Jewish Nursing Home Is Exempt From Title VII's Religious Discrimination Provision

In Shand v. Charles E. Smith Life Communities, (D MD, Sept. 23, 2019), a Maryland federal district court held that a Jewish nursing home, Hebrew Home of Greater Washington, is a religious organization for purposes of in Title VII. Under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-1, religious organizations are exempt from the employment discrimination provisions of Title VII "with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by such [organization] ... of its activities."  In the lawsuit, a geriatric nursing assistant claimed the nursing home had failed to grant her request for a religious accommodation.

Deputy Sheriff Sues Over Refusal To Accommodate His Practice of the "Billy Graham Rule"

Christianity Today reports on a federal lawsuit filed last month by a deputy sheriff who was fired after he refused to train a female deputy because it would require him to spend significant amounts of time alone with her in his patrol car.  The suit, filed on July 31 in the Eastern District of North Carolina, says that deputy Manuel Torres, a Baptist deacon, practices the so-called "Billy Graham Rule" under which he will not be alone with a member of the opposite sex except for his wife.

EEOC Wins Settlement of Suit Brought On Behalf of Seventh Day Adventists

EEOC last week announced the settlement of a lawsuit it had filed against an  Ooltewah, Tennessee, senior and assisted living community.  Garden Plaza at Greenbriar Cove required two Seventh Day Adventist employees to work on Saturdays, and asked them to resign when they refused to do so.  In the settlement, Garden Plaza will pay $92,586.50 in damages, and enter a 2-year consent decree requiring it to train employees on Title VII matters.

Seventh Day Adventist Tennis Players Sue Over Tournament Scheduling

Suit was filed this week in a Washington federal district court by two high school tennis players who are Seventh Day Adventists and were precluded from participating in state championship tournaments because matches were scheduled on their Sabbath (Friday night/ Saturday).  The complaint (full text) and motion for preliminary injunction (full text) in J.G.C. v. Washington Interscholastic Activities Association, (WD WA, filed 8/6/2019) allege that plaintiffs' free exercise and equal protection rights were infringed, and that the anti-discrimination provisions of Washington law and the Establishment Clause were violated in two respects.  Plaintiffs object to tournament scheduling that includes Friday evening/ Saturday games. They also object to tournament rules that require players participate in all events, except in case of injury, illness or unforeseen events.  Religious accommodation is not permitted. Becket issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

EEOC Wins Settlement For Jehovah's Witness Employee

In a July 31 press release, the EEOC announced that American Medical Response of Tennessee, Inc., a medical transportation service company, has settled a religious discrimination lawsuit filed against it by the EEOC. The company will pay $40,000 in damages for refusing to continue accommodating a Jehovah's Witness employee's request for Sundays off for worship.  The company also entered a 2-year consent decree requiring it to develop a religious accommodation policy and train its employees regarding Title VII.

New Report On Muslim Inmates In State Prisons In U.S.

In a press release last week, Muslim Advocates announced the release of a report documenting the size of the Muslim population in state prisons in the U.S. and the extent to which their religious rights are accommodated. The 68-page report (full text) titled Fulfilling the Promise of Free Exercise for All: Muslim Prisoner Accommodation in State Prisons concluded in part:

[O]ur research shows that within the 34 states that provided data in response to our requests, Muslims are overrepresented in state prisons by a factor of eight relative to the general population. In some state systems, Muslims are overrepresented by a factor of closer to eighteen, with more than 20 percent of prisoners identifying as Muslim. The absolute number of Muslim prisoners has also increased over time, even as prison populations in many states have tended to decrease in the last few years. Despite Muslims constituting a significant and growing share of prisoners, many state departments of correction still have policies that are outdated, under-accommodating, or non-accommodating of Muslim prisoners.

The Appeal discusses the report.

EEOC Sues McDonald's Franchisee For Failure To Compromise On Grooming Policy

The EEOC announced yesterday that it has filed a lawsuit in a Florida federal district court charging the owner of several McDonald's restaurant franchises in central Florida with religious discrimination.  McDonald's grooming policy requires all employees to be clean shaven.  The restaurant refused to grant an accommodation to a Hasidic Jew who was applying for a part-time maintenance position. The job applicant offered to wear a beard net, but said his religious beliefs preclude shaving.

UPDATE: Here is the full text of the complaint in EEOC v. Chalfont & Associates Group, Inc., (MD FL, filed 7/16/2019). [Thanks to Tom Rutledge.]

Hospital Settles EEOC Suit For Failure To Accommodate Anti-Vaccine Beliefs of Employee

EEOC announced last week that Memorial Healthcare, an Owosso, Michigan hospital, has settled a suit alleging failure to reasonably accommodate an employee's religious beliefs, in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. According to the Commission:

Memorial refused to accommodate the sincerely held religious requirement of the transcriptionist, whose Christian beliefs require her to forgo inoculations. The transcriptionist offered to wear a mask during flu season. This was an acceptable alternative under hospital policy for those with medical problems with the flu shot, but Memorial refused to extend it to her. It then rescinded her offer of employment....

Under the consent decree settling the suit, Memorial confirms that it now permits those with religious objections to wear masks in lieu of having a flu vaccine. The hospital will also train managerial staff participating in the accommodation process on the religious accommodation policy. In addition, the transcriptionist will receive $34,418 in back pay, along with $20,000 in compensatory damages and $20,000 in punitive damages.

[Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

IRS Urged To Accommodate Amish On Child Tax Credit Claims

As required by the Internal Revenue Code, last week the National Taxpayer Advocate released her FY2020 Objectives Report to Congress.  One of the recommendations of the Report is that the IRS reconsider its position on the application of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to the requirement that taxpayers include the Social Security Number for each child for which they claim a Child Tax Credit.  The requirement disadvantages members of the Amish community who often refuse, on religious grounds, to obtain Social Security numbers.

Air Force Grants Religious Accommodation To Sikh Airman

In a press release last week, the ACLU announced that for the first time, the U.S. Air Force has granted a religious accommodation to a Sikh active duty airman to allow him to wear a turban, beard, and unshorn hair.  The U.S. Army had previously granted similar accommodations. (See prior posting.)

New Rules For Federal Workers' Comp Time To Make Up For Religious Observance

This month's issue of the Justice Department's publication Religious Freedom in Focus calls attention to rules adopted last month by the Office of Personnel Management allowing federal employees to earn compensatory time in order to take off from work on their religious days of rest.  The new rules, which implement 5 USC § 5550a, clarify prior more skeletal provisions that were previously in force. (Full text of Rules effective May 29, 2019).

Muslim Employees Sue Amazon Over Religious Accommodation and Discrimination

On Tuesday, Muslim Advocates filed a complaint (full text) with the EEOC charging that Amazon.com, Inc.'s Minneapolis facility discriminates against its Muslim Somali and east African workers. The complaint charges that, among other things, Amazon fails to reasonably accommodate employees' religious practices. It claims the company provides inadequate space and time for employees to pray, and does not accommodate Ramadan observance. Daily Caller reports on the lawsuit.

New York Legislature Passes Bill To Bar Employment Discrimination Based On Religious Attire

The New York State Legislature on Tuesday gave final passage to A4024 (full text) which adds to the state's anti-discrimination law a specific ban on employment discrimination because of a person's attire, clothing, or facial hair worn in accordance  with  the requirements  of  his  or her religion. The employer is excused from this obligation if reasonable accommodation is impossible. AP, reporting on the passage of the bill, says it was particularly supported by a coalition of Sikh houses of worship. [Thanks to Blog from the Capital or the lead.]

UPDATE: New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed the bill on Aug. 9.

Settlement Reached Requiring Subdivision Gates To Be Open On Sabbath

According to a press release this week from the Office of the New Jersey Attorney General, a settlement agreement has been reached in a religious discrimination suit filed with the state civil rights division:

The homeowner, Nathan Reiss, filed a discrimination complaint in 2017 against The Enclave at the Fairways in Lakewood, alleging that security measures at the adult community interfered with his ability – and the ability of his fellow Orthodox Jewish neighbors – to observe the Sabbath. Specifically, Reiss alleged, a locking electronic pedestrian gate at a community entrance near his home prevented Orthodox Jewish Sabbath observers from walking to synagogue....

Under the settlement announced today and a similar settlement reached in a case filed in federal court, the Enclave Homeowners Association has agreed to unlock the pedestrian gate on the Sabbath, and to make other scheduling accommodations for Jewish Holy Days.

Matzav reports on the settlement. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Failure To Provide Employee Religious Accommodation Upheld

In Dockery v. Maryville Academy, (ND IL, March 29, 2019), an Illinois federal district court dismissed an employee's Title VII failure to accommodate and religious discrimination claims. Plaintiff, a youth care worker at a child welfare agency, wanted Fridays and Saturdays off for religious reasons. According to the court:

It remains unclear to the Court what religion Plaintiff claims to belong. Some evidence indicates that Plaintiff is Jewish. Plaintiff identified himself as a “Jew” on his employee information sheet. Plaintiff refereed to his culture as Judaism during his deposition. Yet Plaintiff also testified that his culture believes that Jesus Christ is the savior....  Still, the Court recognizes that “sincerity rather than orthodoxy is the touchstone” for determining whether a belief is sincerely held.

The court concluded however:

Defendant had an objective basis for questioning whether Plaintiff sincerely believed that it was against his religion to work during the sabbath. Plaintiff’s failure to provide more information to his employer as requested is grounds for granting summary judgment.

Limits On Rescheduling Hearings That Conflict With Religious Holidays Do Not Violate Free Exercise Rights

In Jack Jaffa & Associates v. City of New York, (NY Cty. Sup. St., March 21, 2019), a New York state trial court rejected a claim that rules of New York City's Office of Trials and Hearings violate the First Amendment.  Plaintiff, which represents clients who have been issued administrative summonses by New York City agencies, contended that rules which limit the ability to reschedule hearings that conflict with Jewish and Muslim holidays violate its rights and the rights of its clients.  The court held:

Petitioner has failed to state a claim for violation of its First Amendment right of free exercise of its religion. OATH's rules concerning the rescheduling and adjournment of hearings are neutral in both object and application and therefore "the First Amendment has not been offended."

Firefighter Not Entitled To Religious Exemption From Grooming Policy

In Smith v. City of Atlantic City, (D NJ, March 22, 2019), a New Jersey federal district court upheld the refusal by the Atlantic City Fire Department to grant a long-time employee a religious exemption from the Department's grooming policy.  Plaintiff is an African American male and a Christian who has recently decided to grow a 3-inch beard as an expression of his religious faith. Rejecting plaintiff's application for a temporary restraining order, the court concluded that he was unlikely to succeed on the merits of his free exercise, equal protection or Title VII claim.

Colorado and Masterpiece Cakeshop Agree To End Their Litigation

In a press release yesterday, the Colorado Attorney General's Office announced that the state and Masterpiece Cakeshop have agreed to end their battle over the right of a bakery owner to refuse to design cakes celebrating LGBT events. As previously reported, while the U.S. Supreme Court appeal involving Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack Phillip's refusal to design a cake for a same-sex wedding ceremony was pending, another customer, Autumn Scardina, sought a cake from Masterpiece Cakeshop to celebrate her gender transition. Phillips refused and the Commission issued a probable cause determination.  In response, Phillips filed a federal lawsuit claiming that the Commission was targeting him in violation of his constitutional rights.  In yesterday's announcement, the state said:

Under the terms of the agreement, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission will voluntarily dismiss the state administrative action against Masterpiece Cakeshop and its owner, Jack Phillips, and Mr. Phillips will voluntarily dismiss his federal court case against the State.... This agreement does not affect the ability of Autumn Scardina ... to pursue a claim on her own.

“After careful consideration of the facts, both sides agreed it was not in anyone’s best interest to move forward with these cases. The larger constitutional issues might well be decided down the road, but these cases will not be the vehicle for resolving them. Equal justice for all will continue to be a core  value that we will uphold as we enforce our state’s and nation’s civil rights laws,” said [Attorney General] Weise...

ADF, which represents Phillips, issued a press release yesterday saying that the dismissal of litigation comes "in the wake of newly discovered evidence of the state’s ongoing hostility toward religious freedom."

Fired Employee Loses Suit Over Religious Content of His E-Mail Signature Block

In Sioux City, Iowa on Wednesday, a federal trial court jury rejected a claim by plaintiff who had been hired as a psychiatric security specialist that his firing during his probationary period violated his free speech and free exercise rights.  As reported by the Sioux City Journal, plaintiff Michael Mial pointed to the request by his supervisors at a state sex-offender civil commitment unit that he stop using "In Christ" in his personalized signature block on internal e-mails sent to other employees.

Employer's Proposed Religious Accommodations Were Adequate

In Miller v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, (D NJ, Nov. 13, 2018), a New Jersey federal district court held that the religious accommodations offered to a newly-hired Jewish employee (shift swapping or use of vacation or comp time) were reasonable and the employee's preferred accommodation of his Sabbath observance did not need to be offered. The court said in part:

The employees in Miller’s unit are unionized, and as a result, Port Authority is bound by a collective bargaining agreement. Creating a permanent shift schedule for Miller exempting him from work on the Sabbath or the Jewish holidays, without first offering that option to more senior employees, would have violated the agreement’s seniority provision. It also would have violated the past-practices provision of the agreement, which requires that the established rotational schedule be maintained. In short, Miller’s preferred accommodation would have placed Port Authority in violation of its collective bargaining agreement and required other, more senior employees to work less desirable additional Friday evening and Saturday shifts.

On this record, the religious accommodation offered by Port Authority was reasonable. And because the blanket exemption proposed by Miller would have imposed more than a de minimis hardship, the employer was not required to accept it.

[Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]