Executive Summary: The unprecedented increase in antisemitism in the workplace may subject employers to liability under federal and state laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of religion, race, national origin and ethnicity. This Alert addresses some steps employers can take to ensure their workplaces are free from discrimination and antisemitism and are in compliance with state and federal laws. Doing so not only protects employers in the case of discrimination litigation but also ensures a safe and productive work environment for all employees, including Jewish employees.
Articles Discussing General Topics Regarding Religious Discrimination Claims Under Title VII Of The Civil Rights Act Of 1964.
In this episode, Jen explains the impact of the recent US Supreme Court’s religious accommodation decision in Groff v. Dejoy.
On July 31, 2023, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals revived a Christian teacher’s religious discrimination lawsuit over his refusal to refer to transgender students by their names and pronouns with which they identified. The case highlights the tension between discrimination against LGBTQ+ individuals and discrimination based on religion amid
One of the trickier issues in the workplace can be a religious accommodation request, and on June 29, it got a lot trickier. In Groff v. DeJoy, No. 22-174 (June 29, 2023), the US Supreme Court decided a case involving a mail delivery employee working for the United States Postal Service. An Evangelical Christian, he asserted that his religious belief required that Sundays be devoted to worship and rest, not work. He eventually resigned after being disciplined for missing several Sundays.
How much burden must a company demonstrate before it is relieved of the obligation to accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs in the workplace under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964? On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a decision clarifying the answer
IN GROFF V. DEJOY, THE U.S. SUPREME COURT RENDERS NEW STANDARD FOR EMPLOYERS ASSESSING RELIGIOUS ACCOMMODATIONS
Executive Summary: On June 29, 2023, the U.S Supreme Court issued a decision that broadens protections for workers seeking religious accommodations in the workplace. In Groff v. DeJoy, 600 U. S. ____ (2023), a unanimous decision, the Court rejected the “de minimis” test that has long been used to determine whether a requested accommodation would create an undue hardship on the employer and held that undue hardship now will be analyzed by evaluating whether granting the accommodation would result in “substantial increased costs in relation to the conduct of its particular business.”
In Groff v. DeJoy, the Supreme Court provided “clarification” on the undue hardship standard in religious accommodation claims. The Court heightened the burden on employers to defend against such claims and effectively requires that employers overhaul their own procedures for analysis of religious accommodations.
In Groff v. DeJoy, Postmaster General, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court set aside nearly five decades of precedent holding that an employer could deny an employee’s request for a religious accommodation under Title VII if the accommodation would result in […]
On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States revived an employee’s religious discrimination lawsuit, unanimously holding that to deny a sincere religious accommodation request under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, employers must show that the burden of granting it “would result in substantial increased
The U.S. Supreme Court has “clarified” and changed the religious accommodation standard under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act that employers and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) have relied upon for more than 46 years. Groff v. DeJoy, No. 22-174 (June 29, 2023).
In a year in which we saw a record number of religious accommodation charges and lawsuits, the Supreme Court has “clarified” the religious accommodation standard that employers and the EEOC have relied upon for more than 46 years.
In Groff v. DeJoy, a former United States Postal Service (USPS)
Soap Operas are known for drama. Nothing has caused more drama in the last two years than vaccine mandates. Last week, a California court determined that a plaintiff’s request for religious accommodation at General Hospital could not be accommodated. The court concluded defendant had advanced sufficient evidence that unvaccinated employees
During recent oral arguments, justices for the Supreme Court of the United States seemed conflicted on whether to upend the existing standard that allows an employer to refuse religious accommodations to its employees if the employer can show that granting the accommodation would involve more than a “de minimis” cost