D Religious Discrimination IN THE WORKPLACE BY DEBRA A. MASTRIAN, AMUNDSEN DAVIS LLC Discrimination based on religion is prohibited by federal and state law, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Indiana Civil Rights Act. Title VII prohibits employers from discriminating because of religion in hiring, promotion, termination, compensation, or other terms and conditions of employment. Employers are also required to reasonably accommodate an employee’s sincerely held religious beliefs, practices and observances unless the accommodation would be an undue hardship on the business. The reasonable accommodation requirement is meant to allow the employee to observe religious practices, but it does not impose a duty “to accommodate at all costs.”1 Undue hardship is not defined under Title VII and had previously been interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court as “more than a de minimis cost.”2 This was a lower burden for employers to satisfy than the familiar “undue hardship” defense under the Americans with Disabilities Act, which requires employers to demonstrate a “significant difficulty or expense.” Last summer, in Groff v. DeJoy, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified that employers must show something more akin to “substantial additional costs, or substantial expenditure” if they are going to deny a request for a religious accommodation.3 The Court noted that this is a context-specific standard that requires employers to look at all the relevant factors and consider all viable options. In Groff, the employee worked as a mail carrier for the U.S. Postal Service. The USPS entered into a contract with Amazon to deliver its packages, which necessitated working on Sundays. The employee was an evangelical, Protestant Christian, and his religion views Sundays as a day of worship and rest. The employee requested an accommodation not to work on Sundays. The USPS accommodated his request by transferring him to another location where Sunday deliveries were not required. Eventually, however, that other location required employees to work on Sundays. The USPS offered to allow the employee time off to worship during the Sunday shift. The employee declined and continued to not work on Sundays. He was disciplined and eventually resigned. The employee then sued his employer under Title VII for failing to accommodate his request. The USPS argued that exempting him from working Sundays was disruptive to the workplace and business operations and had a negative effect on employee morale. The district court and Third Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the USPS, finding that requiring the USPS to bear more than a de minimis cost would be an undue hardship. The Supreme Court disagreed and, as noted above, found that the application of the de minimis standard was not appropriate. Instead, if an employer is going to deny an accommodation, the employer must show substantial increased costs or difficulties, taking into consideration all relevant factors, including the practical impact of the accommodation “in light of the nature, size and operating cost of an employer.” The Court also offered the following guidance: ▶ The effect on coworkers is only relevant to the extent that it affects the employer’s business operations. ▶ A hardship that relates to employee hostility toward a particular religion generally, or the idea of accommodating a religious practice, cannot be an “undue hardship.” ▶ An employer cannot simply conclude that making other employees work overtime would constitute an undue hardship; rather, an employer must consider other viable options. Reasonable accommodation and the undue hardship analysis are fact-sensitive and depend on the circumstances. The most common requests for religious accommodations employers face relate to headwear, prayer breaks and time off work. HUMAN RESOURCES 32 HOOSIERBANKER
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTg3NDExNQ==