{"id":266,"date":"2015-06-04T13:42:49","date_gmt":"2015-06-04T18:42:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lindner-marsack.com\/news\/?p=266"},"modified":"2015-06-04T13:42:49","modified_gmt":"2015-06-04T18:42:49","slug":"supreme-court-clarifies-religious-accommodation-obligation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lindner-marsack.com\/news\/supreme-court-clarifies-religious-accommodation-obligation","title":{"rendered":"SUPREME COURT CLARIFIES RELIGIOUS ACCOMMODATION OBLIGATION"},"content":{"rendered":"

On June 1, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores<\/em>.\u00a0 The issue in the case was the scope of an employer\u2019s obligation to accommodate the real or perceived religious beliefs and practices of employees and applicants.<\/p>\n

Samantha Elauf was a practicing Muslim who wore a headscarf to her interview with Abercrombie.\u00a0 During the interview there was no discussion of her headscarf or her religious beliefs.\u00a0 The interviewer assumed Ms. Elauf wore the headscarf for religious reasons.\u00a0 Abercrombie determined the headscarf would violate its dress code and rejected Ms. Elauf\u2019s application for that reason.<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court ruled that Abercrombie\u2019s decision was religious discrimination prohibited by Title VII.\u00a0 Religious discrimination occurs if the real or perceived need for a religious accommodation is a motivating factor in an employer\u2019s decision.\u00a0 It does not need to be the sole reason.\u00a0 It is not necessary for an employer to have actual knowledge of the religious beliefs or practices of the employee or applicant.\u00a0 An employer\u2019s perception that the relevant behavior is religious will be enough.\u00a0 The Supreme Court also stated that employers must accommodate the religious beliefs or practices of applicants and employees unless the accommodation would create an undue hardship.<\/p>\n

Following this decision, employers may want to treat real or perceived religious practices and beliefs the same way they treat real or perceived disabilities.\u00a0 For example, employers may want to present applicants with all relevant job requirements and expectations, including such expectations as adhering to a dress code policy or working on Saturdays and Sundays.\u00a0 Employers can ask applicants if there is any reason he\/she cannot perform these job duties.\u00a0 Employers can also ask whether an applicant believes he\/she will need an accommodation.<\/p>\n

When an applicant or employee has a religious belief or practice which is inconsistent with his or her job duties, employers must explore possible accommodations.\u00a0 If no accommodation is possible, employers should consider how they can prove the necessary accommodation would create an undue hardship.<\/p>\n

If you have any questions about how this decision may impact your organization\u2019s hiring or accommodation practices, please contact John Murray or any other Lindner & Marsack attorney.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

On June 1, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores.\u00a0 The issue in the case was the scope of an employer\u2019s obligation to accommodate the real or perceived religious beliefs and practices of employees and applicants. Samantha Elauf was a practicing Muslim who wore a headscarf to […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[7,14],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-266","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-discrimination","category-eeoc"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p5WrIF-4i","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lindner-marsack.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/266","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lindner-marsack.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lindner-marsack.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lindner-marsack.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lindner-marsack.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=266"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/lindner-marsack.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/266\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":270,"href":"https:\/\/lindner-marsack.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/266\/revisions\/270"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lindner-marsack.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=266"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lindner-marsack.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=266"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lindner-marsack.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=266"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}