Employer Must Accommodate an Employee’s Religious Beliefs
- Article Information
- Published on Sunday, 29 January 2012 21:22
The law requires an employer to reasonably accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs or practices, unless doing so would cause the employer an undue hardship, specifically, cause more than a minimal burden on the employer’s operations. This means an employer may be required to make reasonable adjustments to the work environment in order to allow employees to practice their religion. Some common religious accommodations include flexible scheduling, voluntary shift substitutions or swaps, job reassignments, modifications to workplace policies or practices, and accommodating an employee’s grooming practices related to their religious beliefs. In terms of grooming practices, this might include, for example, permitting the employee to wear a particular head covering or other religious dress (such as a Jewish yarmulke or a Muslim headscarf), or wearing certain hairstyles or facial hair (such as Rastafarian dreadlocks or Sikh uncut hair and beard). It could also include an employee's observance of a religious belief that prohibits wearing certain garments (such as pants or miniskirts). When an employee needs a grooming accommodation for religious reasons, the employee should provide notice to the employer that he or she needs such an accommodation for religious reasons. If the employer reasonably needs more information to determine whether or not the accommodation can be granted, the employer and the employee should engage in an interactive process to discuss the request. If the accommodation would not pose an undue hardship on the employer, it must be granted.
However, as noted above, an employer does not have to provide a religiously based accommodation unless doing so would pose an undue hardship on the employer. Whether a particular accommodation may cause undue hardship on the employer depends on numerous factors including whether the accommodation is: (1) too costly; (2) compromises workplace safety; (3) decreases workplace efficiency; (4) infringes on the rights of other employees; (5) requires that other employees to do more than their share of potentially hazardous or burdensome work.
A recent case filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEOC), serves as a reminder that employers must not discriminate against an employee by failing to grant a religiously based accommodation, provided it does not pose an undue burden on the employer. In this case, the EEOC alleges that Ozarks Electric Cooperative Corporation, an electric power supplier, violated the law by terminating an employee who was a Jehovah’s Witnesses, and who had requested a day off to attend a religious convention. Katharine W. Kores, district director for the EEOC, commented on the case noting that “This employee’s request was so modest and minor it is astounding the company not only refused it, but also fired her…Employees should never be forced to choose between their religion and their job.” Read More.
EEOC Sues Employer for Alleged Religious Discrimination Based on Failure to Accommodate
- Article Information
- Published on Monday, 12 December 2011 23:36
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has filed suit against a nursing home alleging that the facility violated federal law when it terminated a Jehovah’s Witness based on her religion and need for a religious accommodation. According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, Whitehall Healthcare terminated the employee, a Jehovah’s Witness, from her job as a certified nursing assistant, allegedly due to her need to have Wednesdays and Sundays off to attend religious services. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, protects employees against discrimination based on religion and requires employers to provide employees with reasonable accommodations to allow them to practice their sincerely held religious beliefs. Lauren Gibbs, trial attorney for the EEOC commented that “An employer has a legal duty to accommodate an employee's sincerely held religious beliefs, plain and simple…Firing someone for asserting that right violates federal law against religious discrimination and only makes a bad situation worse.” Read More.
Taco Bell Restaurant Sued For Religious Discrimination
- Article Information
- Published on Thursday, 28 July 2011 19:20
A chain of Taco Bell restaurants in eastern North Carolina has been sued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for allegedly failing to accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs and then subsequently terminating him because of his religion. According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, Christopher Abbey is a practicing Nazirite who, due to his religious beliefs, has not cut his hair since he was 15 years old. Abbey had worked at a Taco Bell restaurant in Fayetteville, N.C., since 2004. However, around April 2010, Taco Bell informed Abbey, who was 25 at the time, that he had to cut his hair in order to comply with its grooming policy. When Abbey explained that he could not cut his hair because of his religion, the company allegedly advised Abbey that unless he cut his hair, he could no longer continue to work at the restaurant. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, requires employers to attempt to make reasonable accommodations to sincerely held religious beliefs of employees as long as doing so does not pose an undue hardship on the employer. The EEOC is seeking back pay, reinstatement, compensatory damages and punitive damages for Abbey, as well as injunctive relief. According to Lynette A. Barnes, regional attorney for the EEOC, “Many decision makers seem to forget that they must work with an employee to agree upon a reasonable accommodation that will suit everyone’s needs and rights...This case once again demonstrates the EEOC’s commitment to fighting religious discrimination in the workplace.” Read More.
Court Finds Abercrombie & Fitch Committed Religious Discrimination
- Article Information
- Published on Monday, 18 July 2011 19:58
A federal court has agreed with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) that Abercrombie & Fitch committed religious discrimination against a 17-year-old Muslim girl. According to the EEOC, Abercrombie Kids failed to hire Samantha Elauf for a sales position because she wore a hijab (head scarf) in observance of her religious beliefs. More specifically, the EEOC alleged that Abercrombie Kids refused to hire Elauf for a position at one of its stores because she was wearing the hijab when she was interviewed, and this apparently violated the company’s “look policy” which prohibits the wearing of any head coverings. Abercrombie asserted that permitting Elauf to wear a hijab would cause an undue burden on the conduct of its business. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, protects workers from discrimination based upon religion. This includes disparate treatment, harassment and segregation of employees based on religion. Title VII requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for the religious practices of its applicants and employees unless doing so would pose an undue hardship. Barbara A. Seely, regional attorney for the EEOC, commented that “Samantha is a typical American teenager who has a sincere religious belief that she must wear a head scarf. Employers need to understand their obligation to balance employees’ needs and rights to practice their religion with the conduct of their business. Where there is a minimal impact on the business, those religious needs must be accommodated.” Read More.
9th Circuit Rules CDCR Did Not Commit Religious Discrimination
- Article Information
- Published on Thursday, 02 June 2011 04:14
In a recent decision, the 9th Circuit has ruled that the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) did not commit religious discrimination. In the case, a small group of inmates and a volunteer chaplain sued the CDCR alleging a failure to properly accommodate their religion, specifically the Wiccan religion. This religion honors the "cycles of nature with rituals and new and full moons and on eight seasonal festivals." As of 2007, there were 183 Wiccans inmates in the CDCR, compared to 42, 666 Protestant inmates, and 23, 160 Catholic inmates. In an effort to accommodate the religious needs of inmates, the CDCR has a paid chaplaincy program that employs Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, Muslim and Native American clergy. They serve all inmates, but other religions, such as the Wiccans, are served by volunteer chaplains. The inmates alleged that prison practices failed to provide for certain general Wiccan religious needs and free exercise. The court found that the inmates failed to exhaust their remedies or bring their claim in a timely fashion. As for the chaplain, who claimed a violation of Title VII and FEHA because the CDCR failed to hire him in a paid chaplain position, the 9th Circuit agreed with the district court that a bona fide occupational qualification existed which defeated the chaplain's claim. Specifically, the job descriptions of the paid chaplain positions required that the chaplain be from one of the five denominated faiths in the chaplaincy program....
More Articles...
