EEOC sues Burger King restaurant over treatment of Christian teen who sought to wear skirt
CWN - August 27, 2012
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has filed suit on behalf of Ashanti McShan, a Pentecostal teenage girl who was not permitted to begin work at a Burger King restaurant because she wished to wear a long skirt instead of pants.
“At the time of her interview for the job, Ms. McShan asked to wear a skirt instead of uniform pants as a religious accommodation,” the lawsuit states. “Defendant assured her that she could wear a skirt to work. However, when she arrived at work for orientation, the store management informed Ms. McShan that she could not wear a skirt and that she had to leave the store … The result of the foregoing practices has been to deprive Ashanti McShan of equal employment opportunities because of her religious beliefs and observances as a Christian Pentecostal.”
An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:
Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach five million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!
Progress toward our Spring 2013 goal ($28,940 to go):
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: DrJazz -
Aug. 28, 2012 11:10 AM ET USA
A public company has the right to force a woman to wear pants instead of a (presumably modest) skirt? You've got to be kidding. Can they tell her what color underwear to wear, too?
Posted by: dagbat -
Aug. 27, 2012 1:20 PM ET USA
A public company has the right to establish company policies, including acceptable dress code requirements. If at the time of the interview a waiver to the company's dress code was granted (even mistakenly) then Burger King should stand by the decision. This seems on the surface to be a one-off situation and not precedent setting i.e. it will not impact the company's policy. If it will potentially impact company policy however, then Burger King certainly has a right to protect themselves and rescind their original waiver decision.
Posted by: rpp -
Aug. 27, 2012 10:58 AM ET USA
While I certainly do not believe it is sinful for a woman to wear pants, many evangelical Christians do. I do not see this as a food- or workplace-safety issue. After all, it is not like she requires a skirt style pressure suit because she is an astronaut. She is right and BK is wrong. I don't like using courts in this way, but sadly, that is what life in modern America has degenerated to, one must spend tens of thousands of dollars to get people into doing the right thing. Secularism is evil.