In a recent survey, 20 percent of the workers interviewed reported that they had either experienced religious prejudice while at work or knew of a coworker who had been subjected to some form of discriminatory conduct. Indeed, according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the filing of religious discrimination charges under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (which prohibits discrimination in employment based on race, color, national origin, sex, and religion) increased 75 percent between 1997 and 2008. The growing desire on the part of some religious groups to openly express their faith while at work has forced their employers and coworkers to reconsider the appropriateness of certain aspects of devotional conduct. Religion in the workplace does not sit well with all workers, and, from the employer’s perspective, the presence of religious practice during the workday may be distracting and, at times, divisive. A thin line separates religious self-expression—by employees and employers—from unlawful proselytizing. In Encountering Religion in the Workplace, Raymond F. Gregory presents specific cases that cast light on the legal ramifications of mixing religion and work—in the office, on the factory floor, even within religious organizations. Court cases arising under Title VII and the First Amendment must be closely studied, Gregory argues, if we are to fully understand the difficulties that arise for employers and employees alike when they become involved in workplace disputes involving religion, and his book is an ideal resource for anyone hoping to understand this issue.

With case table.

A full-text reporter of decisions rendered by Federal and State courts throughout the United States on Federal and State employment practices problems.

Hate speech law can be found throughout the world. But it is also the subject of numerous principled arguments, both for and against. These principles invoke a host of morally relevant features (e.g., liberty, health, autonomy, security, non-subordination, the absence of oppression, human dignity, the discovery of truth, the acquisition of knowledge, self-realization, human excellence, civic dignity, cultural diversity and choice, recognition of cultural identity, intercultural dialogue, participation in democratic self-government, being subject only to legitimate rule) and practical considerations (e.g., efficacy, the least restrictive alternative, chilling effects). The book develops and then critically examines these various principled arguments. It also attempts to de-homogenize hate speech law into different clusters of laws/regulations/codes that constrain uses of hate speech, so as to facilitate a more nuanced examination of the principled arguments. Finally, it argues that it is morally fitting for judicial and legislative judgments about the overall warrant of hate speech law to reflect principled compromise. Principled compromise is characterized not merely by compromise over matters of principled concern but also by compromise which is itself governed by ideals of moral duty or civic virtue (e.g., reciprocity, equality, and mutual respect). The Open Access version of this book, available at https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315714899, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 license.