Shannon P. Duffy
The Legal Intelligencer
August 20, 2009
In a case that pitted religious beliefs about photographs against the ramped up security concerns following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, a federal judge has ruled that an oil refinery had no duty to accommodate a worker who refused on religious grounds to pose for a photo ID.
In her 22-page opinion in Cherry v. Sunoco Inc., U.S. District Judge Cynthia M. Rufe of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania found that a 2002 federal law specifically mandated that all workers in port facilities carry photo ID, and that Sunoco had no power to waive that requirement.
John Cherry's lawyer, Sandra I. Thompson, argued that Sunoco could have accommodated Cherry by using biometric identification, such as fingerprints or iris scan, which Cherry had offered to pay for at least in part.
But Sunoco's lawyers, Daniel V. Johns and Farrah Gold of Ballard Spahr Andrews & Ingersoll, argued that the requirements of the Maritime Transportation Safety Act, along with the Coast Guard regulations that were passed in its wake, simply don't allow for any exceptions.
Rufe agreed, saying, Sunoco "could not waive this requirement nor could it make any accommodation that would eliminate the same without suffering undue hardship."
According to court papers, Cherry is a Black Israelite and a member of the Church of the True and Living God who believes that the Second Commandment prohibits him from posing for pictures or photographs and from carrying the same upon his person.
Cherry was hired in March 2001 to work at Sunoco's 1,000-acre, 1,500-employee Philadelphia refinery. At first, Sunoco accommodated his religious beliefs by allowing Cherry to carry an employee ID without a photograph.
Even after the events of Sept. 11, 2001, court records show that Sunoco continued to accommodate Cherry's refusal to pose for a photograph, but required him to report to security when he came into work to show his badge. Read More...
No comments:
Post a Comment