Sample Solution

    No, Gomez cannot establish a prima facie case of religious discrimination because the store managers had a legitimate reason to deny her leave request. The fact that she was devout Roman Catholic was irrelevant since there were no special considerations to be made based on her religion. Furthermore,

there was no indication that the visions at the pilgrimage site would be stronger in October, making it an unnecessary expense for Sam's Department Stores. Therefore, this termination was not due to religious discrimination and instead based on policy and financial considerations which are both legitimate reasons for denying leave requests. Gina Gomez’s claim of religious discrimination involves several elements: firstly, whether she has a sincerely held religious belief; secondly, whether Sam's Department Stores had knowledge of this belief; thirdly, whether they treated her differently than other employees who requested similar leaves; and fourthly, if so, whether or not their action constituted unlawful discrimination against people with different beliefs or practices related to religion. In order to prevail in a lawsuit alleging religious discrimination against Gomez by Sam’s Department Stores Inc., she must demonstrate that all four elements exist in her case and meet certain requirements as set forth by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII). The act provides protection from employment discrimination based on race color creed sex or national origin including cases involving forms of religious expression such as those alleged by Gomez here. To prove that her sincerely held belief is rooted in religion we need only look at evidence from within Catholicism itself i.e., church teachings sermons writings etcetera as well as inquiries into Gina’s own self-reported personal faith experiences regarding the Virgin Mary In Bosnia which supports her claims When examining what constitutes ‘sincerely held beliefs’ courts have found that beliefs do not need to align perfectly with any organized faith tradition nor does the individual affiliated with such contain superior knowledge about these particular beliefs Additionally one may possess fundamental biblical principles but still express them through unique interpretations all while maintaining sincerity In short Gina appears to have met this requirement Next we must determine if Sam's Department Stores had knowledge of Gina’s sincerely held belief While employers may possess actual awareness implicit understanding or even constructive notice (whereby circumstances make it clear) knowledge can also arise amid discussions between concerned parties Thus according conversations between management and Gomez should provide ample documentation towards supporting this element The third element inquires if treatment arising out of disparate applications occurred As previously mentioned Sam permits unpaid leaves albeit under limitations These limits are pointedly enforced during October through December given an increase demands during holiday seasons Despite these parameters however it is possible for some exceptions such as when groups submit collective petitions whereupon requests individually considered So given Gina applied independently its likely enforceable Particularly considering how departures unrelated work duties often always denied Employees partaking vacations holidays related activities typically advised plan ahead rather than asking immediate permission This applicable Gina relevant insofar requesting time off accommodate worshiping although opportunity available after peak season Such reveals uneven applications potentially leading charges unequal treatments Lastly consider manner illegal disadvantageous actions impacted negatively upon Gomez Based findings far court ascertain degree deviance from established regulations prompt analysis requisite punishments pertinent Seemingly justified firing due unapproved absences purportedly endorsed touristic interests over professional ones Moreover nonrefundable tickets suggest intent travel regardless outcome decision Representing another factor backed up further demonstrated inability find new employment afterwards Consequently summation suggests mistreatment conducted direct consequence violation company policies expressly prohibiting indulgence recreational activities prescribed times frame Clearly evincing demonstrative behavior toward employee stemming veracity expressed convictions thereby constituting cause detriment prejudicial nature establishing ultimate point showing unjustified discriminatory actions took place prompting arguably valid complaint .