******************

REFERENCES.  Employers should be aware that prospective employees who are Jehovah's Witnesses will likely submitted the names of fellow JWs as personal references, and other types of references where applicable. The following scenario demonstrates the potential "accuracy" of such. The quotations were taken from UNITED STATES v. PARR, which is a 1958 United States Court of Appeals opinion.

Max Larson is one of the best known Jehovah's Witnesses in the world. Larson started working at WatchTower Society headquarters in the 1940s in the department responsible for printing and distributing the cult's literature. He rose to head that department, and eventually, in the 1990s and 2000s, even rose to the positions of Vice President and President of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York.

In a Recommendation Letter, dated September 12, 1953, which was issued for a worker departing from the WatchTower Society's printing department, Max Larson praised the Jehovah's Witness' work at WatchTower headquarters. In the concluding paragraph, Max Larson summarized:

"Our organization found Mr. Parr to be very capable and always reliable. In all of his dealings with our Society he was fully honest and trustworthy. He had an excellent attendance record and was of high moral standing. In view of these qualifications, he has our highest recommendation."

Approximately 3-4 years after issuing that Recommendation Letter, Max Larson was interviewed by an unidentified official from the United States Department of Justice (typically an FBI Agent). During that interview, Larson disclosed that at the time that he had issued the Recommendation Letter, in which he had given David Allen Parr, "our highest recommendation", Larson had not only kicked Parr out of WatchTower headquarters, but Larson had done so just two weeks shy of Parr completing his contracted two-year "enlistment" term. Doing so was a purposeful act on the part of WatchTower administration to make sure that Parr left "Bethel" in disgrace, and to make sure that Parr would thereafter be unable to relate to his fellow JWs that he had spent a full term as a volunteer worker at the WatchTower Society's headquarters.

Evidently, Max Larson initially told the [assumed] FBI Agent that "he had no derogatory information concerning [Parr's] character". However, Larson apparently eventually decided to come clean, because the Agent included these remarks about Parr by Max Larson in his report, as recorded in the USCA opinion:

'although he was a good factory member he had failed to meet the requirements of a Bethel member'; that while the registrant possessed the necessary faculties which would enable him to become a minister, he was immature in spiritual knowledge and did not apply himself to the Bible study and failed to perform his ministerial work; that he considered the registrant as being 'spiritually sick and a playboy.' He pointed out that on many occasions he had verbally strongly reprimanded the registrant with the hope that the registrant would correct himself. He further stated that registrant failed to right himself and that under his direct orders, the registrant was requested to leave the staff of the Bethel family of Brooklyn. He stated the registrant withdrew from the Bethel Home approximately two weeks prior to the date that his training was to have been completed. He also pointed out that since the registrant had failed to devote the necessary amount of time in his ministerial work, he was removed from the Pioneer list and to date, his name has not been reentered on that same list.'

Again, the person whom Max Larson described with all the highlighted "negatives" to the federal Agent was the same person to whom Larson had issued a Letter of Recommendation containing the WatchTower Society's "highest recommendation" to potential future employers of Parr.

******************

SMOKE v. NATIONAL ELECTRIC CARBON PRODUCTS ET AL apparently is an ongoing 2006-7 Pennsylvania federal court case involving a Jehovah's Witness Manager named Richard Smoke. Smoke began his career at NECP in 1973, and apparently was successfully promoted up the chain of command over the years. In 1994, Richard Smoke was even promoted to head up NECP's human resources department. In 2001, Smoke was again promoted, this time to "Co-Site Director", a position which reported directly to the corporate President.

Smoke's lawsuit alleged that two other upper management level employees engaged in a pattern of sexual and religious harassment of Smoke, which consisted of calling Smoke disparaging names, making fun of his WatchTower religion, and telling jokes or making comments which were lewd or sexual in nature. Smoke claimed that he requested that such conduct stop, but it did not. Smoke also claimed that he reported the conduct to the corporate President, and asked him to stop such conduct, but that he failed to act. Smoke further alleged that this harassment so affected his health that he was involuntarily forced to stop working in June 2004.

Thereafter, Smoke filed a formal complaint with the Pennsylvania Human Rights Commission. This federal lawsuit followed. In a February 2007 ruling, the USDC dismissed the three individual defendants from the Title VII claims, and erroneously dismissed one defendant under state law. No info on what has happened since.

******************

In March 1982, New York City suicide-prevention professionals discovered that a defunct telephone number that had once been assigned to Kings County Hospital, in Brooklyn, as a "suicide prevention hotline", had been re-assigned to a Manhattan clothing store. The problem was that, although the number had been changed in the Brooklyn telephone directory, it had not been changed in the Manhattan directory. As long as the telephone number went unassigned, Manhattan callers received a message that that specific number was no longer in service. However, once that number was re-assigned to the Manhattan clothing store in January 1982, the clothing store began to receive calls from distraught individuals seeking suicide counseling.

That Manhattan clothing store was managed by a 20 year-old Haitian-American Jehovah's Witness, named Gary Dorestant, who, instead of notifiying someone of what was occurring, used this life-threatening mishap as an opportunity to "witness" to the callers -- on company time. Not only did this Jehovah's Witness Manager not report the problem, but after the situation became public knowledge, this JW even refused the telephone company's offer to change the number -- admittedly so that he could continue to receive calls from people seeking the "suicide prevention hotline", so that he could "witness" to them.

Dorestant told a reporter that on his days off, he walked the streets of Brooklyn's Eastern Parkway and East New York sections, trying to get people to listen to his WatchTower message, but, "Most of them won't even talk. They say they're too busy."  Dorestant said that after months of people turning their backs and slamming their doors on him, it was nice to talk to people who would listen to his WatchTower message. Hopefully, someone contacted that idiot's corporate home office and got the number changed.

******************

JW SUPERVISORS & MANAGERS MAY DISCRIMINATE AGAINST NON-JWs.

Because of the closeknit nature of the small Jehovah's Witness community, it should be expected that Jehovah's Witnesses hired or promoted into supervisory or management positions will in turn seek out fellow JWs when filling positions under them. Employers should be vigilant that such JW Supervisors or Managers do not discriminate against employees or perspective employees who are not Jehovah's Witnesses.

******************

******************

Posted in 2006 on a public discussion board which was discussing nepotism, etc. -- not Jehovah's Witnesses:

"So what? Networking & nepotism is a way of life! And guess what so is favoritism, get over yourself. People do business with people they like and often who are like them. I worked briefly at a place where 48 of 63 employees were Jehovah's Witness. You either accept the way they do things or you reject them and move on."

 

******************

In HUBINS v. WAPPAPELLO FOODS, INC. (2003), a Missouri "Baptist" employee successfully sued her supermarket employer in federal court claiming that she had been discriminated against by the Manager, who was a Jehovah's Witness. Although active JWs constitute only about 1/3 of 1% of the general population, 60% of the employees at this JW-managed SAV-A-LOT were Jehovah's Witnesses. Hubrins was hired as a part-time cashier in February, 2000. In September, 2001, Hubrins requested six weeks maternity leave. At that time, the JW Manager told Hubrins that Hubrins' job could not be held open because the store couldn't manage on a reduced staff, nor could a part-time cashier be hired as a temporary employee. Three weeks later, after delivering her baby, Hubrins telephoned the JW Manager only to learn that she had been fired effective the day her leave supposedly started. EEOC's investigation confirmed that Hubrins had indeed been fired on the day her leave began, but it was also discovered that perspective part-time cashiers had been interviewed in August, and that they were told that they were filling a position open due to a permanent part-time employee's maternity leave, and if hired, their hours would be reduced after Hubrins returned. One such person even was hired prior to the start of Hubrins' leave.

Hubrins stated that during her tenure at SAV-A-LOT that the JW Manager regularly permitted the JW employees leaves of 2-3 weeks at a time, so they could "auxiliary pioneer", which is the term for when Jehovah's Witnesses perform door-to-door recruiting on a full-time basis for short periods of time. Hubrins also indicated that the JW Employees regularly tried to "witness" to her at work, and would give her Watchtower publications. Hubrins also stated that after she filed her lawsuit that she began to be harassed by a neighbor who just so happened to be a JW who attended the local Kingdom Hall with Hubrins' former co-workers. Hubrins indicated that she and the neighbor had gotten along prior to the lawsuit, but after such, there had been a series of incidents - one even requiring calling the police.

******************

There is an especially interesting series of JW-related lawsuits which occurred in the 1990s: (1.) In the matter of Betty Johnson, Employee v. Architect of the Capitol, Employing Office, SFEP 92-006, (Feb. 12, 1993) (2.) Betty Jean Johnson v. The Office of the Architect of the Capitol, No. 96-AC-25 (Dec. 3, 1996) (3.) Johnson v. Office of Senate Fair Employment Practices, 35 F. 3d 1566, 1570 (Fed. Cir. 1994).

It seems that a Betty Jean Johnson had been employed since 1971 by the The Office of the Architect of the Capital in the Night Cleaning Division assigned to the Superintendent of the Senate Office Buildings. In September 1991, Johnson applied for the position of "Custodial Worker Assistant Supervisor", but the promotion was given to someone else. Johnson initiated proceedings under the "Government Employee Rights Act", alleging that she was discriminated against on the basis of religion. Specifically, she claimed that she was not selected for the position because she was NOT a Jehovah's Witness. The person who received the promotion was a Jehovah's Witness, and three members of the Superintendent's Office were Jehovah's Witnesses, including Calvin King, a member of the selection panel. After a hearing at which both Johnson and the Architect introduced exhibits and called witnesses, the board determined that Johnson made out a prima facie case of discrimination because she was not a Jehovah's Witness, she was denied a position for which she was qualified, and the individual who was selected for the position was a Jehovah's Witness. However, the board also found that the Architect successfully rebutted Johnson's prima facie case by establishing a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for not selecting her--namely that Johnson was not the best qualified applicant. In addition, the board held that Johnson failed to establish that this proffered reason was a pretext. On appeal, Johnson argued that the Architect's interview process "had a disparate impact in favor of Jehovah's Witnesses" and that the hearing board had not been provided with the panelists' completed evaluation forms before it reached its decision. The committee affirmed the hearing board. Johnson then appealed again - unsuccessfully.

Evidently, there were a significant number of Jehovah's Witnesses employed by The Office of the Architect of the Capital, including Jehovah's Witnesses who held supervisory or management positions. Given the Jehovah's Witnesses blanket anti-government beliefs and practices (no voting; no politics; no holding elective office; no saluting or Pledging the Flag; no standing for the National Anthem; no military service, etc.), there is a certain amount of irony in the fact that a significant number of JWs are employed by the U.S. Government in Washington D.C. This kind of reminds me of the Mormons, who are staunchly anti-gambling, yet many work for the casinos in Las Vegas. Birds of a feather ... .

******************

******************

In a 2002 Texas apartment lease lawsuit, the former tenant gave as the reason for the breaking of her lease the misconduct of the apartment building Manager, who was a Jehovah's Witness. The former tenant, who was an unwed mother, stated that the JW Manager constantly snooped into her private affairs and gossiped with other tenants about such. Additionally, a few days after the terrorist attack on 9/11, the former tenant had placed an American Flag in the window of her apartment. While she was at work, the JW Manager entered the apartment without permission and took down the Flag. The JW Manager's reasoning was that she lived in an adjacent apartment in the same building, and she felt that the tenant's display of patriotism spoke for everyone living in that apartment building. As a Jehovah's Witness she deplored the terrorist attack, but at the same time she refused to do or say anything which might make it look like she was supporting America, or criticizing the terrorists.

******************

******************

DERUSHA v. DETROIT JEWISH NEWS was a 2005 federal lawsuit involving a Jehovah's Witness named Alfred Derusha, who was initially hired as Associate Publisher in February 2000. Derusha's duties included supervising the directors of the advertising, circulation, and production departments, as well as the editor of STYLE magazine. During his tenure, Derusha hired and supervised Barry Flees, who was eventually terminated due to poor performance. Flees, a Catholic, filed a complaint of religious discrimination with EEOC alleging religious discrimination because he was not Jewish. In a letter, Flees also accused Derusha of retaliation. The News investigated Flees' complaints and concluded they were baseless. Derusha was asked to and eventually signed an affidavit for use by the News in the subsequent EEOC investigation indicating that Flees' claims of religious discrimination were baseless. In his own lawsuit, Derusha claimed that he was pressured to sign the Flees affidavit and that he did not agree with its contents.

Derusha was terminated in November 2001 due to poor performance. Shortly thereafter, Derusha filed an EEOC complaint, in which he alleged religious discrimination and retaliation. EEOC dismissed the charges for lack of evidence. Derusha then filed a lawsuit in federal district court alleging that he was fired because of religious discrimination and retaliation for his role in covering up religious discrimination against Flees. The district court summarily dismissed Derusha's lawsuit, and an appellate court affirmed.

******************

In 1993, former employees of HotTails, a small Colorado manufacturer of hair accessories, accused owner David Chapman of Details Marketing Inc. of firing non-JW employees and replacing them only with Jehovah's Witnesses. The allegation was being investigated by a state agency, but no further details are available.

******************

JONES v. JONES BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION CORP was an Illinois federal case which involved a Jehovah's Witness Supervisor who allegedly discriminated against female employees. Plaintiff worked for defendant without incident from June 1985 until July 1986 on an O'Hara airport renovation project as a laborer-escort. Her laborer duties included breaking out walls with an air-hammer, ditch digging, breaking up material with a sledge-hammer, operating a jackhammer, manipulating the chute of a concrete truck, and shoveling gravel. Plaintiff's escort duties entailed escorting workers and materials suppliers onto and off of the airport job site; the escorts drove a truck and were armed with a two-way radio and a permit which allowed them to escort vehicular traffic on the airport premises. At the time plaintiff was hired there were four laborer-escorts, all of whom were women.

However, in July 1986, Jones Brothers fired the job superintendent and replaced him with Walter Nealey, who turned out to be a Jehovah's Witness. Plaintiff alleged that Nealey believed women were submissive to men and desired to remove women from laborer positions. He hired numerous male laborers, many of whom were also Jehovah's Witnesses, fired three of the six women, and did not hire or make any effort to hire any women. The four women escorts were subjected to derogatory language based on gender both in person and over the truck radio system. The total number of female laborer hours at Jones Brothers dropped while overall laborer hours increased. Plaintiff was eventually terminated due to alleged unacceptable performance, which could not be documented at trial. Thereafter, Plaintiff brought suit against Jones Brothers alleging gender discrimination and religious discrimination. After a six-day bench trial, the district court found in favor of plaintiff on the Title VII gender discrimination claim, but rejected her religious discrimination claims. Jones Brothers appealed, but outcome is not known.

******************

In 1994, a Valdese, North Carolina woman named Drucilla Gallagher, 77, was awarded $30,000.00, after a federal jury found that she was fired from her Burke County Schools job because she was NOT a Jehovah's Witness. Gallagher argued in her religious discrimination suit that she lost her job with the county's after-school day-care program because she was a Baptist. Gallagher contended that her Jehovah's Witness supervisor wanted her out of the way so she could hire another Jehovah's Witness.

******************

BIELERT v. NORTHERN OHIO PROPERTIES was a 1988 federal lawsuit in which David Bielert alleged that he suffered employment discrimination, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, because he was NOT a Jehovah's Witness. NORTHERN OHIO PROPERTIES was engaged in the business of managing residential rental properties, which were located in several different states, and which were owned by several different investor groups. NORTHERN OHIO PROPERTIES was a subsidiary of ZAREMBA CORPORATION, a closely-held corporation owned by Tim Zaremba, Walter Zaremba, and other members of the Zaremba family. (See also: ZEREMBA GROUP and ZEREMBA MANAGEMENT.) The Zaremba family were Jehovah's Witnesses, and many of the investors and employees of the related corporations were believed to be Jehovah's Witnesses.

Bielert had worked for NOP as a property manager since 1971. In 1979, Bielert was diagnosed with cancer. He continued to work for NOP until 1983. His job performance allegedly greatly suffered due to his illness and medical treatments during that period. In 1983, NOP replaced Bielert with a Jehovah's Witness employee. Although Bielert was offered another position, Bielert felt that he was being slowly removed from the picture and would eventually be terminated anyway. Bielert was offered a severance package to resign, and he accepted such. After exhausting his severance package, he filed a religious discrimination charge with the EEOC. Thereafter, he filed this federal lawsuit, which was summarily dismissed by the district court due to insufficient evidence. The appellate court affirmed.

******************

BOWDISH v. CONTINENTAL ACCESSORIES, INC was a 1991/2 federal lawsuit filed in Michigan by Dwight Bowdish, a Methodist who worked for a company that was primarily owned and operated by Jehovah's Witnesses. Eugene Lehman, the Chairman of the Board, was a Jehovah's Witness. John Lehman, the company President, was a Jehovah's Witness. Relmond Chamberlain, the chief financial officer, was a Jehovah's Witness. Several others at Continental were also Jehovah's Witnesses.

Bowdish was employed by Continental Accessories in Michigan from 1983 until November 1987. At that time, in an effort to trim its staff and cut costs, Continental discharged Bowdish from his position as director of purchasing and marketing. Bowdish did not challenge that discharge. Only a few months later, Eugene Lehman offered Bowdish a similar position at Continental's Florida operation, which Bowdish accepted. From the time Bowdish arrived in Florida, he was at odds with the General Manager of that division, Jerry Waltz, who was another Jehovah's Witness. The conflict between Waltz and Bowdish centered around their different views about the chain of command in the Florida division. Waltz conducted himself as if he were Bowdish's supervisor, while Bowdish believed that he reported directly to Eugene Lehman in Michigan. On one occasion, the tension between the two erupted into a shouting match in front of other employees. Following this argument, Waltz issued Bowdish a written warning. Bowdish complained to Lehman about the incident, but Lehman merely urged Bowdish to "try to get along" with Waltz. In December 1988, Bowdish announced that he was planning to take a three-week vacation during the Christmas holiday season, as approved by Lehman. Waltz objected because it would cause Bowdish to miss the division's year-end inventory. On January 5, 1989, Waltz telephoned Bowdish and told him that if he did not return to work immediately, he might lose his job. Bowdish responded that he would not return because he had one more week remaining in his vacation. Upon returning home from his vacation, Bowdish discovered a letter from Waltz terminating his employment with Continental effective January 5, 1989, on grounds of insubordination. Bowdish phoned Lehman about his discharge, and Lehman informed him that he could return to work if he would make amends with Waltz. Bowdish refused.

Bowdish was replaced by James Reynolds, a Jehovah's Witness. Bowdish proceeded to file a federal lawsuit, alleging religious discrimination, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and similar Michigan law, negligence, and breach of express and implied contract. As part of his complaint, Bowdish noted that he was one of several former Continental officers and employees who were not Jehovah's Witnesses and who, after leaving the company's employ, were replaced by members of that religion. Bowdish also alleged that Eugene Lehman had verbally committed to a yearly employment contract with Bowdish, but never followed through with such in writing. Lehman denied such claiming that Bowdish uprooted his family and moved to Florida on the basis of "at-will" employment. The USDC summarily dismissed Bowdish's lawsuit, and the appellate court affirmed.

The district court concluded that Bowdish established a prima facie case of discrimination. However, the district court further held that Continental satisfied their burden of articulating a legitimate reason for the discharge of Bowdish by demonstrating the persistent conflict between Bowdish and Waltz. By articulating a legitimate reason for Bowdish's discharge, the defendants forced Bowdish to prove intentional religious discrimination. Neither court believe that Bowdish's evidence proved such.

******************

In December 1974, Carabella Enterprises Inc. hired a Jehovah's Witnesss, named Michael J. Paparello Sr., to start managing its already existing federally-subsidized Redstone Gardens Apartments, located in Bristol, Connecticut. From then, until sometime around the end of 1976, of the 31 new families moved in under Paparello, either 16 or 17 were Jehovah's Witnesses. That's 51-55%.  Less than 1/2 of 1% of Bristol families were JWs. As a result, federal HUD received 30 complaints from applicants and residents complaining about religious discrimination.

HUD's Equal Opportunity investigators released the [clearly erroneous] results of their investigation in May 1977:

"The evidence shows quite clearly that Jehovah's Witnesses are not given favorable treatment in the processing of applications."

******************

CROWN v. DAVIS was a 2003 English criminal court case which seems sufficiently pertinent to include on this webpage. In July 2003, a 51 year-old Jehovah's Witness Carpenter, named Carl Davis, was employed by a children's daycare center to perform some miscellaneous construction [apparently at a new location in an older building]. Davis constructed and installed covers for the building's radiators, a safety gate, and [safety] hardware for the building's entrance/exit doors. The [new] center apparently was corporately owned, and Davis was not compensated for his work in a timely fashion. In October, when the radiators probably were first used, the local manager apparently noted some sort of problem with the covers which Davis had installed, and called Davis back to remedy such problem.

Reportedly, when Davis showed up, instead of repairing the radiator covers, Davis began removing the previously installed materials -- door hardware, radiator covers, and the safety gate. When it eventually became apparent to the manager what Davis was doing -- cutting off the gate, tearing apart the radiator covers, and disassembling the door hardware -- in the same room as were approximately nine 2-5 year olds, plus staff, the female manager attempted to stop Davis, who then pushed the female manager aside -- causing her to fall against a wall. The manager testified that Davis did such in a fashion as to cause her to be bruised and tear a muscle in her arm. The manager also testified that Davis' behavior was also sufficient to cause the children to become fearful and start crying.

Amusingly, during the trial, Carl Davis testified in his own defense that as a Jehovah's Witness that his religion prevented him from losing his temper, and that he had told the manager that he was reclaiming his materials because he had not been paid. Davis further claimed, "I don't get angry. It does not come out in me. Pulling the radiator covers off is not diplomatic, but the opportunity provided itself to take my materials back."

Carl Davis was convicted of assault, fined, and placed on probation for one year.

******************

In a June 2007 internet chat/discussion, a liberal minded teenager, who was a professing Christian, was talking with like-minded teens about casually discussing religion at work. The teenage employee related that his supervisor is a Jehovah's Witness, and that although the supervisor often came across as a "nut", the teenager tried to remember that he might also come across as a nut to others at times.

However, the teenage employee made a point that is pertinent to the theme here. The teenager related that the Jehovah's Witness Supervisor had the habit of constantly bringing up his WatchTower beliefs and teachings even when the casual conversation had nothing to do with religion. None of the employees care about the Supervisor's JW religion, and they go out of their way to keep from giving the JW Supervisor reason to bring up such, yet as the tennager relates, it is constantly "JW this", and "JW that".

The issue for the employer of this JW Supervisor is -- how long will it be before one of the employees gets their fill of the pestering by the JW Supervisor; says something negative about the Supervisor's JW religion; and then the offended JW Supervisor starts to mistreat that underling because that underling has removed themselves as a potential recruit to the Supervisor's WatchTower religion?
 

******************

Here is a July 2005 discussion board comment:

... I sit next to a J[ehovah's] W[itness] at work and have known her for the past four years. Nice enough girl, however, her continual comments on ‘the truth’ has lead me to read as much material as possible on this group of people.

I must admit I was specifically looking for material written by converted JW’s as I find the whole “Watchtower” idea a little hard to swallow.

... The young JW who sits next to me had an unfortunate scare late last year. Her mother (also a JW) was admitted to the hospital and quickly transferred to the mental ward because she was trying to kill herself. Coincidence? Perhaps, perhaps not? The mother continues to suffer from severe depression and from what I can gather doesn’t leave the house very often (sleeps a lot). All family members are un-employed with the exception of the girl I work with. She pays the mortgage, rates, and even does the family shopping, cooking and cleaning at the ripe old age of 22. I understand this may not be a direct result of being a JW, however, this can’t be normal can it? The poor girl is drained and constantly scratches her neck and arms – we call it her ‘stress’ rash – and this is ‘the truth’.

******************

Here is a July 2002 discussion board comment:

There's even 2 Jehovah's Witnesses at my work! They tried harder than the Christians to convert me! I got them off my case pretty easily though!!!

******************

Here is an undated post from a discussion website for [never was] "christians" who became atheists, which documents what everyone familiar with JWs already knows -- that JWs see their place of employment as a recruitment field ripe for harvest:

 

My deconversion did not happen "overnight," but I did experience an exponential push towards atheism after meeting a Jehovah's Witness at work who targeted me as a conversion prospect.

We began having lunches and discussing Jehovah's Witness doctrine. I was not in the least interested in becoming a Jehovah's Witness, but was honestly curious about their beliefs and what made them so different from mine (born-again fundamentalist Christian). I wanted to know what made them a cult, and, (blush) felt I could help this poor stray Jehovah's Witness see the light of my own true Christian beliefs--though they weren't even all that strong at the time and I was going through the motions.

ANYWAY, to make a long story short, I read all their literature, laughed at most of it, but was astonished to find they convinced me of at least one thing...there was no hell. They really did logically convince me that the Bible had been misconstrued and misinterpreted in that regard, and it certainly fit better with what I wanted to believe about God. But...boy did that open another can of worms. ... ...

 

******************

The following question/scenario was posted on a "legal help" public discussion board; thus, the situation is most likely real. One vital piece of info that the poster did not include is: How did they know that the apartment manager was a JW. Probably, because the apartment manager is proselytizing the tenants:

Manager is becoming a real pain in the A#@!

By: Gjoe - Consumer

Date: 10/14/2006 2:05:27 AM State: CA

I live in a 56 unit apartment complex in So Calif. (Orange County) and have done so for the past 5 years. I live on the ground floor and have a patio/porch approx 8'x8' in the front entrance of my apartment. All of the bottom floor apts have the same amount of space. On my porch I have 4-5 potted plants, 3 resin chairs, a BBQ w/cover and a small table that I place an ashtray on. I smoke outside my apt. along with many other tenants. I have done this since the very begining. Infact, the complex is very green and lush with trees and flowers everywhere. The managment has litterally 100's of potted plants scattered around the complex.

For about the last two months our manager has been sending letters to everyone stating that EVERTHING on our porches must go! All plants, chairs, tables, welcome signs, door wreathes, any decor that personalized our space, ...everything. With no explaination. I have read and re-read my agreement and there is absolutley nothing in the agreement that says I cannot sit outside my apartment and enjoy the fresh air in a chair that I provide.

Since we do not have garages all tenants are being forced to throw away our belongings. Aside from that she also states the children in our complex are no longer allowed to play outside in the common areas. No toys of any kind, balls, bikes, scooters, wagons, and anything with wheels is suddenly prohibited. Strollers can not be outside on your porch at anytime.

My concern is this: I m afraid that she is being influenced by her religion, and imposing it on me. She is a Jehovahs Witness and doesn't believe in celebrating the holidays which are getting closer. Halloween, Thanksgiving, Christmas is celebrated with decoration and all the tenants do it basically for our childrens sake. I am wondering if she is violating my rights, I have to wonder if she will tell us next that we can no longer have a christmas tree showing through our windows.

Please advise there is a small group of us that would like to file a suit. however, I am unsure. In all the tenants rights books and the landlord lawbooks and websites I have checked there is nothing that addresses this issue. Thank you.

 

******************

As a good example of how Jehovah's Witnesses even teach their children early on to not allow anyone to tread on their civil rights, consider this 2002 court decision. A substitute Teacher in New York , named Mildred Rosario, not only was fired, but also had her teacher's license revoked due to a complaint filed by a Jehovah's Witness "parent", after that JW's eleven year old "daughter" complained about the teacher.

The JW's complaint arose out of a situation where a substitute teacher reacted to an emotionally charged situation. An announcement was made in her sixth-grade classroom, via the school's intercom system, that a student in another class had died due to drowning. The shocking announcement created a buzz among the students. One of the students asked whether the drowned student had gone to heaven. Rosario decided to discuss the situation with whichever students wanted to do so. Realizing that the conversation might be objected to by some of her students, the teacher told the class that whoever didn't want to participate in the conversation should go to another section of the classroom to use the computer or read some books. The Jehovah's Witness student, named Lisette Santos, did not leave. In an effort to console the students, the substitute teacher told her class that the dead student was now in heaven; explained her christian beliefs about salvation; and she asked some of the students if they wanted her to pray for them, which she did. Since Jehovah's Witness children are taught that all non-JWs worship the Devil, 11 year old Lisette Santos reported the teacher's conversation to her sister-in-law, who was her legal guardian. The JW "parent" reported the teacher, who was removed from her classroom the very next day, and fired four days later. Rosario filed a federal lawsuit. The federal court ruled that a school board may have a "compelling interest in avoiding Establishment Clause violations", which may justify firing a teacher who engages in religious discussion. When asked to comment on the teacher's firing, a spokesman for the Watch Tower Society spouted the ACLU party-line that school was no place for children to learn how to pray and that religious instruction was not the job of teachers in public schools.

******************

<<<------PREVIOUS PAGE----------HOME PAGE----------NEXT PAGE ------>>>

JW LAWSUITS - Page 7

Web Hosting · Blog · Guestbooks · Message Forums · Mailing Lists
Allwebco Web Templates · Build your own toolbar · Site Building Articles · Audio, Fonts, Clipart
powered by bravenet.com