5 (W.D. Wash. Aug. 29, 2005), the courtroom dominated that notwithstanding the employer’s purported reliance on an organization profile and buyer research suggesting that it seeks to present a household-oriented and kid-pleasant image, the company didn't exhibit that permitting an employee to have seen religious tattoos was inconsistent with these objectives. 1992) (per curiam) (remanding to find out whether or not employer happy its accommodation obligation by allowing employee to swap shifts to keep away from working on his Sabbath the place employee discovered it "virtually impossible" to arrange voluntary swaps). 2003) (holding that state police officer’s requested religious accommodation to not be assigned to full-time, everlasting work at a on line casino was unreasonable, as a result of police and fireplace departments "need the cooperation of all members" and need them to carry out their duties "without favoritism"). 1987) (the place plaintiff believed it was morally wrong to work on the Sabbath and that it was a sin to induce another worker to take action, it was not an inexpensive accommodation for employer merely to be amenable to a shift swap; employer would not have incurred undue hardship by soliciting a alternative).
