Religious Affiliation in Public Announcement

KienholzEtc · May 2003

Every Friday afternoon, I send out an informational email to our department of 180+ employees. This email contains information about new employees, changes or FYIs related to benefits, upcoming events, etc. I also include - with the employee's written (email) permission - birthdays, "condolences" regarding a death in their family, new babies and marriage.

An employee's father passed away yesterday. He has given me permission to list this in the email, however, he has asked if I can list as a quote from him that his father is now home with Jesus. I have told the employee that I would review laws & policies to see what I could state without placing the company or myself at risk. I also told him that I may suggest some alternatives. I cannot think of any laws that forbid this and our policies do not restrict this. However, I believe that this could be the proverbial "can of worms". If I state this for this employee, I am setting a precedence that each employee could then mix their religious beliefs into shared information.

We have a very culturally diverse group (as most workforces are today). Employees often have very healthy discussions about the differences in their celebration of holidays, religious customs, etc. I don't feel that this statement would be offensive to anyone, but don't know that I'm willing to open that door.

Has anyone had a situation such as this? Any guidance you can provide?

thanks!

Whatever · May 2003

Haven't been in this situation. However, I would be very nervous about doing this. The issue is not setting the precedence. HR people (almost by definition) must be sensitive and aware of the feelings of others. While this statement may not be offensive to you, it might be to someone else. And since the message is going out on a company computer, using the company email system etc, the message could be perceived as a company endorsement of some sort.

Rockie · May 2003

I think on these type things, it's best to keep it strictly professional and to the point. "I'm sorry to announce that Joe's father passed away yesterday. Please keep Joe and his family in your thoughts. If you would like to send a card,please forward to my office and I will be sure that Joe gets them".

I can remember a time when people would not have given a second thought to a religious remark such as what you described, but nowdays, there is always someone who is going to get offended by something and make an issue of it. Sad commentary on our society.

MS HR · May 2003

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 05-22-03 AT 02:53PM (CST)[/font][p]don't do it.
non-christians will be violated.
stick to company policy and issue generic announcements.
just my thoughts. (from experience)

Don D · May 2003

You told the employee you might also 'suggest some alternatives'. Although I applaud 100 times your intentions and dedication to your employees, this is a perfect example of why these sorts of things should be discontinued. In this particular case, for people with certain unbending religious faith and affiliations, there frankly is no alternative to the wording he wants you to use. That is the ultimate for him at this time and it is his decision and I would not place myself in the middle of trying to get him to budge off that. He should not be asked to 'tone down' or alter his feeling for anybody or any reason. His feelings and need for comfort are all that matters at this point in time, period.

I once told a lady in an office, when she spoke of upcoming surgery, "I'm glad you told me, I'll keep my fingers crossed for you." She was offended by my remark and told me, "No, crossed fingers are the devils sign, YOU PRAY FOR ME".

With or without employee permission, you have been painted into a corner by today's political correctness, laws and now HIPAA. You can't win. Sadly, I suggest you discontinue your wonderful program of announcement.

In more ways than one, I wish we could all go into the time machine, backwards!

Parabeagle · May 2003

I'm going to disagree with most of these posts. If you are reporting a direct quote from the employee, e.g., "John reports that it has been hard on everyone, but says his father is now home with Jesus," I don't see a problem. Regardless of what religion the employee professes, publishing a quote that incorporates that employee's religious sensibilities should be no big deal. If I had an Islamic employee who wanted me to publish that his father had gone to be with Allah, I can't think of a single employee in our office who would be offended, because it merely reflects the beliefs of that individual.

Let's get off the PC train, already and lighten up!

Just my opinion.

Hatchetman · May 2003

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 05-16-03 AT 01:33PM (CST)[/font][p]I agree with Parabeagle. In fact, if he hadn't suggested it, I was about to after I came across the original post.

As a non-Christian, Parabeagle's suggested wording would not be offensive to me.
Such a statement in quotes is no more an expression of the company's position than it would be for the company to identify employees who were engaged in community activities and their causes, many of which are social issues on which two or more "sides" may exist.

scottorr · May 2003

I would have to disagree with any religious comments coming out of the HR department whether it is in quotes or not. If an employee sues the company for religious discrimination, you can be rest assured that it will be used against you. Play it safe and leave religion out of anything HR related.

Parabeagle · May 2003

Well, the solution is simple enough: The informational e-mail that is sent out weekly should carry, in fine print, a disclaimer with words to the effect of, "This e-mail is an unofficial communique distributed to employees of Brand X corporation and designed to keep employees informed about current events affecting them. It does not necessarily reflect the views of Brand X Corporation, its affiliates or subsidiaries, etc. etc. etc."

The Air Force has used that disclaimer for years in its unofficial base newspapers. Think I even saw the word God printed in there a time or two. x;-)

Don D · May 2003

The EEOC has never in their lifetime conducted an investigation on a military base.

Don D · May 2003

Healthy debate going here! I agree with Scott. It would be just like me putting in my weekly fuzzy update column, Hatchet and Beagle were both involved in an accident last week and will return by the middle of next week. They want you to know that "Beagle had his spleen removed and suffered a severe bruise to his left whatever" and "Hatchet's spouse reports he is walking fine with four toes on that foot and the prescription for Dulaudid is working". Although it's in quotes, in the courtroom, the judge and jury couldn't care less who HR is quoting, only that HR is violating the law.

And if my weekly HR report to the troops says, Beagle's girlfriend is up from Georgia; he reports that the rumors are unfounded and that he "Is attending church regularly and his Baptist minister has told him that prayer will deal with all of this and God will direct him out of this firestorm and he asks that we all pray with him and attend church on Sunday, Amen Brother." The judge and jury, or the EEOC, more accurately, will severely admonish HR for the publication, regardless of the quotation marks.

How about a tie breaker here, someone.

Parabeagle · May 2003

Actually, she's from Alabama, not Georgia, but that's neither here nor there. x;-)

Getting the medical info allegory (I think that's the term I'm looking for) doesn't quite illustrate the point I'm trying to make, but I'll try again. Okay, let's say I have no problem with you printing my medical condition. In fact, I'm the one who told you what was going on with my condition and I felt very strongly about it. In point of fact, I actually gave you permission to print that information. Just as the employee's father specifically requested that he be quoted as saying that his father had gone to be with Jesus.

With an appropriate disclaimer disavowing any corporate sponsorship or endorsement of the opinions expressed in the newsletter, I really don't see what the problem is.

And also, regarding the disclaimer that the Air Force uses -- I never said that the EEOC had ever gone after them, I was merely making the point that the AF uses that disclaimer so that no one can mistakenly allege that they (the Air Force) endorse the opinions they print.

MS HR · May 2003

See, if someone can interpret it as a litiginous comment, you could be on the defensive end of the stick. Why take the risk of exposure? Just use generic comments.

Parabeagle · May 2003

I'm trying to wrap my brain around how this is any different than any other type of reporting to a target audience. No religious fundamentalists sue CNN, NBC, CBS, Al Jazeera or any other news organization if they come on television and say that Osama bin Laden is calling for a jihad against the Godless heathen Americans and the suicide bombers are in heaven with Allah. I'm sure many people take offense at that, but it's merely reporting something that has been said. It's news. Just like that employee's father's passing is news, as far as his company is concerned, and if that's what the employee has to say about the subject, that's what the reporter should report.

Don D · May 2003

I'm going home to eat a steak, but will close by saying... Something keeps flashing in the left side of my brain reminding me that I was hired here neither to be a reporter for CNN nor a gossip columnist for the office rag, nor a 2nd lieutenant issuing meaningless disclaimers behind the impenetrable iron gates of a military base; rather to operate a professional HR department, constantly aware that the rules that apply to HR departments are typically quite different from those applying to military bases, newspapers, television stations or the town crier; and that the EEOC, The ADA and the HIPAA constabulary are poised to pounce on our every mistake. I enjoyed the debate even though we come down on different sides of it. Have a great weekend all.

Parabeagle · May 2003

Just occurred to me that I think I sided opposite your view on the Confederate flag thing, didn't I, Don? Hmmmm..... :-?

And in some companies, HR does serve the function of corporate communications, so these distinctions and this debate is not without purpose.

Have a good weekend.

HRsage · May 2003

I'll just add that I need as few headaches as possible in this job since I deal with enough already. By adding the religious comment with or without quotes leaves me and my company vulnerable to a possible future conflict- regardless of the validity of the complaint. I don't want to go to court and say, "but I put it in quotes" or "I have a disclaimer"- because I'm still going through the trouble and burden of dealing with it. Whereas, if I leave it out, it won't ever be an issue for me to have to deal with. We deal with people day in and day out that are irrational. I want to be able to do my job with as little of that as possible.

Don D · May 2003

I don't know. I don't track who sides with whom on what. I just give my opinions like everybody else. I do try to reason through mine based on experience and knowledge. Perhaps sometimes I fail. Corporate communications responsibilities assigned to HR would not protect them against violating the law for publishing protected medical information. 'Freedom Of The Press' isn't exactly one of our mantras. Don't risk it.

HS · May 2003

Uh-Oh Don, x:o you've just offended the vegetarians! :-S

Parabeagle · May 2003

Wait! Wait! I've got it! I have the answer!

In addition to the disclaimer on the newsletter, we make all employees who may read the newsletter sign an acknowledgement that they have read the disclaimer. This acknowledgement is filed in their personnel file along with the Release of All Claims, in which they specifically agree that if they encounter an objectionable phrase, idea, concept, or bad word (like "doody") while perusing the newsletter, they will not take action against the company, the author of the article containing said bad word, and hold harmless the company, its heirs and assigns, second cousins, third great-uncle twice removed, etc.

Finally, as a fourth layer of insulation against exposure, we wrap the newsletter in brown paper and print yet another disclaimer on the front which tells the reader that this newsletter has been modified from the original for content and to be read in the time allotted. We could even put ratings symbols on the outside of the newsletter for those who prefer not to take any risks that they might be offended and they could stop right there.

Hopefully, they wouldn't be offended by the ratings symbols.

Sorry. Just had to vent.

HRsage · May 2003

That was great Parabeagle. Do you really live in Oregon? I always thought Oregon was more on the PC vibe than other states. That's why they call CA,OR and WA the Left Coast. One of my biggest issues with being in HR is having to deal with all the PC junk. But it's something that we have to deal with. And eventually we will be closer to your extreme scenario, and it won't be as extreme anymore. Great debate though, one of the reasons I love the Forum.

Parabeagle · May 2003

Yes, I really do live in Oregon -- native, in fact. Interestingly enough, when I first went into HR in the 80's, I was at the front of the line on the PC bandwagon. Don't know what's changed over the years, but I find myself becoming more curmudgeonly as time goes on, I guess.

njjel · May 2003

Enjoyed reading the above comments! At my company, it is common for someone in the group to say grace out loud at a company luncheon! Now how's that strike you?

scottorr · May 2003

I'm glad I'm not in your shoes. Religion is a hot topic that needs to left out of the work place. We were having a Holiday party last December 10. One of our secretaries sent out a reminder that referred to the party as the Christmas party. Within 15 minutes we had 6 people file a complaint.

njjel · May 2003

Oh yes, we do not address anything at work as Christmas anything! We have a very diverse cultural organization and to mention one religion over another is tabu. We used to call our annual party a Christmas Party but now it is called the Holiday Party. But this seems to make everyone happy!

scottorr · May 2003

As a personal note, as a professional working in HR, I feel I need to present the image of neutrality. If I show any sign of favoritism (real or perceived), then I am not doing my job or living up to expectations. I also have the expectation that all management staff must also be non-partial to any group, real or perceived. You can not be fair to all employees unless you are neutral.

njjel · May 2003

And even when you are neutral someone will complain! At least that's how it is here. It goes with the territory of HR I think.

Trinity · May 2003

I am not sure if I can add anything else to this topic, but I will at least state my opinion. You all have wonderfully stated your sides and to be honest I found that I went from initially one way of thinking to another. And this is why: Being a strong believer in Christ myself, my initial reaction was one of "let the man say what he wants! After all his Father died and if you say it came from him, then what is the harm?" This seems a logical way to think and with most mainstream religions, hey, no problem. But when we bring religion into the workplace in this capacity, we find in HR that it is not these that will bring the problems if we open the door.
Many people consider Satanism to be a religion, so hey, what if my dad dies and I want you to say that I believe he is rotting in hell and that I plan to sacrifice a goat in his honor tonight? Well, you put the Christian's statement in the email, why not the Satanists?
And this is where the danger happens. I believe in allowing employees to have christian symbols at their desk and in their personal work space, but on a company newsletter, writte by a management team, it opens doors you may not want opended. And I WHOLEHEARTEDLY agree with Don that it would be better to inform this gentlemen that you cannot put anything religious in the company email, rather than ask him to water down the foundation of his faith.

Sorry for the length, but I wanted to say something.

Plano · May 2003

Wow I just love the forum. Funny though we can have a 100 names for one god but only one name for the devil. Is this what HR has come to a debate between good and evil. Darn, we can't bring god to work, but the devil is allowed to run wild. Go Figure!!!!!

scottorr · May 2003

I think some of us are forgetting that not everyone believe in God and the Devil. Religion is not that black and white. So like I said again and again lets leave the devil, god and religion in general out of the work place!!!!!! If you don't allow any of it, you will not have to worry.

AnneLa · May 2003

AMEN!!! Opps....sorry, I couldn't resist.

Religious Affiliation in Public Announcement

Comments