| by

noun-sign-language-5072546-1024x1024

Yesterday, we discussed how an employee asserting a failure-to-accommodate claim under Title VII must establish that their request for a religious accommodation resulted in an adverse employment action. The same appellate court deciding that case also recently confirmed that the same maxim applies to failure-to-accommodate claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

But, there’s a rub. Continue reading

| by

noun-discipline-475445-1024x1024

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 creates a statutory obligation for covered employers to make reasonable accommodations for workers’ religious observances, short of incurring an undue hardship. At a minimum, aggrieved employees generally must establish three elements in a failure-to-accommodate lawsuit:

Continue reading

| by

noun-prayer-3988748

Last week, the Supreme Court unanimously agreed that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires an employer that denies a religious accommodation to show that the burden of granting an accommodation would result in substantial increased costs in relation to the conduct of its particular business. The next day, the Supreme Court concluded in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis that the First Amendment superseded a state’s anti-discrimination law which would have forced a website designer who does not believe in same-sex marriage to create wedding websites for gay couples.

Since then, I’ve seen folks asking whether employees with sincerely-held religious beliefs about same-sex marriage can get a religious accommodation from their employer to refuse to work with a gay coworker? Continue reading

| by

noun-supreme-court-149365

Last week, the Supreme Court made it more difficult for employers to establish that an employee’s request for a religious accommodation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 creates an undue hardship.

But there’s much more to Title VII than just religious accommodations. And the Supreme Court isn’t done with the statute yet. Last week, it agreed to determine whether Title VII prohibits discrimination in transfer decisions absent a separate court determination that the transfer decision caused a significant disadvantage. Continue reading

| by

noun-religion-3817675-1024x1024

About 50 years ago, Congress tweaked Title VII, a federal law that makes it unlawful to discriminate against workers based on their religion. It clarified that employers must “reasonably accommodate. . . an employee’s or prospective employee’s religious observance or practice” unless the employer is “unable” to do so “without undue hardship on the conduct of the employer’s business.”

But what does that mean? Continue reading

| by

noun-thinking-11665-1024x1024

On August 7, 2018, a worker sent an email. The email stated, “I fear retaliation” and “my colleagues and I have been the victims of continuous harassment, both sexual and emotional.”

On August 9, 2018, just two days later, the company fired her.

How do you think that turned out? Continue reading

| by

noun-resume-225918-1024x1024

In 2016, a public employer sought a new Health Commissioner. They thought they had found the ideal candidate. Her resumé stated that she held a master’s degree in Public Health and had experience as a licensed sanitation. The candidate nailed the interview. Ultimately, the employer hired her for the Health Commissioner position because of her “excellent” resumé and interview.

Or so it thought. Continue reading

| by

noun-covid-test-4191906

Near the beginning of the pandemic, an employee in New Jersey reported to work but felt ill; specifically, he felt “cold, clammy, and weak.” After going home, the employer told him not to return until he tested for COVID-19. The next day, the plaintiff went to a free clinic where he obtained a COVID-19 test. While waiting for the results, the employee reported to his employer that he felt better, and offered to return to work, maintaining social distance from others. The employer fired him instead.

Is this disability discrimination? Continue reading

“Doing What’s Right – Not Just What’s Legal”
Contact Information

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2024, Eric B. Meyer
| All Rights Reserved Worldwide.
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design