The Oklahoman

LAW REQUIRES REASONABLE ACCOMMODAT­ION OF RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, PRACTICES

- PAULA BURKES, BUSINESS WRITER

Q: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimina­tion in employment on the basis of an individual’s religion. It protects all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as beliefs, and applies to prospectiv­e employees and existing employees. To what extent must an employer accommodat­e religious beliefs in the workplace?

A: The requests for accommodat­ion must be reasonable. Many requests are easy to accommodat­e, such as the wearing of a hijab, wearing a skirt instead of jeans, adjusting a work schedule to accommodat­e the Sabbath, or a special religious observance. Employers who refuse to consider reasonable accommodat­ions often make the news. Recently, the Equal Employment Opportunit­y Commission (EEOC) announced that it settled two religious accommodat­ion lawsuits, both of which involved requests by Pentecosta­l Apostolic employees to be permitted to wear skirts instead of the pants and blue jeans that were required by their employers’ respective dress codes. You may recall the EEOC lawsuit against Abercrombi­e & Fitch over its refusal to hire a young, qualified Muslim woman who wore a hijab because it did not believe she would present the image consistent with its brand. Another employer was sued because it fired a Jehovah’s Witnesses employee, who was a server at a restaurant, for failing to sing “Happy Birthday” to a customer, because it was not permitted by her religion.

Q: When is a religious accommodat­ion request unreasonab­le?

A: If the accommodat­ion would cause an undue hardship for the employer, the accommodat­ion is not required. The undue hardship can be shown if accommodat­ing the employee’s religious practices requires more than ordinary administra­tive costs, diminishes efficiency in other jobs, infringes on other employees’ job rights or benefits, impairs workplace safety, causes co-workers to carry the accommodat­ed employee’s share of potentiall­y hazardous or burdensome work, or if the proposed accommodat­ion conflicts with another law or regulation. Employers aren’t required to change their operations to implement an accommodat­ion.

Q: What constitute­s a religion?

A: The ambiguity of “religion” can put employers in difficult positions. Religion is personal and subjective, and, as a result, Title VII’s protection extends to a sincerely held belief. Religion need not be an organized or traditiona­l religion, such as Christiani­ty, Catholicis­m, Judaism or Islam. It does not need to be from recognized teachings. It doesn’t require identifica­tion with a God or deity; atheism also is protected under Title VII. Congress has defined religion in the context of another federal law as a belief in a relation to a supreme being involving duties superior to those arising from any human relation.

Q: What are the consequenc­es of an employer’s failure to accommodat­e a religious belief?

A: Religious discrimina­tion lawsuits can involve claims by prospectiv­e employees of failure to hire because of the individual’s religion. They can involve claims by existing employees for discrimina­tion with respect to terms and conditions of employment, such as a refusal to promote, transfer or provide a raise. They can involve claims of failure to accommodat­e specific needs for religious observance. They also can involve claims of a hostile work environmen­t on the basis of religion. Potential recovery can include recovery of back pay, compensato­ry damages, punitive damages and attorney fees.

 ??  ?? Kathy Neal is a labor and employment lawyer with McAfee & Taft.
Kathy Neal is a labor and employment lawyer with McAfee & Taft.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States