
She even provided a note from the pastor of her Far Rockaway church, Holy Ghost Headquarters Prayer Band Mission of New Beginning Deliverance Church, requesting she be permitted to wear a skirt. But transit officials insisted that for safety reasons she had to wear either pants or culottes.
"I told them culottes are just wide pants," Jenkins said. "I said 'I'm not going to change my religious beliefs just to be a bus driver.' I've been driving a school bus for years and my skirt never got caught on anything." Transit officials said they had no choice but to fire her Tuesday.
The agency has come under fire in the past for accusations of religious discrimination, such as the Sikh train operator who wanted to wear his turban. But this case is different, officials said.
"The supervisor went out of his way to try to accommodate her," NYC Transit spokesman Charles Seaton said. "We had tried a few years ago to use a uniform skirt, but it was rejected for safety reasons. It was very restrictive, and there [is a] danger it could get caught on something."
By taking her hand off the wheel to adjust her skirt, Jenkins could put her passengers in danger, Seaton said.
A single mother with three children, Jenkins said she was thrilled to get called up for the job after waiting four years on a waiting list.
"It's a good job with great benefits," she said. "I just don't understand. Other departments in transit are allowed to wear skirts, and I will be able to fully perform my duties."
Jenkins said she has considered filing a pant suit.
She may have a case based on similar recent decisions in lawsuits filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
In 2002, Brinks Inc., the armored-security company, was successfully sued for firing a Pentecostal driver who refused to wear pants.
In addition to a $30,000 award, the driver was offered her job back and was permitted to wear culottes as a compromise.
EEOC attorney Justine Lisser said that while she could not comment on Jenkins' case without knowing more details, the law is clear that "a company cannot discriminate against an individual on the basis of religion."
An employer could possibly win a case by arguing that the particular religious observance caused a safety hazard, she said. For instance, a factory could prohibit employees from wearing loose clothing that could get caught in machines, she said.

[TalkLady]

Someone just sent me that in email, Sis. Alvear.

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

May 31, 2007 -- A bus driver is seeking redress from the MTA after getting fired for refusing to wear pants.
On her second week on the job, Tahita Jenkins, 33, explained to her new bosses that as a Pentecostalist, the standard issue NYC Transit bus-driver uniform is against her religion.
She even provided a note from the pastor of her Far Rockaway church, Holy Ghost Headquarters Prayer Band Mission of New Beginning Deliverance Church, requesting she be permitted to wear a skirt. But transit officials insisted that for safety reasons she had to wear either pants or culottes.
"I told them culottes are just wide pants," Jenkins said. "I said 'I'm not going to change my religious beliefs just to be a bus driver.' I've been driving a school bus for years and my skirt never got caught on anything." Transit officials said they had no choice but to fire her Tuesday.
The agency has come under fire in the past for accusations of religious discrimination, such as the Sikh train operator who wanted to wear his turban. But this case is different, officials said.
"The supervisor went out of his way to try to accommodate her," NYC Transit spokesman Charles Seaton said. "We had tried a few years ago to use a uniform skirt, but it was rejected for safety reasons. It was very restrictive, and there [is a] danger it could get caught on something."
By taking her hand off the wheel to adjust her skirt, Jenkins could put her passengers in danger, Seaton said.
A single mother with three children, Jenkins said she was thrilled to get called up for the job after waiting four years on a waiting list.
"It's a good job with great benefits," she said. "I just don't understand. Other departments in transit are allowed to wear skirts, and I will be able to fully perform my duties."
Jenkins said she has considered filing a pant suit.
She may have a case based on similar recent decisions in lawsuits filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
In 2002, Brinks Inc., the armored-security company, was successfully sued for firing a Pentecostal driver who refused to wear pants.
In addition to a $30,000 award, the driver was offered her job back and was permitted to wear culottes as a compromise.
EEOC attorney Justine Lisser said that while she could not comment on Jenkins' case without knowing more details, the law is clear that "a company cannot discriminate against an individual on the basis of religion."
An employer could possibly win a case by arguing that the particular religious observance caused a safety hazard, she said. For instance, a factory could prohibit employees from wearing loose clothing that could get caught in machines, she said.

[SDG]

Yeah that church name really caught my attention ...

Holy Ghost Headquarters Prayer Band Mission of New Beginning Deliverance Church

[Michlow]

Jenkins said she has considered filing a pant suit.

This has got to be a joke!

[Theresa]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Yeah that church name really caught my attention ...

Holy Ghost Headquarters Prayer Band Mission of New Beginning Deliverance Church

and a partridge in a pear treeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

[COOPER]

Originally Posted by Michlow

This has got to be a joke!

Quote:
Jenkins said she has considered filing a pant suit.

[Scott Hutchinson]

She should stick to her convictions ,but did she not know the uniform requirements prior to getting hired ? And did she tell her future employer of her convictions before getting hired ?

[Sister Alvear]

I don´t think she should be thinking about suing if she is so spiritual...(just my thoughts)

[Scott Hutchinson]

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

I don´t think she should be thinking about suing if she is so spiritual...(just my thoughts)

This should have been worked out prior to her employment.

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

May 31, 2007 -- A bus driver is seeking redress from the MTA after getting fired for refusing to wear pants.
On her second week on the job, Tahita Jenkins, 33, explained to her new bosses that as a Pentecostalist, the standard issue NYC Transit bus-driver uniform is against her religion.
She even provided a note from the pastor of her Far Rockaway church, Holy Ghost Headquarters Prayer Band Mission of New Beginning Deliverance Church, requesting she be permitted to wear a skirt. But transit officials insisted that for safety reasons she had to wear either pants or culottes.
"I told them culottes are just wide pants," Jenkins said. "I said 'I'm not going to change my religious beliefs just to be a bus driver.' I've been driving a school bus for years and my skirt never got caught on anything." Transit officials said they had no choice but to fire her Tuesday.
The agency has come under fire in the past for accusations of religious discrimination, such as the Sikh train operator who wanted to wear his turban. But this case is different, officials said.
"The supervisor went out of his way to try to accommodate her," NYC Transit spokesman Charles Seaton said. "We had tried a few years ago to use a uniform skirt, but it was rejected for safety reasons. It was very restrictive, and there [is a] danger it could get caught on something."
By taking her hand off the wheel to adjust her skirt, Jenkins could put her passengers in danger, Seaton said.
A single mother with three children, Jenkins said she was thrilled to get called up for the job after waiting four years on a waiting list.
"It's a good job with great benefits," she said. "I just don't understand. Other departments in transit are allowed to wear skirts, and I will be able to fully perform my duties."
Jenkins said she has considered filing a pant suit.
She may have a case based on similar recent decisions in lawsuits filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
In 2002, Brinks Inc., the armored-security company, was successfully sued for firing a Pentecostal driver who refused to wear pants.
In addition to a $30,000 award, the driver was offered her job back and was permitted to wear culottes as a compromise.
EEOC attorney Justine Lisser said that while she could not comment on Jenkins' case without knowing more details, the law is clear that "a company cannot discriminate against an individual on the basis of religion."
An employer could possibly win a case by arguing that the particular religious observance caused a safety hazard, she said. For instance, a factory could prohibit employees from wearing loose clothing that could get caught in machines, she said.

This is stupid! If one is looking into a job that require you to dress in such a such way, and it does not line up with your guide lines, move on find another job already!