Muslim bus driver's discrimination lawsuit against MTA continues, even after driver's death...

[Turbo19]

A Muslim-American bus driver who refused to cover her religious head scarf or slap an MTA logo on it died in poverty more than two years ago — but her decade-long fight for justice can continue, a judge has ruled.

 

Brooklyn Federal Court Judge Sandra Townes rejected a Metropolitan Transportation Authority motion to dismiss a discrimination and retaliation lawsuit Stephanie Lewis filed in 2004 after she was transferred off her bus route to a lower-paying job in a depot.

 

The MTA fired Lewis the next year, leaving the diabetic not only without an income but without health insurance to pay for her insulin, Omar Mohammedi, her lawyer said. Her health deteriorated and she had a leg amputated before dying in 2012, Mohammedi said.

 

“She couldn’t afford anything,” Mohammedi said. “She died in debt. She used to tell me, ‘I would rather die dignified than compromise my religious beliefs.’ I promised to her I would continue fighting for her and one day I go to her grave and tell her justice was done for her.”

 

If successful, the lawsuit would result in financial damages being paid to Lewis’ estate and children.

Read more: Source

[traingoat]

Its on her.  They tried to work with her but she refused.

[MHV9218]

Its on her.  They tried to work with her but she refused.

 

How about hell no. This was a messed up call on the MTA's part to insist on the dumb logo in the first place and now they've got blood on their hands as a result.

[traingoat]

How about hell no. This was a messed up call on the MTA's part to insist on the dumb logo in the first place and now they've got blood on their hands as a result.

 

Not really.  She could of worn a hat over the scarf and everyone is happy. She is a uniformed employee and knew that when she took the job.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Not really.  She could of worn a hat over the scarf and everyone is happy. She is a uniformed employee and knew that when she took the job.

Exactly... Her employment with the was "at will", which means that if she didn't like the rules, she could've left.  No one forced her to take the job.

[Turbo19]

Its on her.  They tried to work with her but she refused.

Wrong. Because her employer failed to accommodate her religious beliefs this is considered discrimination in simple terms, and may perhaps be in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights act.

 

Not really.  She could of worn a hat over the scarf and everyone is happy. She is a uniformed employee and knew that when she took the job.

She was clearly not happy or otherwise contempt with that ruling. Furthermore her headscarf was not an interference in her work activities.

 

Exactly... Her employment with the was "at will", which means that if she didn't like the rules, she could've left.  No one forced her to take the job.

Wrong. By law an employer is to provide reasonable accommodations to it's workers. Allowing her to wear her headscarf was an extremely reasonable request and required no effort on the MTA's part.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Wrong. Because her employer failed to accommodate her religious beliefs this is considered discrimination in simple terms, and may perhaps be in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights act.

 

She was clearly not happy or otherwise contempt with that ruling. Furthermore her headscarf was not an interference in her work activities.

 

Wrong. By law an employer is to provide reasonable accommodations to it's workers. Allowing her to wear her headscarf was an extremely reasonable request and required no effort on the MTA's part.

Reasonable is the keyword... There is nothing "reasonable" about wearing a headscarf on the job.  If she wants to wear that during her free time, sure, but not while she's on the job.  Completely unnecessary.

[lupojohn]

Reasonable is the keyword... There is nothing "reasonable" about wearing a headscarf on the job.  If she wants to wear that during her free time, sure, but not while she's on the job.  Completely unnecessary.

First of all, she's dead. That changes everything. Secondly, she has to. In the Muslim tradition, most do wear it.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

First of all, she's dead. That changes everything. Secondly, she has to. In the Muslim tradition, most do wear it.

Well like I said, she could wear it and not work for the . No one forced her to take that job.  I don't think the should have to bend over backwards for anyone like that. It's insane. 

[lupojohn]

Well like I said, she could wear it and not work for the . No one forced her to take that job.  I don't think the should have to bend over backwards for anyone like that. It's insane. 

You don't know or understand what it's like. And why should she have to give up a job she clearly loved because she couldn't wear a scarf? You have to live in that culture to really get it.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

You don't know or understand what it's like. And why should she have to give up a job she clearly loved because she couldn't wear a scarf? You have to live in that culture to really get it.

Well I'm Catholic, but you don't see me advertising as if the whole world needs to know. Some people are a trip.  

[lupojohn]

Well I'm Catholic, but you don't see me advertising as if the whole world needs to know. Some people are a trip.  

Again, she has to. It's pretty simple. And maybe if the didn't force her to stop wearing it, she'd be alive.

 

EDIT: I see they demoted her and she lost her check, which meant she couldn't pay for her insulin, thus the is liable. Seeing as how you're...........well to do, you probably don't understand how a diabetic lives and needs their insulin. The should pay the family and get it over with.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Again, she has to. It's pretty simple. And maybe if the didn't force her to stop wearing it, she'd be alive.

 

EDIT: I see they demoted her and she lost her check, which meant she couldn't pay for her insulin, thus the is liable. Seeing as how you're...........well to do, you probably don't understand how a diabetic lives and needs their insulin. The should pay the family and get it over with.

They should fight.  They are giving away taxpayer dollars which could be used for more important things like new roads, new schools, etc.

[lupojohn]

They should fight.  They are giving away taxpayer dollars which could be used for more important things like new roads, new schools, etc.

How are new roads, new schools, etc. more important taking care of their family, when they were the ones who caused this in the first place?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

How are new roads, new schools, etc. more important taking care of their family, when they were the ones who caused this in the first place?

The made it very clear what her options were... She could follow the rules like other employees instead of acting as if she's so special because of her religion, or she could work elsewhere.  She had plenty of options, but she close to be difficult and disregard the 's policies.

[lupojohn]

The made it very clear what her options were... She could follow the rules like other employees instead of acting as if she's so special because of her religion, or she could work elsewhere.  She had plenty of options, but she close to be difficult and disregard the 's policies.

That wasn't the point I was making. You mentioned new roads, schools, etc. Since she's not alive, it's about her family now. They shouldn't have to suffer because the is being stubborn. What about her husband and kids? They didn't do anything. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

That wasn't the point I was making. You mentioned new roads, schools, etc. Since she's not alive, it's about her family now. They shouldn't have to suffer because the is being stubborn. What about her husband and kids? They didn't do anything. 

Why should the be liable for her own arrogance and disregard for their rules?  

[traingoat]

First of all, she's dead. That changes everything. Secondly, she has to. In the Muslim tradition, most do wear it.

 

 

Whether she is alive or dead has nothing to do with it. They wanted the hat on her with the logo. Now this she could of worn it over the scarf and everybody is happy  All this is a move to go against the pockets of the MTA  not  religious freedom of any sort.  No one told her to remove the scarf but wear the hat.

[lupojohn]

Why should the be liable for her own arrogance and disregard for their rules?  

Why can't you start a post with ''my condolences to her family'' ''it's tragic she died'', etc? In any case, it's about humanity and feelings. No one stated what the exact rule was. She could've worn a hat over it. That's allowed. Maybe the could've  tried that option instead of what happened. Regarding her seeking another job: she's Muslim. Muslims are not still somewhat accepted in this city because of..well, you know.

Whether she is alive or dead has nothing to do with it. They wanted the hat on her with the logo. Now this she could of worn it over the scarf and everybody is happy  All this is a move to go against the pockets of the MTA  not  religious freedom of any sort.  No one told her to remove the scarf but wear the hat.

Actually, if you'll notice, VG8 said she had to take it off. Your thoughts on that are.....

[traingoat]

Why can't you start a post with ''my condolences to her family'' ''it's tragic she died'', etc? In any case, it's about humanity and feelings. No one stated what the exact rule was. She could've worn a hat over it. That's allowed. Maybe the could've  tried that option instead of what happened. Regarding her seeking another job: she's Muslim. Muslims are not still somewhat accepted in this city because of..well, you know.

 

Actually, if you'll notice, VG8 said she had to take it off. Your thoughts on that are.....

 

Problem is if you knew the rules before taking the job and changing them afterward to suit yourself , you have a problem.   The MTA wanted the hat and she refused for whatever reason.  As you said  Muslims aren't accepted because of you know what and wanted an Official sign she was one of them.  There is more to this story than just the hat.

[lupojohn]

Problem is if you knew the rules before taking the job and changing them afterward to suit yourself , you have a problem.   The MTA wanted the hat and she refused for whatever reason.  As you said  Muslims aren't accepted because of you know what and wanted an Official sign she was one of them.  There is more to this story than just the hat.

Actually, quoting VG8 again, she refused to(in his words)stick an logo on her headscarf. He never mentioned a hat. 

[traingoat]

Actually, quoting VG8 again, she refused to(in his words)stick an logo on her headscarf. He never mentioned a hat. 

 

Its a case of escalation and compromise.  Wear the hat, No I won't because of the scarf.  Then wear the logo on your scarf, No, I won't.

[lupojohn]

Its a case of escalation and compromise.  Wear the hat, No I won't because of the scarf.  Then wear the logo on your scarf, No, I won't.

Wrong. A-the never asked her to wear a hat(as I see you have avoided answering my part about VG8). B-you can, as I said, before, wear a hat over the scarf. C-the could've put it on her sleeve or pants. D-address how the isn't responsible for her death when they knew a demotion would mean a lesser paycheck which would lead to her not being able pay for her insulin. Again, sometimes humanity and feelings usurp rules. E-how will her husband and kids survive now? 

 

Fire away, my friend.

[Turbo19]

I swear, some people are oblivious to the bigger picture. It's always the same damn people too.

[lupojohn]

I swear, some people are oblivious to the bigger picture. It's always the same damn people too.

I agree. The banter is fun but annoying when they can't see the other side of things.