Religious Diversity Training Manual

Introduction
The diversity training manual provides a better understanding of the need for a diverse
working environment. The manual also provides strategies to put in place to effectively
manage various employees and improve the performance of the organization (Keil et al., 2007).
The manual is centered on enhancing the relationship among the employees, fostering teamwork,
competitive ability, and entrepreneurial skills geared towards a productive workforce. The
objectives for training using this manual are to: address diversity issues at the workplace, enable
the management to understand the employees, and increase the compassion of employees to one
another and the clients (Keil et al., 2007). A company can only have a higher diversity index
once they develop and follow an action plan entirely. This paper will explain religious diversity
and affirmative action about the current state laws. Further, the essay will also provide a
summary of all the key areas in the manual.

Religious Discrimination

According to the Civil Rights Act, Title VII of 1964, the workers are protected from
discrimination in employment based on race, religion, nationality, and color (National Park
Service, 2016). The act solely singles out religion and expects the hiring organizations to
accommodate various religious beliefs and practices of their employees. This is subject to those
believes that are held sincerely, observed, and practiced upon request by the employees (National
Park Service, 2016). In case an application would bring forth undue hardship on the normal
operations of the organization, religious requests may not be granted, and the employer is
cushioned from possible prosecution on violation of this act. Undue hardship can be explained as
‘more than de minimis,’ which implies a lower standard that employers should satisfy without

RELIGIOUS DIVERSITY TRAINING MANUAL 3
incurring extra costs (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2008). The act also
extends protection to those who don’t subscribe to any religion. Religious pluralism has fostered
discrimination in the American workplace to the extent that some of the employees seek legal
redress. The Civil Rights Acts protects the employees against disparate treatment by employers
during recruitment, compensation, and even promotion. The act aims to prevent any harassment
on the employees due to their religious practices, which could be a condition for employment or
failure to secure a job.
Religious Groups
The following religions have distinct practices that can be accommodated without
causing undue hardship to the organization. Some of the methods, however, will be difficult to
accommodate.
Orthodox Judaism

The management can accommodate the wearing of Yarmulke by the male Orthodox Jews
since it does not interfere with the normal operations of the company. Comments from
colleagues at the company may be treated as insensitive but not to the extent of creating a hostile
working environment for these Jews. The orthodox Jews also follow the laws of ‘negiah,’ which
prohibits physical contact with people of the opposite sex apart from close relations (National
Park Service, 2016). The management can, therefore, accommodate this practice by allowing an
alternative method for the male Jews to greet the females since it does not cause undue hardship
to the company. Conversely, most of the men also grow beards, which may not be acceptable
with the workplace policy of short facial hair.

RELIGIOUS DIVERSITY TRAINING MANUAL 4
Similarly, the company may not give the orthodox Jews Friday evenings and Saturdays as
off days to attend their Sabbath since it may compromise the work schedules of the other
employees (National Park Service, 2016). However, if they can individually successfully swap
their programs with other employees within the organization, the management can accommodate
that since none of the business operations of the company will be left unattended. Further claims
on disparate treatment that may pose a liability to the government will be avoided.

Hinduism
Displaying their religion through expression such as red marks on the forehead can be
accommodated by the management. Similarly, showing the ‘Vedas’ on the working space of an
employee does not pose any harm to the organization; hence this can be accommodated
(National Park Service,2016). However, the introduction of Yoga and meditation scriptures
‘Dharma’ may not augur well with other employees who, do not subscribe to such religious
activities (National Park Service,2016 At the same time, the male Hindus, tend not to shave their
mustache or facial hair since it is an act that separates men from boys. In some cases, it is a sign
of virility, reverence, and decorum (National Park Service,2016). Such an employee may not be
assigned to the assembling division of the company since the facial hair, if long, may interfere
with the assembling process. On the other hand, accommodation would imply the employee
opting to use a facemask to cover the hairs and allow efficient workflow without conflict with
the religious believes.
Islam
Prayers, according to Islamic schedules, can be accommodated. Midday prayers and
evening prayers can be done at a particular location provided by the management.

RELIGIOUS DIVERSITY TRAINING MANUAL 5
The management can also allow female workers to wear a ‘hijab’ at the workplace in line with
their religious laws that require females to cover their hair (National Park Service, 2016).
Further, proximity to a mosque for prayers may not be realized if the facility is not available
within the organization. Similarly, it may be difficult for a company to allow female security
agents who are Muslims to wear shawls instead of the prescribed uniform at work (National Park
Service,2016). The employee here is required to adhere to the policies of the workplace, even if
it conflicts with her sincerely held religious beliefs. Accommodation of a change of attire would
impose an undue hardship on the management; hence it would be difficult for such a request to
be granted.

Affirmative Action

These are a set of laws and procedures developed by the state to eliminate the illegal
discrimination of individuals who have been historically disadvantaged due to racial, religious,
gender, or nationality affiliation. The laws seek for equal opportunities in education and
employment (Legal Information Institute, 1992). The affirmative action came from an
‘Executive Order’ 10925 that was signed by the US president John Kennedy in 1961 (Legal
Information Institute, 1992). The Civil Rights Act and the American with Disabilities Act
prohibit any form of religious and disability discrimination during employment, education, and
promotion(Legal Information Institute, 1992).

Initial Intent of Affirmative Action Legislation
The initial purpose of affirmative action, as documented by the executive order of the
president in 1961, was to ensure that the applicant is hired and treated relatively during
employment regardless of their race, nationality or religious affiliation (Webster,2017). The role

RELIGIOUS DIVERSITY TRAINING MANUAL 6
of affirmative action is to enhance social equality by promoting privileged treatment to those
individuals who are economically disadvantaged. The discrimination of such individuals could
be dated back to historical periods such as slavery (Webster,2017). The need for equal
opportunities also extended to admissions in higher institutions of learning.

Regents v. Bakke Landmark Case
This was a landmark case in 1978 (US Supreme Court, 1978). Allan Bake, who was in
his mid-30’s, had applied for admission to twelve medical schools, including California medical
school at Davis (Ball, 2000). All the schools rejected him, and Bakke chose to sue the school at
Davis that had rejected him two times. He argued based on discrimination since the school had
admitted the students of color with lower medical scores than himself (Ball,2000). The
‘University of California Medical School’ at Davis had reserved 16 spots for every 100
successful applicants for the minority students (Little, 2017). The court had to determine
whether the school policy violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the 14 th Amendment of
the equal protection clause (US Supreme Court, 1978). The court did not uphold the majority
opinion action but stated that the constitution prohibited a school from putting in place racial
quotas (Legal Information Institute, 1992). The court ordered the Medical Class at Davis to
admit Bakke, stating that affirmative action was applicable in specific contexts but not on racial
quotas (US Supreme Court, 1978). The basis for the conclusion of Regents v. Bakke’s case was
that race quota could policy was unconstitutional and could not be used for admission of students
to Davis medical school (Liptak, 2013).

Positive and Negative Results of Affirmative Action Legislation

RELIGIOUS DIVERSITY TRAINING MANUAL 7
Affirmative action enhances diversity, which brings in experiences to a new environment
that would not have been possible in the absence of the program (Smith & Weidman, 2016).
Individuals can learn from differences instead of upholding the status quo. Further, affirmative
action allows individuals to pursue careers that could not be achieved without the help of the
program. There are many gaps present for women in minority groups such as technology and
nuclear physics, such special groups of people could benefit from diversity promoted by
affirmative action (Webster, 2017). Affirmative action has also helped to bridge the education
gap attributed to race in colleges and universities. Minority students such as the black and
Hispanic account for 14 and 17 percent respectively of the enrollment in institutions of higher
learning. Their white counterparts accounted for 55 percent of the total enrolment
(Webster,2017). Thus affirmative action policies seek to increase the enrollment of minority
groups of students in postsecondary institutions.
Conversely, the selection of someone to a job based on their affiliation with a protected
class may be counterproductive since they may not be qualified for the job (Webster,2017).
Affirmative action also breeds reverse discrimination since the conventional categories of people
are passed over in favor of less qualified candidates (Webster, 2017). Affirmative action also
reinforces the stereotype of minority groups; for example, women may be seen as inferior to
men. At the same time, Latinos and blacks may be seen as inferior to whites. Affirmative action
breeds personal bias since the current environment is dominated by racism and political classism.
This means that affirmative action can only be successful in an evolved environment that
embraces equality.
Diversity Manual Summary

RELIGIOUS DIVERSITY TRAINING MANUAL 8
The management should come up with a diversity manual that factors in the anti-
harassment policy. The manual elaborates on various forms of religious harassment, prohibitions,
and procedures for reporting harassment to the attention of the management. The assurance that
the complainants will be safe from retaliation should also be spelled in the training manual. The
mechanisms of raising complain should provide several avenues, such as written documents and
emails. The investigating officer should also be impartial in their investigations and come up
with appropriate corrective mechanisms. The management should allow the employees to
express their religion as long as they are not perceived as harassment. Coercive religious
practices should not be permitted, especially those held by those in authority, since the
subordinates may be forced to comply or face disciplinary action. Similarly, the management
should encourage tolerance to religious diversity in the organization. Discriminatory remarks and
prejudices should be addressed with the seriousness it deserves.
Affirmative action seeks to address historical injustices by promoting equality in
employment, education, business regardless of the race, religion, gender, and nationality of an
individual. The executive order by the president in 1961 on affirmative action was to ensure that
applicants received equal chances of being hired and fair treatment during employment.
However, the case of Regent v. Bakke in 1978 shed new light on affirmative action. The court
concluded that racial quotas were unconstitutional, and hence students should not be admitted
based on racial affiliations. This was later fully implemented in California medical school in

1996. Affirmative action promotes diversity and allows minority groups to achieve their dreams.
      On the other hand, affirmative action may create reverse discrimination, as seen by the
      disadvantaged male athletes who were overshadowed by female athlete’s empowerment
      programs. Similarly, affirmative action breeds minority stereotypes where blacks are regarded as

RELIGIOUS DIVERSITY TRAINING MANUAL 9
inferior to whites due to their inability to compete successfully in the job market. The training
manual, therefore, highlights religious practices that can be accommodated at work and those
that may cause undue hardships hence becoming inadmissible. The diversity manual will enable
the employees to embrace cohesiveness and affirmative action policies at the workplace.

RELIGIOUS DIVERSITY TRAINING MANUAL 10

References

Smith, M. & Weidman Powers, L. (2016). Raising the Floor: Sharing What Works in Workplace
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. The Obama White House. 28 November 2016.
Legal Information Institute. (1992). Affirmative action. Legal Information
Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/affirmative_action
US Supreme Court. (1978). Regents of Univ. of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978). Justia
Law. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/438/265/
Ball, H. (2000). The Bakke Case: Race, Education, and Affirmative Action. Lawrence, KS:
University Press of Kansas.
Keil, M., Amershi, B., Holmes, S., Jablonski, H., Lüthi, E., Matoba, K., … & von Unruh, K.
(2007). Training manual for diversity management. European Commission.
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2008, July 22). EEOC compliance manual:
Section 12: Religious discrimination. Retrieved
from https://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/religion.html

Liptak, A. (June 25, 2013). “Justices step up scrutiny of race in college entry”. The New York
Times. 
National Park Service. (2016, March 22). Civil Rights Act of 1964. Retrieved
from https://www.nps.gov/articles/civil-rights-act.htm
Little, B. (2017, August 3). Why the DOJ is suing colleges on behalf of white students.
HISTORY. https://www.history.com/news/the-landmark-supreme-court-case-that-
upheld-affirmative-action

RELIGIOUS DIVERSITY TRAINING MANUAL 11
Webster, E. S. (2017, August 14). This is how affirmative action works. Teen
Vogue. https://www.teenvogue.com/story/what-is-affirmative-action-explainer