D.C. firefighters have requested a decide to carry the District in contempt of court docket for a coverage that bans beards, resurrecting a battle fought over facial hair a long time in the past.
Washington, D.C
D.C. firefighters sue over policy banning beards for employees
Steven Chasin, Calvert Potter, Jasper Sterling and Hassan Umrani every put on a beard “in accordance with the tenets of his Muslim or Jewish religion,” which was protected by a everlasting injunction the boys gained towards the District about 15 years in the past beneath the Non secular Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA), filings from their attorneys state. The division’s newest coverage unlawfully ignored the court docket order that permits them to maintain their facial hair as an expression of non secular beliefs, the firefighters argue.
“There actually isn’t any excuse,” Jordan Pratt, senior counsel with First Liberty Institute, mentioned in an interview. “They [D.C. FEMS] determined to be their very own federal decide and violate the federal court docket order. That violation brought about our purchasers hurt for a 12 months and a half.”
A D.C. FEMS spokesperson directed all inquiries to the D.C. Workplace of the Legal professional Normal, which didn’t reply to requests for remark.
Many fireplace departments that ban facial hair for workers argue beards forestall masks from creating a correct seal and cut back their effectiveness.
In 2007, the District labored to maintain its grooming coverage in assist of shaving, saying it was within the curiosity of security, based on court docket paperwork filed by the D.C. legal professional common’s workplace.
“The District maintains that it’s unsafe to put on a tight-fitting face-piece with facial hair on the level of seal no matter whether or not the face-piece is utilized in a optimistic or destructive configuration,” the District argued in a movement.
However in 2007, U.S. District Courtroom Decide James Robertson sided with firefighters and concluded that, outdoors of a “catastrophic state of affairs,” “proof exhibits {that a} beard has by no means interfered with the flexibility of a FEMS employee to do his obligation,” based on a court docket memorandum.
Within the division’s latest coverage, issued in February 2020, staff have been prohibited from having “facial hair that comes between the sealing floor of the face piece and the face,” “facial hair that interferes with the valve perform,” or “any situation that interferes with the face-to-face piece seal or valve perform,” based on the court docket movement. The language of the coverage mirrors the coverage that D.C. FEMS was completely ordered to not apply, utilizing the identical security pursuits as earlier than, Pratt mentioned.
The coverage “intends to guard and improve the security of all members and thereby assist our capability to offer environment friendly fireplace and emergency medical companies to the residents and guests of the District of Columbia,” based on a common order from D.C. FEMS cited within the movement.
Every plaintiff knowledgeable their supervisor of the coverage violating the federal court docket order, however was nonetheless reassigned from area obligation in March 2020, Pratt mentioned.
The enforcement was initially scheduled for April 2020 however was moved up by means of a particular order issued by the division, which mentioned that the unfold of covid-19 would enhance the usage of “N-95 masks and air-purifying respirators” and that “the presence of facial hair interferes with the masks’s seal,” based on the movement. The coverage in D.C. got here within the earlier months of the coronavirus pandemic, however the firefighters argue that the District had deliberate to reinstate the beard ban earlier than the covid emergency.
The reassignments to logistical positions resulted within the firefighters shedding alternatives to earn time beyond regulation and vacation pay, which was much less whole pay than they might have obtained had they remained on area obligation, the plaintiffs asserted.
Potter and his household “skilled elevated psychological stress and frustration” due to the lesser revenue, and Umrani was “unable to take part in particular job coaching actions” and “was not allowed to use for a promotion” at his firehouse as a result of he was not within the area, their court docket filings mentioned. Sterling mentioned he was compelled to “use depart time to attend medical appointments” and will now not take his son to highschool on off days as a result of the brand new project modified his schedule. Chasin additionally had to make use of depart time for medical appointments, based on the movement.
“It was solely after we acquired concerned and despatched a letter that defined, ‘Nicely, you possibly can’t simply unilaterally violate federal injunctions.’ It’s solely then that they restored them to area obligation, however thus far simply haven’t been prepared to adequately compensate our purchasers for the hurt that their violation brought about,” Pratt mentioned.
Potter and Sterling have been restored to area obligation in October 2021, and Umrani was in December 2021. Chasin transferred to an administrative place in March 2021 at his selecting, based on the movement.
The newest struggle over the division’s grooming insurance policies, earlier reported by WTOP, mirrors authorized wrangling that goes again a long time. In 2001, firefighters introduced swimsuit towards D.C. FEMS for violating their spiritual freedoms by forcing them to chop their hair or shave their beards, and gained. The division had argued the coverage was enforced “to extend self-discipline, uniformity, security and esprit de corps all through this Division,” based on a Washington Publish report on the time.
The District has the chance to reply to the movement as to why they shouldn’t be held in contempt of court docket. Attorneys are requesting compensatory aid for the plaintiffs.
After years of backwards and forwards over beard coverage, the plaintiffs once more are looking for that the everlasting court docket order is being adopted beneath RFRA, and that firefighters practising spiritual beliefs are protected, Pratt mentioned.
“In a world with out RFRA, it’s the minority religions that might endure essentially the most,” Pratt mentioned.