Opinion ID: 449468
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Annual Leave

Text: Eighteen (18) days of annual leave cumulative to 180 days shall be granted for personal illness and/or illness in the immediate family (spouse, children, parents, and family members residing in household), which requires the presence of the professional staff member, and within the limits stated below: limit of 2 days per  1. Death in the immediate family 5 day limit each time 2. Family funeral attendance 1 day each time 3. Friend Funeral attendance 1 day each time-limit of 2 days per year  4. Immediate family wedding 1 day each time  5. Immediate family graduation 1 day each time  6. Immediate family religious 1 day each time ceremony (Ordination, Vows. Bar Mitzvah, Bas Mitzvah, First Communion, Baptism) 7. Official delegate to national 1 day per year veterans organization 8. Official delegate (President 1 day per year-with and/or Business Agent) to out charge national or state teachers organization 9. Official delegate (other than 1 day per year President and/or Business Agent)-(limit of 3) to national or state teachers organization 10. Mandated religious 3 days per-year observance without charge Those holidays which are required by and obligatory due to written denominational law shall be considered as authorized leave and shall not be charged to annual leave, including accumulated days. No annual leave, including accumulated days, shall be used for absence due to religious holidays in excess of three days per year. 11. Necessary personal business 3 days total per year a. Necessary personal 1 day per year business Granted at the discretion of the professional staff member with 48 hour notification to the immediate supervisor. Professional staff member will note pesonal day on the form provided by Board of Education. b. Necessary personal 2 days per year business with approval Professional staff member must request the days for personal business on a form provided by the Board of Education forty-eight (48) hours prior to such leave. Reasons for such leave may be stated in general terms if the professional staff member is concerned with protecting the confidential nature of the personal business. The professional staff member shall make all reasonable efforts to plan and conduct personal business so that it does not conflict with assigned professional duties. Exceptions regarding the forty- eight (48) hour notice provision and/or use of prepared form may be made in cases of emergencies. Necessary personal business shall not include (without limitations): 1. Marriage attendance or participation; 2. Day following marriage or wedding trip; 3. Attendnce or participation in a sporting or recreational event; 4. Any religious observance; 5. Travel associated with any provision of annual leave; Purpose set forth under annual leave or another leave provision of this contract.  Immediate family shall be defined as spouse, children, parents, step-parrents, grandparents, brothers, sisters, parents-in-law, family members residing in the professional staff member's household Absence due to any judicial proceeding in which the professional staff member is a plaintiff or defendant or is a witness under subpoena shall be considered as authorized leave and shall not be charged to annual leave, including accumulated days. Absence due to jury duty shall be considered as authorized leave and shall not be charged to annual leave. Immediately upon notice of the possibility of the teacher serving jury duty, such notice shall be communicated to the teacher's principal. All teachers shall make every effort to be excused from jury duty. The Board may require satisfactory proof of illness after a professional staff member is absent for four (4) consecutive school days on account of illness. Such proof of illness may also be required of a professional staff member's immediate family member if the professional staff member is absent for four (4) consecutive school days on account of the immediate family member's illness. For absence other than for personal illness and not authorized herein, a salary deduction equal to 1/180th of the annual salary shall be made. Any travel by a professional staff member, conducted in connection with and/or at the time of any school holiday, vacation, school commencement in September or school termination in June shall be arranged where possible, in advance, so as not to conflict with assigned or required professional duties. 3 In 1984, it cost $30 per day to hire a substitute, while the school board would have docked appellant over $130 for one unauthorized absence 4 After the Connecticut Supreme Court decided Corey v. Avco-Lycoming Division, 163 Conn. 309, 307 A.2d 155 (1972), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1116, 93 S.Ct. 903, 34 L.Ed.2d 699 (1973), limiting an employer's duty to accommodate employees' religious beliefs under the Connecticut Fair Employment Practice Act, the CHRO ended its conciliation efforts 5 In 1975, the union instituted a grievance proceeding against the school board on behalf of appellant. The only issue before the arbitrator, however, was the meaning of the Ansonia collective bargaining agreement. The arbitrator denied the grievance 6 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000e(j) provides: (j) The term religion includes all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief, unless an employer demonstrates that he is unable to reasonably accommodate to an employee's or prospective employee's religious observance or practice without undue hardship on the conduct of the employer's business. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000e-2(a)(1) provides, in pertinent part: (a) It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer-- (1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.... The legislative history provides little assistance in interpreting Sec. 2000e(j). See Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison, 432 U.S. 63, 74-75 & n. 9, 97 S.Ct. 2264, 2271-2272 & n. 9, 53 L.Ed.2d 113 (1977). 7 Section 1605.2(c)(2) provides: (2) When there is more than one method of accommodation available which would not cause undue hardship, the Commission will determine whether the accommodation offered is reasonable by examining: (i) The alternatives for accommodation considered by the employer or labor organization; and (ii) The alternatives for accommodation, if any, actually offered to the individual requiring accommodation. Some alternatives for accommodating religious practices might disadvantage the individual with respect to his or her employment opportunites [sic ], such as compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment. Therefore, when there is more than one means of accommodation which would not cause undue hardship, the employer or labor organization must offer the alternative which least disadvantages the individual with respect to his or her employment opportunities. 8 On remand, the district court must make findings about the use of personal business leave from 1968 through the present. Appellant does not only seek prospective relief; he also seeks back pay In its brief on appeal, the school board seems to assume that the burden is on appellant to show that the personal business accommodation would not cause undue hardship. It is not: once appellant has made out a prima facie case, the school board has the burden of showing that an accommodation would cause undue hardship. 9 The district court also thought appellant wanted something for nothing. Certainly it was overlooking his offer to work extra hours to make up for days missed. The court noted an analogous federal statute providing a government employee with abstention from work during certain periods of time for religious reasons if the employee engage[s] in overtime work for time lost, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5550a (1982), yet the court incorrectly stated that appellant agrees with everything but the work part. The statute appears to support, not weaken, appellant's claim 10 29 C.F.R. Sec. 1605.2(d)(1)(i) advocates the use of voluntary substitutes as an example of reasonable accommodation without undue hardship: (i) Voluntary Substitutes and Swaps Reasonable accommodation without undue hardship is generally possible where a voluntary substitute with substantially similar qualifications is available. One means of substitution is the voluntary swap. In a number of cases, the securing of a substitute has been left entirely up to the individual seeking the accommodation. The Commission believes that the obligation to accommodate requires that employers and labor organizations facilitate the securing of a voluntary substitute with substantially similar qualifications. Some means of doing this which employers and labor organizations should consider are: to publicize policies regarding accommodation and voluntary substitution; to promote an atmosphere in which such substitutions are favorably regarded; to provide a central file, bulletin board or other means for matching voluntary substitutes with positions for which substitutes are needed. 11 Perhaps Hardison may be read as equating undue hardship with preferential treatment. That is to say, accepting an accommodation that would lead to greater than de minimis costs to the employer constitutes under Hardison preferential treatment when looked at from the perspective of the employees. Yet accepting a proposal that would not cause undue hardship, does not constitute preferential treatment. We need not reach this question, however Moreover, in light of our remand, we do not address the hypothetical question whether accepting either of appellant's proposed accommodations constitutes an unconstitutional establishment of religion. We do note, however, that several courts of appeals have held that Title VII's duty to accommodate does not run afoul of the First Amendment. See McDaniel v. Essex International, Inc., 696 F.2d 34, 37 (6th Cir.1982); Tooley v. Martin-Marietta Corp., 648 F.2d 1239, 1244-46 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1098, 102 S.Ct. 671, 70 L.Ed.2d 639 (1981); Nottelson v. Smith Steel Workers, 643 F.2d 445, 453-55 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1046, 102 S.Ct. 587, 70 L.Ed.2d 488 (1981); Hardison v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 527 F.2d 33, 43-44 (8th Cir.1975), rev'd on other grounds, 432 U.S. 63, 97 S.Ct. 2264, 53 L.Ed.2d 113 (1977). 12 The district court held it had no jurisdiction over the individual school board members and the union officers. Appellant does not raise this issue on appeal and, therefore, we do not address it While we reach only the Title VII issues, the First Amendment issues remain open, if appellant should lose on the Title VII issues on remand.