“Conscientious Objector Rights in the Workplace”
David T. Ball
Some of the most meaningful opportunities to engage in prophetic ministry can come when a pastor has the opportunity chance to counsel a church member regarding conscientious objector issues. My father, a retired pastor, was involved in such counseling during the Vietnam War and the years that followed. In more recent years, I have had such opportunities as a high school Sunday School teacher and college chaplain.
Usually, we think of one’s conscientious objector rights in relation to military service. A recent federal court decision recognizes that these rights extend into the workplace.
In Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Dresser-Rand Co., the court addressed a situation involving a skilled machine tool operator, Harry Davis, who worked for Dresser-Rand, which manufactures custom turbines, compressors and other industrial products. Mr. Davis had been both a Dresser-Rand employee and a Jehovah’s Witness for over 20 years.
As a Jehovah’s Witness, Mr. Davis believes that he may not perform work on any part or product that could be used as an implement of war. Thus, for many years, whenever Mr. Davis was asked to work on projects that involved orders from any of the Armed Services, he would refuse, and those projects were reassigned to other machine operators. His supervisors at Dresser-Rand were well aware of Mr. Davis’ beliefs and had accommodated those beliefs on many occasions in the past.
In December, 2002, Mr. Davis was asked to work on a part intended for use on a United States naval submarine. As he had before, he refused to do so. But this time, he was cited for insubordination and then fired after he refused to accept an alternate assignment in the company’s shipping department.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission investigated and decided to bring a lawsuit against the company, on the grounds that the company had violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion. To prevail on such a claim, Mr. Davis had to show that:
Dresser-Rand did not dispute that Mr. Davis had met elements (1), (2) and (3) of his claim. It did not challenge that his objection to working on implements of war is grounded in his faith as a Jehovah’s Witness. Nor did it dispute that his supervisors were aware of that belief, or that he was cited and then terminated for refusing to accept work that he believed he could not perform due to religious reasons.
What Dresser-Rand did contend related to element (4). The company maintained that it had offered Mr. Davis a “reasonable accommodation” by reassigning him to the shipping department, which would have accommodated his need to perform non-military work.
Mr. Davis disputed whether he had actually been offered that position. Even assuming that he had, he contended that the company had given no explanation as to why it was suddenly unable to reassign machine shop work to other operators in this instance, when it had done so many times in the past. Dresser-Rand attempted to argue that it was too burdensome on the company to have to accommodate Mr. Davis’ religious beliefs by reassigning work in this manner, but the court agreed with Mr. Davis, and ruled in his favor on that basis.
This decision provides a road map for those who may find themselves in situations similar to that of Mr. Davis and for their employers. To be entitled to invoke the protections of Title VII in this context, an employee must first be able to point to a “bona fide religious belief” that prevents the employee from working on a particular military-related assignment. Just as pastors have assisted conscientious objectors in documenting their beliefs regarding military service, pastors can provide a useful service by assisting those who object to military-related work assignments in documenting those beliefs and supporting those beliefs with any relevant positions that their denomination may have taken.
Second, the employee must make sure that the employer knows about the employee’s belief(s). The employer will not be held responsible for disciplining or terminating an employee for refusing military-related work if the employer has no knowledge that the employee has religious beliefs against doing such work.
Third, if the employee is disciplined, it must be clear that the employer’s action resulted from the employee’s refusal to perform military-related work, and not from other factors. For example, if the employee is terminated for excessive absenteeism unrelated to the refusal to perform military-related work, the employee cannot trump that legitimate reason for being terminated by raising conscientious objector issues.
Fourth and finally, if the employer offers a reasonable accommodation, the employee must accept it. Religious employees do not have absolute rights to dictate what work they will and will not do in the workplace – only a right to be offered reasonable accommodations that enable them to continue working for the employer without unduly burdening the employer’s ability to manage the business. In Mr. Davis’s case, the court did not consider reassignment to the shipping department to be a reasonable accommodation for a skilled machine operator, when the employer had been able to accommodate Mr. Davis’s beliefs by simply assigning the military-related work to other machine operators in the past.
As an employment lawyer, I have to acknowledge that exactly what is and isn’t a “reasonable accommodation” for Title VII purposes is impossible to define for all purposes. Both employers and employees need to seek legal counsel regarding reasonable accommodation issues when those arise. What EEOC v. Dresser-Rand does clarify, however, is that one’s conscientious objector rights do extend into the workplace, and that employers have a legal responsibility to take reasonable steps to accommodate those rights.
David T. Ball is an Attorney at the law firm of Schottenstein Zox & Dunn Co., LPA. He has a dual background in theology and law, with an M.Div. and a Ph.D. in theology, and a J.D. from Boalt Hall School of Law at the University of California, Berkeley. In addition to several years of experience assisting religious organizations with a wide variety of legal issues, David has been a pastor and college chaplain, and teaches as an adjunct faculty member at the Methodist Theological School in Ohio. He can be reached at (614) 462-2700 or dball@szd.com.