Wren v. T.I.M.E.-D.C., Inc., 78-1593

Decision Date03 April 1979
Docket NumberNo. 78-1593,78-1593
Citation595 F.2d 441
Parties19 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 584, 19 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 9104 Donald WREN, Appellant, v. T.I.M.E.-D.C., INC., Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

Michael J. Hoare of Chackes & Hoare, St. Louis, Mo. (argued), and Michael Wolf of American Civil Liberties Union, St. Louis, Mo., on brief, for appellant.

Thomas E. Tueth of Lashly, Caruthers, Thies, Rava & Hamel, St. Louis, Mo. (argued), and Michael Miller of Gracey, Maddin, Cowan & Bird, Nashville, Tenn., on brief, for appellee.

Before ROSS and McMILLIAN, Circuit Judges, and VAN SICKLE, District Judge. *

VAN SICKLE, District Judge.

Donald Wren appeals from an order of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri dismissing his action against T.I.M.E.-D.C., Inc. Wren alleges that T.I.M.E.-D.C. discriminated against him because of his religious beliefs and practices in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e Et seq. The trial court, following the guidelines set forth by the Supreme Court in Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison, 432 U.S. 63, 97 S.Ct. 2264, 53 L.Ed.2d 113 (1977), concluded that T.I.M.E.-D.C. was unable to accommodate Wren's religious practices in a reasonable manner without undue hardship. We affirm.

Wren had been an employee of T.I.M.E.-D.C., an interstate trucking operation, since 1965. He was an over-the-road truck driver and had been a member of Local 600 of the Teamsters Union approximately nineteen years.

The St. Louis terminal operates 365 days a year and is a critical link in T.I.M.E.-D.C.'s trucking operation which covers basically the entire continental United States. At the time suit was brought, approximately sixty over-the-road truck drivers were employed at the St. Louis terminal.

The St. Louis terminal operates under a contract with Local 600 of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America. This agreement subjected the St. Louis terminal to a seniority system. This seniority system is important in scheduling drivers on the various runs. Approximately sixty percent of the over-the-road drivers' runs are bid runs. The remaining drivers are placed on the extra board.

Drivers, according to their seniority, may bid for set schedule runs during a bidding period that occurs once every six months. The bid run is desirable in that it consists of a schedule with a regular departure time, regular days off, a regular number of work hours per week, and a more steady paycheck.

Over-the-road drivers who are unable to secure a bid run because they lack seniority or are unwilling to secure a bid run for any personal reasons are placed on the extra board. Extra board drivers haul freight as it becomes available and must be available for call from the dispatcher twice daily. The extra board is also subject to the seniority system. Drivers on the extra board with the most seniority are called first and may reject the run only if extra board drivers with less seniority are available. If no extra board drivers with less seniority are available, the driver called is required to protect the shift by driving the run. Any driver on the extra board may decline a run for certain reasons. Some of these reasons are sickness of a driver, more than seventy hours of driving within eight days, or excused absence secured in advance of the dispatch. Thus, the least senior extra board driver contacted, who is without a sufficient excuse for not making the run, must make the run.

If all the extra board drivers are either assigned or have excused absences and there is still a need for drivers for the scheduled number of runs, the dispatcher checks with off-duty bid drivers, laid off city drivers, and casual road drivers 1 in that order. If either city drivers or casual road drivers are utilized, T.I.M.E.-D.C. is required under the union contract to make certain contributions to insurance and pension funds. 2 The substitute drivers do not have to be available for call from the dispatcher and, even if contacted, may refuse the run at will. This creates a problem in that if the dispatcher cannot locate a driver within a certain time period, a run may have to be cancelled. Since dispatches out of St. Louis are timed to relay with dispatches out of other T.I.M.E.-D.C. terminals, unavailability of a driver may result in delay or cancellation of both runs, causing T.I.M.E.-D.C. to experience a double economic loss and the customers to experience a delay in service.

Between 1974 and 1976, T.I.M.E.-D.C. was in serious financial difficulty. In an all-out effort to turn the company around, there were stringent measures taken. One of the measures taken was to reduce the number of drivers employed and to utilize the remaining drivers to their utmost capacity. Because certain benefits such as health, welfare, and pension costs are set, it is more economical to work one driver seventy hours per week than to work each of two drivers thirty-five hours per week.

At the time of this suit, Wren was 44-years old. In his thirteen years with T.I.M.E.-D.C., he had climbed to twenty-fourth out of fifty-nine drivers on the seniority list at the St. Louis terminal. In August of 1972, Wren began to study the beliefs of the Worldwide Church of God and was baptized into that faith in April of 1973. One of the principles of the religion is that the Sabbath, which is celebrated from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday, is a day of rest on which no work may be done. All parties agree that Mr. Wren's religious sincerity is not an issue in this case.

In April of 1973, Mr. Wren provided Tom Thiene, T.I.M.E.-D.C. Terminal Manager at St. Louis, with documents explaining the basic tenets of the Worldwide Church of God regarding its Sabbath and Holy Days. Since Wren's seniority was not high enough to secure a bid run that would not conflict with his Sabbath, he remained on the extra board. From 1973 through 1976, Wren was able to avoid work on most Sabbaths without incident. During this period of time, the company had a large pool of drivers, and the dispatchers would usually call Wren only when the extra board was exhausted. This same arrangement was apparently available to the other extra board drivers when they wanted time off. However, Wren was not immune from work on his Sabbath. Information compiled from his driver's log books indicate that Wren worked on all or part of his Sabbath twelve days in 1973, sixteen days in 1974, eleven days in 1975, and nine days in 1976.

On May 5, 1976, Robert Grempler became the St. Louis Terminal Manager. In an effort to cure the company's financial difficulties, Grempler reduced the number of drivers, and tried to utilize them to their maximum number of hours per week. Because of this reduction in drivers, the extra board became exhausted much more often than before, and Wren was asked to drive on his Sabbath with increased frequency. In June of 1976, Wren and another driver, who was a member of the Worldwide Church of God, asked for...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Sturgill v. United Parcel Service, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • 15 Enero 2008
    ...avoid working on the Sabbath and to fire the employee for refusing to work after failing to arrange a swap. In Wren v. T.I.M.E.D.C., Inc., 595 F.2d 441, 444-45 (8th Cir. 1979), a truck driver joined the Worldwide Church of God but continued to work some Sabbath days. When the employer's dem......
  • Mann v. Frank
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Missouri
    • 10 Junio 1992
    ...Diagnostic Center Hospital, 671 F.2d 141 (5th Cir. 1982); Wren v. T.I.M.E.-D.C., Inc., 453 F.Supp. 582, 584 (E.D.Mo.1978), aff'd, 595 F.2d 441 (8th Cir.1979). "In other words, a reasonable accommodation need not be on the employee's terms only." Brener v. Diagnostic Center Hospital, 671 F.2......
  • Mathis v. Christian Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • 25 Enero 2016
    ...113 (1977) ; Webb , 562 F.3d at 260 ; Cloutier v. Costco Wholesale Corp. , 390 F.3d 126, 134 (1st Cir.2004) ; Wren v. T.I.M.E.–D.C., Inc. , 595 F.2d 441, 445 (8th Cir.1979). Some courts have also found that accommodations to an employer's neutral dress or grooming policies could pose an und......
  • Cook v. Chrysler Corp., 87-1985C(5).
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri
    • 31 Diciembre 1991
    ...for replacements, if such costs were more than de minimis. TWA v. Hardison, 432 U.S. at 84-85, 97 S.Ct. at 2277; Wren v. T.I.M.E.-D.C., Inc., 595 F.2d 441, 445 (8th Cir.1979) citing in affirmance, Wren v. T.I.M.E.-D.C., Inc., 453 F.Supp. 582 Cook's absence on the assembly line every Friday ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT