Before breaking for summer recess, the Supreme Court released a decision that will make it significantly more difficult for employers to deny employee requests for religious accommodation.
On its face, the new ruling is simply a clarification of a standard for interpreting Title VII of the Civil Rights Act that was established by the Court in the late 1970s and had served as precedent ever since.
Title VII requires qualifying employers that have more than 15 employees to make reasonable accommodations for the sincerely held religious beliefs, practices, and observances of their employees so long as those accommodations don’t impose an undue burden on the employer. The issue in question is what constitutes an “undue burden.”
Between 1977 and the Court’s latest issuance, an accommodation that met the undue burden standard was interpreted under the law to be any accommodation that requires employers to incur more than a de minimis, or trivial, cost as a result of making the accommodation. While there remained some degree of imprecision in terms of what costs qualify as de minimis, generally speaking this interpretation significantly favored employer discretion in making these determinations.
As of this recent ruling in the case of Groff v. DeJoy, however, the Court has reinterpreted TitleVII of the Civil Rights Act to require employers to make all reasonable accommodations unless the employer can show that the accommodation would lead to “substantial increased costs in relation to the conduct of its particular business.” This new standard clearly heightens the burden placed on employers to deny accommodations.
While the Court stated that it did not believe the new standard would have much if any substantial effect on current EEOC guidelines on these issues, employers would be wise to prepare for an expected increase in religious accommodation requests and have a plan for how best to manage them.
To those ends, one potential starting point is working with legal counsel to better understand what evidence will be required in order to deny an employees’ religious accommodation requests, including how state and local laws may come into play. These inquiries will also likely include considerations ranging from the employer’s financial resources to safety implications and of course the impact that non-accommodation will have on the employee.
Further, employers would be wise to invest in training for managers and the human resources team on how to navigate these requests under the new standard. Also, company materials including employee handbooks, conduct policies, and relevant procedures should be updated to clarify the new practices and expectations.
Unlike regulatory rules, there is no delayed implementation with Supreme Court rulings, so this clarification of the undue burden standard is currently in effect and is already being considered in legal disputes over religious accommodation requests. Employers that want to stay ahead of the curve will be proactive in their approach to religious accommodation requests not just through adherence to the new interpretation of Title VII, but also through establishing an inclusive environment that encourages both cross-cultural respect and dedication to the company mission in a way that minimizes conflict over these issues in the first place.
You can read more about this topic here.
.svg){kind=small}
.svg){kind=small}
%201.svg){kind=small}
