Story on Not Always Working

[Parrothead]

OK, I was going over old stories on NAW and came across this one. Basically, OP gets fired for how s/he teaches a new hire orientation.

This one just burns me, because I can't tell if the OP is genuine about not knowing why they were fired, or what. But when I read the first bit (about prayer), I knew what was going to happen. Honestly, it comes across like the OP is trying to be accepting of other cultures and then just harped on one tiny aspect of one culture.

Gah, this just irritated me and I needed to vent.

[Aethian]

I don't think she should have gotten fired. Those of Islamic faiths do have prayer times that fall outside of "the norm". Letting them know they have a place to practice their religious prayer time should be a good thing.

That person who said she was being racist was stupid since this had nothing to do with race. Also she didn't name names or point anyone out. If the person who complained was really that offended then how exactly were they going to do their job well when some customer starts spewing filth at them?

[Parrothead]

But (according to my understanding of the situation) NO ONE TOLD HER SOMEONE WAS MUSLIM IN THE GROUP. That speech, to me, should only have been given if someone came up and said "Hey, I'm Muslim, where can I pray and will I get in trouble for it?"

[TheHuckster]

I am tending to agree with Parrothead. The story doesn't tell us why the OP felt the need to mention this. Was it because of some of the trainees' skin color or ethnicity? If so, that's definitely racism. Was it because one of them mentioned aside that they were Muslim? That's somewhat better, but it still doesn't call for one to single out their needs. That's like someone mentioning that the fridge is going to have meat and dairy products together because some of the trainees are Jewish. Just because you are Muslim or Islam doesn't mean you practice all of the traditions others might.

The only way the OP could be justified is if someone anonymously had concerns about prayer and asked if there are accommodations for that.

That said, I think firing the person for this is harsh. HR could have solved this by simply calling the OP in, mentioning the problem, and educating the person as to why it was wrong. The OP clearly didn't have any malice or hatred in his/her actions. If OP acknowledges this and moves on, then no harm, no foul, IMO.

[siead_lietrathua]

i dunno. to me it just screams scapegoat. i mean, trainers (especially in big companies) tend to work off a company script, not write their own. and if this person was a training supervisor, then they must have gone through several sessions, with the same script, without issue. it's not like it was a first day fuckup if they've been there for six years.

my bet's on some thin-skinned, random trainee complaining to be a douche, and the company using the trainer as a fallman.

[Gravekeeper]

Its a strange spiel to just randomly give without anything to prompt it. There must have been something else to the story. Even if there wasn't, that's not racism of all things. Let alone something she should be instantly terminated for after 6 years.

[HYHYBT]

I cannot understand why they would fire someone outright over this, as opposed to telling her how to alter her lesson to avoid the problem in the future. On the other hand, I've been fired for far less with no prior hint of any kind that there was a problem; not all employers are reasonable.

[s_stabeler]

I fail to see why what the OP said was a problem. Indeed, it seems to me like it's actually important- because it goes into the procedure for getting a "prayer break" so to speak.

also,it sounds like a script to me- which might mean the company TOLD the OP to say it.

[gremcint]

I think we're getting a modified version of events here.

[siead_lietrathua]

I cannot understand why they would fire someone outright over this, as opposed to telling her how to alter her lesson to avoid the problem in the future.

because sometimes it's easier to just fire someone than deal with a bullshit discrimination suit.

[Aethian]

I think we're getting a modified version of events here.

Always, were only getting the OP's view and most likely not all that happened.

[Gravekeeper]

because sometimes it's easier to just fire someone than deal with a bullshit discrimination suit.

The location says Toronto. If things actually went down as indicated in the story, it'd be hard to find any grounds whatsoever for a discrimination suit in Canada over this. The one making the complaint would have to prove that being accommodated somehow adversely affected them. But seeing as the person in question thinks Muslim is a race, I wonder if it was even actually a Muslim that complained or just some busybody ass hat.

If anything, her spiel is actually in line with the duty to accommodate under the human rights act which is straight up defined as it sometimes being necessary to treat someone differently in order to be fair and prevent discrimination in the workplace.

The suspicious thing is her being instantly fired for this. Any company worth its salt has an actual process in place to handle employee incidents and disciplinary actions. If it went down the way it did, it sounds more like they wanted her gone to begin with and just found a great excuse she wouldn't think to argue against.

If I was her I wouldn't have signed a damn thing.

[patiokitty]

In at least two call centers I have worked at we were told about the special accommodations set up for Islamic practitioners and none of us in either of orientation group were Islamic. Nobody batted an eye at it and nobody would have gone running to HR or management to claim 'racism'. We just nodded and carried on our merry little way.

As far as I'm concerned there was no grounds to claim racism, even if the new employee was Islamic. There is even less grounds to claim racism if the new employee wasn't Islamic. I think we are missing some context somewhere...

[TheHuckster]

In at least two call centers I have worked at we were told about the special accommodations set up for Islamic practitioners and none of us in either of orientation group were Islamic. Nobody batted an eye at it and nobody would have gone running to HR or management to claim 'racism'. We just nodded and carried on our merry little way.

As far as I'm concerned there was no grounds to claim racism, even if the new employee was Islamic. There is even less grounds to claim racism if the new employee wasn't Islamic. I think we are missing some context somewhere...

Yeah. I don't know how notalwaysworking doctors their submissions, either. I know I've submitted a few stories to Clients From Hell and while they kept the overall story in tact, they made a few critical changes to the dialog and cut some exposition and narration out which made it not as genuine or authentic just for the sake of making it a better story. I get the feeling the notalways suite of sites do the same thing.

It's possible the workplace had a very high population of practicing Muslims and the OP thought it to be prudent to say something about it, which I don't think is wrong (e.g. around here, where there's a high Christian population, HR has sent memos about giving special consideration to those who need Easter or major Christian holidays off). It's even possible the OP got enough feedback from existing workers about the practice that the trainer decided to just add it to the standard speech.

It's also possible the OP truly gave equal attention to every possible little accommodation that the workplace might give, not only to practicing Muslims, but to those with other traditional/religious restrictions, food allergies, or even those who want smoke breaks a couple times a day. It's a little overboard to make all of those known during a training session, but it's definitely not a offensive thing to do, and certainly not a fireable offense by any stretch.

[smileyeagle1021]

Yeah. I don't know how notalwaysworking doctors their submissions, either. I know I've submitted a few stories to Clients From Hell and while they kept the overall story in tact, they made a few critical changes to the dialog and cut some exposition and narration out which made it not as genuine or authentic just for the sake of making it a better story. I get the feeling the notalways suite of sites do the same thing.

They do edit them... I've made submissions that have been edited extensively and for more than just fixing grammar.

As to the OP, I've worked in call centers like that and yeah, they would fire someone for something that stupid (I got written up for failure to follow the script exactly because I didn't leave a long enough pause between sentences, yes, they were that specific).