Discrimination in the workplace is a hard subject. Employers are forbidden from discriminating on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin under the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964. According to this law, it is illegal for an employer to refuse to recruit, terminate, or otherwise discriminate against an employee based on these factors.
Proving these types of cases can be difficult, such as proving that an action was discriminatory or determining an employer’s motivation. However, in other circumstances of religious discrimination, employees may have an easier time showing motive.
An example of a racial discrimination case
The Supreme Court of the United States issued a ruling in 2015 addressing Abercrombie & Fitch’s refusal to hire a Muslim woman who wore a customary head covering during her interview. Her headscarf violated the company’s “look policy,” which barred employees from wearing “caps” at work, thus she was not hired. She was otherwise qualified, but was turned down primarily because of the policy prohibiting employees from wearing “caps.”
On behalf of the Muslim woman, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed a lawsuit arguing that the look policy was discriminatory because it resulted in qualified individuals’ applications being denied based on their religious beliefs or practices. The trial court first ruled the practice discriminatory, but the appeals court overturned that verdict, declaring the policy “neutral” and not discriminatory (in other words, it applied to all candidates and employees equally). In a decision that favored employees who claim they have been discriminated against because of their faith, the United States Supreme Court disagreed.
The Supreme Court determined that the law requires that all religious observances and practices be protected unless an employer can show that it is unable to accommodate them without undue hardship. This decision is noteworthy because it requires businesses to accommodate religious practices unless doing so would cause undue hardship.
The Court also determined that an employer does not have to know that an employee requires accommodation; all that is required is that the employer suspects or believes that accommodation is required. If an employer discriminates against you because you have a religious practice, it doesn’t matter if you didn’t know you needed an accommodation. If the employer’s intention in dismissing the Muslim woman’s application was to avoid making an exception to the look policy, then the company broke the law.
What does this case mean for you?
In the end, it may be easier to prove religious discrimination because the accommodation does not have to be requested. Even if the employee or potential employee did not make a particular request for accommodation, if an employer acts with the goal of avoiding having to accommodate a religious practice, that may be enough. If a person interviews for a job and the company suspects that the person is Jewish, the application cannot be rejected because the employer does not want to give the candidate Saturdays off for religious reasons. Even if the applicant never explicitly stated that he is Jewish or that he would require Saturdays off for the Sabbath, this would be religious discrimination.
Cases of employment discrimination are very reliant on the facts of each case. A knowledgeable employment discrimination lawyer can assess your case to see if you have a solid claim for religion or other types of discrimination that are prohibited by federal law. Contact PLBH at (800) 435-7542 or info@plblaw.com if you believe your employer or a potential employer has discriminated against you. We have a lot of expertise resolving employment discrimination cases in a variety of situations, and we will fight for your right to work without being discriminated against because of your race, gender, color, religion, or national origin.