AASRA MAGAZINE: Connecting Communities Since 2006

"If I have been given a choice of choosing between my Kirpan and my job, I choose my Kirpan."
- Kawaljeet Kaur, IRS employee

The Sikh Coalition is currently litigating a case on behalf of a Sikh woman who was ordered to remove her Kirpan by her employer, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The Sikh employee was ultimately terminated from her job because of her refusal to remove or modify her Kirpan. This article provides an overview of that case and information for Sikhs who may have questions about their rights regarding wearing a Kirpan in the workplace.

A Kirpan, the Sikh article of faith at issue here, commonly resembles a sword but varies in length, and the portion representative of a "blade" is often dulled. The word "Kirpan" comes from two Punjabi words: 'kirpa' means an act of kindness or a favor; 'aan' means honor, respect, or self-respect. The Kirpan acts as a constant reminder to its bearer of a Sikh's solemn duty to protect the weak and promote justice for all. Thus, contrary to the IRS' characterization of the Kirpan as a sword or weapon in this case, the Kirpan is an article of faith and functions quite differently than a weapon or sword.

Kawaljeet Kaur is a Sikh woman who came to the U.S. from India at the age of 16 with her parents. She became an accountant and eventually secured a position with the IRS in Houston in July, 2004. In April, 2005, Ms. Kaur took Amrit and began wearing a Kirpan. She informed her supervisor of this development, and her supervisor had some concerns about her wearing a Kirpan at work. He asked if she had any difficulty getting through security when she entered the building, and she informed him that she had not. She was able to pass throug the metal detector without incident. The day after Ms. Kaur returned to work after taking Amrit, her supervisor requested written information regarding her Kirpan, which was provided to him by the Sikh Coalition. The letter also requested that the IRS provide religious accommodation to Ms. Kaur so that she could wear her Kirpan at work. Soon after receiving the letter, Ms. Kaur's supervisor told her to leave work because wearing the Kirpan violated IRS Rules of Conduct and federal law.

Ms. Kaur was required to work from home. She continued to work from home, and was not allowed to return to work wearing her Kirpan for over nine months. In January, 2006, Ms. Kaur was informed that she must report to work with a modified Kirpan by January 30, 2006. Ms. Kaur returned to work as directed but was not allowed to enter the building because she was wearing her Kirpan. She was sent home and the IRS determined that she was absent without leave (AWOL) and stopped paying her. Ms. Kaur was directed by her supervisor to return some files on March 9, 2006, which she did. She entered the building by passing through security and the metal detector without incident. She was wearing her Kirpan, but it was not detected.

Ms. Kaur was ultimately terminated by the IRS in a letter dated July 11, 2006. The IRS said that she 'failed to observe designated duty hours because she was AWOL for 12 weeks; and that she willfully possessed a weapon in a federal building without authorization as a result of entering the Leland Building with her Kirpan on March 9, 2006. The case is currently being reviewed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

There are several examples of legal cases in which the wearing of the Kirpan has been misunderstood. Since 2001, the Sikh Coalition has assisted Sikhs in 17 separate criminal cases in which Sikhs were being charged with crimes related to carrying a "weapon". The criminal charges were dropped or dismissed in all 17 cases because the prosecutors in the cases determined that the Kirpan was not a weapon but was an article of faith. In Ms. Kaur's case, it is most unusual that the IRS determined that her Kirpan was a "weapon", as no one at the IRS has ever inspected her Kirpan or asked her to see it in order to make that determination.

It is against the law to "discriminate against any individual because of...religion." In Ms. Kaur's case, she was discriminated against based on her religion. The IRS never inspected Ms. Kaur's Kirpan to determine whether it should be classified as a "weapon". The IRS discriminated against Ms. Kaur by terminating her for carrying an article of faith.

It will be interesting to see the outcome of Ms. Kaur's case as it may have implications for many other Sikhs in similar situations. A Kirpan is an article of faith, not a weapon, and it is important that employers recognize this and do not punish or discriminate against Sikhs for practicing their religion by wearing a Kirpan. If you or someone you know has been discriminated against for being a Sikh, or carrying a Kirpan or any other article of the Sikh faith, it is important that the matter is addressed. You can contact The Rekhi Law Firm or the Sikh Coalition if you have any questions or concerns.

- Heather Rekhi