In Bingham v. City of San Jose, (CA App., Oct. 30, 2024), a California state appeals court held that five San Jose firefighters who were placed on unpaid leave when they asserted religious objections to the Covid vaccine may move ahead with their claims under Title VII and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. Reversing the trial court's dismissal of the suit, the appeals court held in part:
Plaintiffs have sufficiently pleaded that the extended and involuntary unpaid leave allegedly imposed on them was not a reasonable accommodation. By not requiring plaintiffs to take the COVID-19 vaccines mandated by the County vaccination order, the City eliminated the conflict between the order and plaintiffs’ religious beliefs concerning the COVID-19 vaccines. However, the alleged unpaid leave did not reasonably preserve plaintiffs’ employment status....
... [T]he amended complaint alleges that the City Fire Department was facing a severe staffing shortage and that a County public health order allowed employers facing such shortages to seek a waiver of the vaccination requirement. Additionally, plaintiffs alleged that they could have been transferred to positions answering 911 calls, which presumably is not a Higher-Risk Setting and therefore would not have required vaccination under the County vaccination order. If these allegations are accepted as true, as they must be at the demurrer stage... that would have allowed plaintiffs to work without a vaccination. Thus, far from establishing the City’s undue hardship defense, the face of the complaint shows that the City could have reasonably accommodated plaintiffs’ beliefs without undue hardship.
CBN reports on the decision.
