private sector, as well, as long as we sensitize the employers, the supervisors who are involved.

Chair NORTON: Do you have any questions, Commissioner Walsh? Commissioner WALSH: No questions.

Chair NORTON: Thank you very much, Mr. Shayovich.

I would like to call as our next witness Mr. W. Melvin Adams, director of the Public Affairs and Religious Liberty, General Conference of Seventh Day Adventists.

Mr. ADAMS: Members of the Commission, with me are two of my associate directors in the Department of Public Affairs and Religious Liberty. On my left is Robert Nixon and on my right is Mr. Gordon Engen.

We have two other individuals with us and they will be introduced a little bit later.

I am here on behalf of the one half million Seventh Day Adventists in the United States and also I am here to express my appreciation to the Commission for your concern in this issue, which is demonstrated by these hearings.

It is not my intention to read the 31 pages of the prepared statement which has already been submitted to you; you will have that opportunity. Nor will I attempt to touch on each one of the points that are made there.

Rather, I want to just call attention to a few highlights which I believe need very definitely to be brought to the attention.

Historically Seventh Day Adventists have had a problem concerning Sabbath observance. This has been brought about because we live in a society that is geared to the Sunday observance.

Consequently, the Seventh Day Adventists back as far as 1888 organized a department within the church to deal with these issues. We were greatly assisted in this problem of religious discrimination concerning Sabbath observance with the Civil Rights Law that came, with the guidelines that were given by the EEOC, and with the addition of the 1972 Amendment, but this changed measurably when Hardison's decision came.

In fact, Hardison hit us like an earthquake. Many of the things that had been accomplished by the work of the church, by the work of EEOC, by the civil rights laws just all of a sudden crumbled.

I have in my hands here a bundle of single page reports coming from around the United States that came in the wake of Hardison. These are the ones that were reported and we have to realize that many of our people feel that this is just something that has to be endured and

AI, employen become a major stumbling block. In fact, it ingness to accommodate, rather than ability

My #1 MARK Yenaje protiem.

Wwx a 1/4, we started keeping a record of our Sabbath observance provaya Bhar tatt ner has passed over 800 that have reached our

Sunes Hardison Mis has ballooned It is hard for me to, out of all of Much a few this morning, but just a couple as an example, and we have the fours here in the flesh to tell us what we mean by that. In Cantorma, for example, an employee was granted an accommodation by the employer on April 28, 1977. On July 20, 1977, a few days after Hardison, he was told he would have to now, because of Hardison, work the regular work schedule.

Another one from California, it just happens, I'm not picking on

California, because it is all around the circle. A flexible mail carrier was dismissed and the assistant postmaster told him that since Hardison, the postal guidelines requiring accommodation were no longer in effect.

In Ohio the bank official handed an employee who had been accommodated and was being accommodated a newspaper clipping of Hardison. A few days later they back up that little move by discontinuing the accommodation that was made.

There is no use of my going on. We have heard already and will continue to hear how this is being done. But let me call your attention to a double edged sword that is now being inflicted upon Sabbatarians. Sabbatarians are being cruelly whiplashed by employers who do not accommodate and then who characterize these people as in such terms as "insubordination", "disciplinary action" and "voluntary quit."

Now what do I mean by that? Well this is cruel for an individual to have to lose their job because of their religious convictions. That's bad, but when his record is cluttered up with such terms as "insubordination", "disciplinary action", then the State agencies come along and feel that they too must enter in and deny that individual unemployment compensation because of the record that has been made due to his religious convictions.

I submit that this needs serious consideration. We are aware that not all individuals will be able to be accommodated. That is a well known fact, but the laws of the land should not be so construed and the employer should not be permitted to use this in a double edged sword, and that is not only to cause that person to lose their job, but then to put such things in the record that causes him also to lose his unemployment compensation.

In our experience we find that most employers do little more than mentally try out accommodation. This has been demonstrated literally in hundreds of cases where charges have been filed, where EEOC has investigated or a court has made findings; all of a sudden they find there are ways and things work out very well. I come back to the issue-many of them only make mental tests.

They do not really attempt to see whether by experiment such an accommodation is possible.

Before listing a number of suggestions for the Commission to consider I would like to go on record that the Seventh Day Adventists do not feel that accommodation is possible in every incident.

We are aware that there are undue hardships. We counsel many times that such is the case and urge our people to seek other accommodation.

Also there is another point that I think we would like to go on record

WAY WINTER & wordt unfair employment practice to
TURAR, KEh has been in regular
From night,369 egter on, a new boss, and the accom-

My Who Why to get you an unfair employment practice to Aygosity Yabatpants that get are as a result of Sabbath observance as in derdingbon or whodheq such term along that line.

4) We believe that it should be an unfair employment practice for an employed to wee dieriplinary machinery in handling accommodation

problems; the warning letters, the several days off without pay as a penalty, and the disciplinary machinery of the organization.

(5) We believe it should be an unfair employment practice for an employer to record a dismissal as disciplinary action.

(6) We believe it should be an unfair employment practice to label a dismissal as voluntary quit.

Now, these few right here get right to this double edge of the problem that Sabbatarians meet, not only running into places where it would be an undue hardship, but then the record being set up so that they also lose unemployment compensation and other things.

(7) We believe it should be an unfair employment practice to dismiss an employee before first experimenting with possible solutions. (8) We believe that the employer should be required to try a temporary solution while more permanent solutions are being sought. (9) We believe that it should be an unfair employment practice to dismiss because rearranging of schedule is either inconvenient or extra work.

(10) We believe that it should be an unfair employment practice to arbitrarily prohibit the trading of shifts. Now this is done many times. (11) We believe it would be an unfair employment practice for an employer or labor organization to refuse to assist the employee in his attempt to trade shifts with someone that would be willing.

(12) We believe that it should be an unfair labor practice to arbitrarily refuse the use of flex time. Many times the Sabbath overlaps the working day by just a few minutes on Friday afternoon. Maybe it goes on for six, seven, eight weeks and the total accumulated time amounts to only three or four hours and yet because of a rigid arbitrary policy of no flex the person loses their job.

(13) We believe it should be an unfair employment practice to arbitrarily refuse the use of personal or annual leave for this accommodation.

(14) We believe it should be an unfair employment practice to arbitrarily refuse time off without pay.

(15) We believe it should be an unfair employment practice to arbitrarily rule out the use of premium pay days at regular pay to make an accommodation.

(16) We believe it should be an unfair employment practice to arbitrarily prohibit the crossing of crafts in order to accommodate religious convictions. The Post Office is a prime example of that. The delivery man on the route, six day a week job, Sabbatarian can't work on Saturday, but he can work on Sunday, but his craft does not work on Sunday because mail is not delivered, but clerks do work in the Post Office and are needed for that time.