AELE LAW LIBRARY OF CASE SUMMARIES:
Employment & Labor Law for Public Safety Agencies
Back to list of subjects Back to Legal Publications Menu
Religious Discrimination
Monthly Law
Journal Article: Legal Challenges to Police and
Fire Chaplain Programs, 2009 (4) AELE Mo. L.J. 201.
Monthly Law Journal Article: Rights
of Rastafarian Employees and Inmates, 2015 (8) AELE Mo. L. J. 201.
A county employee filed an EEOC Title VII charge against her employer, asserting sexual harassment and retaliation for reporting the harassment. While the charge was pending, the county fired her because she failed to come to work on a Sunday, going to a church event instead. She then attempted to supplement her EEOC charge by handwriting “religion” on an intake questionnaire, but did not amend the formal charge document. Upon receiving a right-to-sue letter from the EEOC, she filed suit, alleging discrimination on account of religion and retaliation for reporting sexual harassment. After years of litigation, only the religion-based discrimination claim remained. The county then asserted for the first time that the court lacked jurisdiction because the EEOC charge did not state a religion-based discrimination claim. A federal appeals court reversed dismissal of the suit. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed, holding that Title VII’s charge-filing requirement is “not jurisdictional.” A claim-processing rule requiring parties to take certain procedural steps during or before litigation may be mandatory so that a court must enforce the rule if timely raised. A mandatory rule of that sort, unlike a prescription limiting the kinds of cases a court may adjudicate, is ordinarily forfeited if not timely asserted. The Court found that Title VII’s charge-filing requirement is discrete from the statutory provisions empowering federal courts to exercise jurisdiction over Title VII actions. The plaintiff, therefore, could proceed with her religious discrimination claim despite not having listed it on her original charge form. Fort Bend County v. Davis, #18-525, 2019 U.S. Lexis 3891
A county employee claimed that a director of her agency had sexually harassed and assaulted her. After an investigation, the director resigned. After that, the employee’s supervisor, a friend of the resigned director, allegedly retaliated against the employee, who had stated that she could not work on a specific Sunday because she had promised to attend a special church service. The supervisor did not approve the absence, but the employee was not at work that day and instead attended the service, after which she was fired. A federal appeals court rejected her Title VII unlawful retaliation claim, but allowed her religious discrimination claim to move forward, finding genuine disputes of material fact as to whether she held a bona fide religious belief that she needed to attend the service and whether the county would have suffered an undue hardship in accommodating this religious observance. The U.S. Supreme Court denied review of that ruling. On remand, the defendant county for the first time argued that the plaintiff had failed to exhaust available administrative remedies before suing. The federal appeals court rejected the argument that this alleged failure was jurisdictional, requiring dismissal of the lawsuit, and held that the county had forfeited this defense. Davis v. Fort Bend County, #16-20640, 893 F.3d 300 (5th Cir.).
A city employee claimed that she was subjected to discrimination because she converted to Islam and wore a head scarf to her job, and also because she suffered from ADHD. Rejecting these claims, a federal appeals court found that the employee did not met her burden to show that she was constructively discharged and was unable to rebut the city’s legitimate, nondiscriminatory basis for its actions, including her tardiness to work, with evidence of pretext and discriminatory motive. Cherkaoui v. City of Quincy, Mass., #16-2304, 2017 U.S. App. Lexis 24423 (1st Cir.).
A Chicago police officer claimed that he was harassed based on his national origin, German, and religion, Jewish. He also claimed that his complaints led to retaliation. After a decade of litigation, a jury awarded him $30,000, rejecting his retaliation claim. His lawyer requested $1.5 million in attorney’s fees, which the district court reduced to $430,000. The attorney claimed to have worked 3,742 hours at an hourly rate of $395, while the trial judge reduced the hours to 2,878 and the rate to $300, which yielded a lodestar of $863,000. The trial judge then took into account the modest degree of success the plaintiff had achieved and halved the lodestar. A federal appeals court affirmed this result, including the trial court’s decisions to grant partial summary judgment for the city by confining the discrimination counts to the question whether a fellow officer’s statements had created a hostile work environment; eliminating two counts for lack of any evidence that would permit a finding that the plaintiff’s injury resulted from an express policy, a widespread practice, or a policymaker’s final action, and restricting the retaliation claim period. Challenges to the trial court’s reduction of the requested attorneys’ fees were “unpersuasive.” Sommerfield v. City of Chicago, #13-1265, 2017 U.S. App. Lexis 12443 (7th Cir.).
A
police officer claimed that department officials violated his freedom of
religion by allegedly holding a group prayer during an official meeting and
subsequently assigning him to non-law enforcement duties as punishment for his
non-participation. A federal appeals court ruled that, if the facts were as
described by the plaintiff, the defendants were not entitled to qualified
immunity on an Establishment Clause claim. It was clearly established law that
the prayer was state-sponsored during the official meeting and that ordering
the officer, against his will, to stand nearby while his colleagues engaged in
a prayer, and then humiliating and punishing him for non-conformance,
constituted religious coercion. Marrero-Mendez v. Calixto-Rodriguez, #14-2030,
2016 U.S. App. Lexis 13178 (1st Cir.).
When a woman from Saudi Arabia started to work at
a county court, her clothing marked her as a Muslim. When she was assigned to
child care duties, she was the only employee in that position who was an Arab
or a Muslim. Her superior was an allegedly vocal Christian, and the employee
filed internal complaints about his behavior, contending that he established a
hostile working environment for her. Her superior said he was tired of her
complaints and she was transferred to the court reporter's office, an
assignment in which she wass allegedly treated badly and subjected to retaliation
because she had filed EEOC complaints. She sued under Title VII and 42 U.S.C.
Sec. 1983, asserting that her First and Fourteenth Amendment rights had been
violated. A federal appeals court found that the plaintiff adequately stated a
claim for a hostile work environment and that her superiors were not entitled
to qualified immunity for their alleged actions of retaliation. The employee
had engaged in protected conduct in complaining about alleged religious and
national origin harassment. Her complaints about abusive conduct including
screaming, prayer circles at work, social shaming, implied criticism of
non-Christians expressed at work, and "uniquely bad treatment" of her
were plausible. Huri v. Office of the Chief Judge, Cook County, #12-2217, 2015
U.S. App. Lexis 18296 (7th Cir.).
The U.S. Supreme Court, in an 8-1 ruling, held
that an employer may have discriminated against a Muslim woman applicant for
employment on the basis of religious discrimination when it failed to hire her
because she wore a hijab headscarf to her interview. The subject of her
religious beliefs never came up in the interview process, and the employer
contended that its reason for the rejection was that the headscarf would
violate its dress code. The Court held that in establishing a claim for
unlawful disparate treatment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,
it was not necessary to show that the employer had actual knowledge of the
applicant's need for an accommodation, but only that the applicant's need for
an accommodation for a religious practice was a motivating factor in the
employer's decision. Further a discrimination claim based on failure to
accommodate a religious practice did not have to be raised as a disparate
impact claim rather than a disparate treatment claim, as religious practice was
a protected characteristic that could not be accorded disparate treatment.
Title VII gives favored treatment to religious practices rather than demanding
that a religious practice be treated no worse than other practices. EEOC v.
Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., #14-86, 2015 U.S. Lexis 3718.
A Jewish police officer was awarded $540,000 in
damages against a now retired supervising sergeant who he said taunted him for
years with anti-Semitic and racist remarks, calling him a "bloodsucking
parasite," a "Fucking Jew boy," and similar epithets. The
sergeant would allegedly greet him with a Nazi salute, and several times showed
a swastika logo to the plaintiff, a German Jew who lost relatives in the Holocaust
during World War II. The City of Chicago was previously dismissed from the
lawsuit, so the award is only against the retired sergeant. Sommerfield v. City
of Chicago, #1:08-cv-03025, U.S. Dist. Ct. (N.D. Ill. July 28, 2014).
A police captain sued challenging his punishment
for objecting to an order requiring that he either himself attend a
law-enforcement appreciation event hosted by a local Islamic Society or else
order subordinates to do so. He claimed that the order violated the First
Amendment's establishment of religion clause as well as impairing the free
exercise of religion and freedom of association. A federal appeals court upheld
summary judgment for the defendants. The plaintiff's own religious freedom
rights were not burdened as he was not required to violate his personal
religious beliefs by necessarily himself attending the event. Further, there
was no establishment of religion because "no informed, reasonable observer
would have perceived the order or the event as a government endorsement of Islam;"
There was no violation of his right to freedom of association as there was no
interference with his freedom to determine what organizations he wished to
become a member of. The appeals court found that an equal protection challenge
was duplicative of the free exercise of religion claim and also failed. Fields
v. City of Tulsa, #12-5218, 2014 U.S. App. Lexis 9521 (10th Cir.).
An employee of the Department of Homeland
Security claimed that he was passed over for a position as a deportation
officer because of his Muslim religion, African-American race, and/or his
Arabic national origin. A federal appeals court vacated summary judgment for
the employer, finding that the plaintiff presented sufficient evidence that he
had been subjected to discrimination to present a question of fact for a jury.
The evidence indicated that his language skills, long job tenure, and exemplary
record made him more qualified than other applicants selected for the position.
Further, there was evidence of past hiring and promotions which excluded
minorities, including the selection of three white males for the positions,
from which discriminatory animus in the selection process could be inferred.
Ahmed v. Napolitano, #13-1054, 2014 U.S. App. Lexis 9454 (1sr Cir.).
Public employees of the state of Illinois have a
statutory right to non-association with a union based on bona fide religious
tenet or teachings of church or religious body of which such employees are
members. They are entitled to pay an amount equal to their fair share dues to a
non-religious charity rather than to a union. The plaintiff, a public employee
whose coworkers were represented by the Teamsters, notified the union that he
did not wish to join the union and wanted to donate his union dues to a
charity. The union failed to respond to his email and took receipt of his
fair-share dues, failing to put them into escrow. The court held that the
collective bargaining agreement failed to safeguard the plaintiff's right of
non-association, and that this failure constituted an unfair labor practice by
both the union and the employer. Trygg v. The Illinois Relations Board, 2014 IL
App (4th) 130505.2014 Ill. App. Lexis 299.
A federal judge ruled that a city and its police
officials did not violate the religious freedom rights of a police captain who
was disciplined for refusing, on religious grounds, to attend a community
policing event at a local mosque or else order his subordinates to attend. A
directive indicated that someone should attend a law enforcement appreciation
day at the mosque. The plaintiff argued that doing so would violate his
Christian religious beliefs. The court found that no reasonable jury could find
that the captain was personally ordered to attend the event "because the
directive at issue permitted him to assign others to attend rather than attend
himself. Therefore, the directive did not conflict with [his] sincere religious
belief that he must proselytize when confronted by others whose religious
beliefs differ from his." The court said that it need not decide whether a
directive requiring him to personally attend the event would have violated his
rights. Fields v. City of Tulsa, #11-cv-115, 2012 U.S. Dist. Lexis 176698 (N.D.
Okla.).
A city and police department officials did not
violate the First Amendment religious freedom rights of a Christian police
officer who claimed that he was demoted and given a two-week unpaid suspension
because he refused what he interpreted as orders to attend an event known as
law enforcement officer appreciation day at a Muslim mosque. He found the event
objectionable because it was a Muslim worship service, and he believed that he
would be proselytized at it. He also refused to assign other officers from his
shift to attend. In a lawsuit over the incident, the police chief stated that
he could not have a police department where everybody refuses to interact with
Muslims in the community because of their personal religious beliefs. The court
held that no reasonable jury could find that an order to attend the event violated
the officer's right to practice his religion. Fields v. City of Tulsa,
#11-cv-115, 2012 U.S. Dist. Lexis 176698 (N.D. Okla.).
A federal appeals court rejected a challenge to
the legality of a prison-paid chaplaincy program that limited the hiring of
chaplains to only those who were members of five major faiths--Protestant,
Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, and Native American religions. While a Wiccan
chaplain believed that it was unfair that he was not compensated for his
services, there was no showing of intentional discrimination against him on the
basis of religion. On his employment discrimination claim, requiring that he be
a member of the designated faiths was a bona fide occupational qualification
justified by the requirement of meeting the religious needs of the prisoners.
The court did not reach the issue of whether Wiccan inmates could succeed in a
challenge to the policy, but did say that, at this point, there is no clearly
established right of Wiccan prisoners to have a paid chaplain. McCollum v.
California Department of Corrections, #09-16404, 647 F.3d 870
(9th Cir. 2011).
Federal appeals panel rejects a discrimination
action brought by an Apostolic Christian who was fired for insulting a
coworker's sexual orientation. The terminated employee allegedly screamed that
God does not accept gays, they should not be on earth, and they will go to hell
because they are not right in the head. Matthews v. Wal-Mart, #10-2242, 2011
U.S. App. Lexis 6647 (Unpub. 7th Cir.).
Muslim police officer who was terminated after being
questioned by the FBI for possible links to terrorist groups accepts $125,000
from the city and school district. A flier with his police ID photo had been
circulated in the local school district advising that he is "currently under
investigation by the FBI for possible affiliation with a terrorist
organization." Fernandes v. City of Fremont. [Cal. Govt. Code §910-913.2
claim]
The failure to accommodate an employee's request
to have every Saturday off for religious reasons did not violate Title VII
because management is not required to disregard a seniority system to
accommodate an employee's religious beliefs. Harrell v. Donahue, #10-1694, 2011
U.S. App. Lexis 6621 (8th Cir.).
Third Circuit affirms a $100,000 award to a
part-time police officer who was laid off due to budget constraints. The chief
had made adverse comments about the officer's church attendance and there was
an earlier effort to prohibit him from wearing of a cross pin. Risk v.
Burgettstown Borough, Pa., #08-4746, 364 F. Appx. 725, 2010 U.S. App. Lexis
2906, 108 FEP Cases (BNA) 1040 (Unpub. 3d Cir. 2010).
Federal court finds that management had made good
faith effort to accommodate a Muslim officer's religious belief in growing his
beard by allowing a one-quarter inch beard. Wallace v. City of Philadelphia,
#06-4236, 2010 WL 1730850, 2010 U.S. Dist. Lexis 42437, 109 FEP Cases (BNA) 401
(E.D. Pa. 2010).
Appellate panels affirms the dismissal of a
lawsuit by a parole officer that alleged a failure to accommodate his religion,
but revives his complaint of a hostile work environment. Whether the conduct
alleged was so severe or pervasive as to create an objectively hostile or
abusive work environment must be decided based on the totality of the circumstances.
The plaintiff presented evidence of six interactions with his supervisors over
a three-year period that implicated his religion. Leifer v. N.Y. Div. of
Parole, #07-0642-cv, 2010 U.S. App. Lexis 17646 (Unpub. 2nd Cir.).
U.S. Army allows a non-citizen service member to
wear a turban (dastaar), a beard and long hair, to accommodate his Sikh
religious preferences. Recruited under the Military Accessions Vital to the
National Interest Program, he is fluent in Punjabi and Hindi. In re Simran Lamba,
G-1 Human Resources Policy Directorate (8/30/2010).
Eighth Circuit upholds an employer's safety
policy that prohibits headwear and loose-fitting clothing for workers at a
printing plant. The EEOC represented a Muslim woman who refused to remove her khimar.
The employer had a "legitimate, nondiscriminatory ... facially neutral,
safety-driven dress policy prohibiting all employees ... from wearing loose
clothing or headwear of any kind." EEOC v. Kelly Services, #08-3880, 2010
U.S. App. Lexis 6173 (8th Cir.).
Seventh Circuit finds that a sheriff violated the First
Amendment's "Establishment" of a religion clause, by inviting a
Christian group to speak at a number of mandatory employee meetings. The
presentations gave the appearance of an endorsement. Milwaukee Deputy Sheriffs'
Assn. v. Clarke, #08-1515, 2009 U.S. App. Lexis 26344, 107 FEP Cases 1571 (7th
Cir, 2009).
Federal court refuses to dismiss a suit brought by a
terminated female Pentecostal bus driver who challenged a rule requiring all drivers
to wear pants. The rule had a disparate impact on her religion, which requires
women to wear skirts. She alleged that she was terminated for refusal to comply
with policy and that there was no business justification for it. The judge also
rejected the claim that disparate impact claims have no place in religious
discrimination actions. Jenkins v. New York City Transit Auth., #08 Civ. 6814,
2009 U.S. Dist. Lexis 56008 (S.D.N.Y.).
Appellate court rejects a no-beard rule for
firefighters who claim a religious exemption. "The positive pressure in
the SCBA system is adequate to protect the bearded firefighter from any leakage
that may be caused by facial hair." Potter v. Dist. of Columbia, #07-7164,
2009 U.S. App. Lexis 4540 (D.C. Cir.).
In a religious discrimination action brought by a
police officer, his lawyer had summarized 11 depositions and distilled
thousands of pages of testimony into a 26-page report for the plaintiff’s
expert witness. The expert did not independently verify that the summarized
information was accurate and did not review the depositions. The court granted
the city’s motion to strike the expert report and bar the expert from
testifying at trial. Sommerfield v. City of Chicago, #06-cv-3132, 2008 U.S.
Dist. Lexis 88760 (N.D. Ill.).
After a city changed psychologists it used for
pre-employment evaluations, the firm failed to prove that his protected
activity was a motivating factor in their termination of the contract because
of his membership in a conservative, religious organization. Campion, Barrow
& Associates v. City of Springfield, #06-CV-3215, 2008 U.S. Dist. Lexis
21249 (C.D. Ill.); prior ruling at 2007 U.S. Dist. Lexis 56235.
Jury awards a former worker $147,174 for economic
losses, $500,000 for emotional distress and $5.9 million in punitive damages
against her former employer. Initially, a federal district court in Sacramento
dismissed her lawsuit. Reversing, the Ninth Circuit recognized a claim of
reverse religious discrimination. The plaintiff had alleged she was denied a
promotion because she was not a member of a favored religious group.
Post-trial, the judge reduced the punitive damages award to $647,174, plus
attorney's fees. Noyes v. Kelly Services, #2:02-cv-2685, Pacer Doc. 226
(7/31/2008); prior decis. at #04-17050, 488 F.3d 1163 (9th Cir. 2007).
Jewish police officer's claim that he was
subjected to a hostile work environment was sufficient to support the jury's
verdict; statements made by superiors that referred to "dirty Jews"
and demeaning persons of Jewish ancestry conveyed an ongoing hostility. Cutler
v. Dorn, #A-51-2007, 2008 N.J. Lexis 895, 104 FEP Cases (BNA) 25
The New Jersey Dept. of Corrections' training
academy no-facial hair policy was facially neutral and only incidentally burdened
religious conduct. It was rationally related to compliance with federal and
state health regulations concerning the use of respirator masks and to a
concern about the esprit de corps, which comes from uniformity of appearance.
It did not violate the rights of a Muslim trainee removed from the training
program when he failed, on three separate occasions, to keep his beard within
parameters that were allowed to him as an accommodation of his religion. Valdes
v. New Jersey, #07-2971, 2008 U.S. App. Lexis 17380 (Unpub. 3rd Cir.).
Federal court grants a partial summary judgment
for a Las Vegas police officer who converted to Orthodox Judaism and grew a
beard. Agency policy allowed medical exemptions from the no-beards rule for
uniformed personnel, but not for religious reasons. Riback v. Las Vegas Metro
Police Dept., #2:07-cv-0115 (D.Nev.).
Federal court declines to dismiss a
discrimination action brought by a Muslim Arab-American law enforcement officer
against the city, where an employee of an outside contractor caused the
offensive behavior. Doe v. City of New York, #06-CV-13738, 102 FEP Cases (BNA)
1478, 2008 U.S. Dist. Lexis 33488 (S.D.N.Y.).
Fourth Circuit rejects an action brought by the
EEOC on behalf of a worker that belonged to the Living Church of God and who
sought extensive leave for religious reasons. Employers must respect seniority
rights, if protected in a bargaining agreement, when excusing attendance from
work. EEOC v. Firestone, #06-2241, 515 F.3d 307, 2008 U.S. App. Lexis 2949, 102
FEP Cases (BNA) 961 (4th Cir.).
An atheist member of a town council had been
recalled by the voters and removed from public officer because of his refusal
to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Any alleged injury resulting from social
pressure to recite the pledge was not compensable or redressable. Habecker v.
Town of Estes Park, #06-1515, 2008 U.S. App. Lexis 5630 (10th Cir.).
Appellate court upholds the termination of a
Muslim firefighter for taking an unauthorized leave to visit Mecca. The
plaintiff failed to cooperate and explore accommodation through shift trades,
unpaid leave, vacation time, or other possible options before departing on his
religious pilgrimage." Waqia v. City of Oakland, #A114704, 2007 Cal. App.
Unpub. Lexis 9558 (1st Dist.).
Federal court finds that a sheriff and a captain
violated the "Establishment of Religion" clause of the First
Amendment when they "invited representatives of a Christian organization
to present a proselytizing Christian message to deputies at meetings held at
the workplace during working hours, which deputies were required to attend, and
conveyed a message of endorsement of the presentations. The effect of
defendants' actions was to promote religion and to do so coercively." A
Catholic and a Muslim deputy brought the suit. Milwaukee Deputy Sheriffs Assn.
v. Clarke, # 06-C-602, 513 F Supp.2d 1014, 2007 U.S. Dist. Lexis 71454, 101 FEP
Cases (BNA) 1519 (E.D. Wis.).
It is a factual issue whether creating a new
position for a Seventh Day Adventist to accommodate her religious belief
against working on Sabbath, would impose an undue hardship on the city. Ford v.
City of Dallas, #3:05-CV-1676-D,, 2007 U.S. Dist. Lexis 50914 , 101 FEP Cases
(BNA) 179 (N.D. Tex.).
Federal court upholds Philadelphia police rule
that prohibits the wearing of a religious scarf while in uniform.
"Prohibiting religious symbols and attire helps to prevent any
divisiveness on the basis of religion both within the force itself and when it
encounters the diverse population of Philadelphia." Webb v. City of
Philadelphia, #05-5238, 2007 U.S. Dist. Lexis 42727 (E.D. Pa. 2007).
Jewish police officer failed to prove a hostile work
environment claim, where he and coworkers teased each other. Cutler v. Dorn,
#A-5512-02T15512-02T1, 100 FEP Cases (BNA) 140, 2007 N.J. Super. Lexis 30.
U.S. Justice Dept. sues N.Y. DoC seeking
accommodation of Muslim Corrections officers to wear a Kufi (skullcap) while in
uniform. U.S. v. N.Y. State Dept. of Corr. Servs., #07-2243 (S.D.N.Y.). The
civil action parallels private litigation filed by an Islamic corrections
officer. Haqq v. N.Y. State Dep't of Corr. Servs., #06-8156 (S.D.N.Y).
Federal court rejects an employer's view that
discriminatory conduct by coworkers was not severe or pervasive and did not
create a hostile environment. Campbell v. Avis, #05-74472, 2006 U.S. Dist.
Lexis 72509 (E.D. Mich. 2006). {N/R}
Wire services have reported that the widow of a
soldier killed in Afghanistan won Nevada state approval to place a Wiccan
religious symbol on his memorial plaque, something the U.S. Department of
Veterans Affairs had refused. The U.S. Dept. of Veterans Affairs does not
recognize the Wiccan religion and prohibits the pentacle (a circle around a
five-pointed star) on veterans' headstones in national cemeteries. In re Sgt.
Patrick Stewart. {N/R}
DC Circuit finds that certain Navy chaplains were
entitled to injunctive relief, in a suit claiming that the Navy
unconstitutionally maintained a religious quota system for the promotion,
assignment, and retention of clergy that was prejudicial to chaplains of
non-liturgical Protestant faiths. Chaplaincy of Full Gospel Churches v.
England, #05-5143, 2006 U.S. App. Lexis 16952, 98 FEP Cases (BNA) 603 (D.C.
Cir. 2006). {N/R}
Federal court grants a summary judgment favoring
a uniformed employee who was fired for wearing a headscarf during the month of
Ramadan. EEOC v. Alamo Rent-A-Car, #2:02-cv-01908, 2006 WL 1464472, 2006 U.S.
Dist. Lexis 34674, Pacer Doc. 62 (D. Ariz. 2006). [2006 FP Sep]
Ninth Circuit holds that a California county
could prohibit an employee from discussing religion, displaying religious
messages in his work cubicle, and using a conference room for prayer meetings.
Berry v. Dept. of Social Services, #04-15566, 447 F.3d 642, 2006 U.S. App.
Lexis 10796, 97 FEP Cases (BNA) 1833 (9th Cir. 2006). {N/R}
Federal appeals court rejects a suit by a prison
chaplain who was disciplined after refusing to allow a gay inmate to lead the
choir during a Protestant service. Akridge v. Wilkinson, #05-3015, 2006 U.S.
App. Lexis 10671 (6th Cir. 2006), affirming 351 F.Supp.2d 750. [2006 FP Jul]
D.C. Court allows management to assign Muslim
firefighters to administrative duties until it is clear their beards do not
interfere with non-SCBA face-pieces. Potter v. Dist. of Columbia, #01-1189 382
F.Supp.2d 35, 2005 U.S. Dist. Lexis 16727, 96 FEP Cases (BNA) 1243 (D.D.C.
2005). [2006 FP Apr]
Seventh Circuit holds than an employer can refuse
to recognize a worker affinity group that promotes a particular religious
position. Moranski v. G.M.C., #05-1803, 433 F.3d 537, 2005 U.S. App. Lexis
28901, 97 FEP Cases (BNA) 97 (7th Cir. 2005). {N/R}
Federal court allows a Seventh-day Adventist who
was rejected as the village finance director to sue the village and its mayor
for religious discrimination because budget meetings were typically held on
Saturdays. Filinovich v. Claar, #04C7189, 2005 U.S. Dist. Lexis 24433 (N.D.
Ill. 2005). [2006 FP Jan]
Following Utah's lead, the Arizona Peace Officer
Standards and Training Board has decertified a police chief and an officer for
polygamy. In re Samuel Roundy and In re Vance Barlow (AZ POST 10-19-2005). The
current POST action is unreported. [2005 FP Dec]
Federal court rejects a discrimination suit
brought by an Orthodox Jew who sought appointment as a state trooper but
refused to work on the Sabbath. Sides v. N.Y. Div. of State Police, #03-CV-153,
2005 U.S. Dist. Lexis 12635, 96 FEP Cases (BNA) 196 (N.D.N.Y. 2005). [2005 FP
Oct]
Federal appeals court in Boston upholds an
employer's refusal to allow workers to have visible body piercings, even if the
employee claims the jewelry is worn for religious reasons. Cloutier v. Costco,
#04-1475, 2004 U.S. App. Lexis 24763, 94 FEP Cases (BNA) 1476 (1st Cir. 2004).
[2005 FP Feb]
Ninth Circuit upholds a hotel/casino's dress code
policy that women must wear facial makeup. The plaintiff alleged gender
discrimination. Jesperson v. Harrahs, 2004 U.S. App. Lexis 26892 (9th Cir.
2004). [2005 FP Feb]
Federal court declines to dismiss a suit brought
by a Jewish police officer. Although she was allowed to wait until after
sundown before taking the test, she objected to being monitored intrusively
during the period when the promotional tests were given to all others. Kaplan
v. City of Chicago, #99C1758, 2004 U.S. Dist. Lexis 22339 (N.D.Ill. 2004).[2005
FP Jan]
Ninth Circuit upholds the termination of an
evangelical Christian supervisor who violated an employer's policies when she
criticized a subordinate's homosexuality and asked her to attend church. The
subordinate transferred to another office because the supervisor's actions made
her uncomfortable. Bodett v. CoxCom Inc., 366 F.3d 736, 2004 U.S. App. Lexis
8154, 93 FEP Cases (BNA) 1108 (9th Cir. 2004). {N/R}
Colorado federal jury finds that a Catholic
business owner engaged in religious harassment when he required two
subordinates, one an atheist and the other a Lutheran, to sign a prayer. One
plaintiff was awarded $50,000 in compensatory damages, $45,000 in punitive
damages, and $15,364 in back pay. Another plaintiff was awarded $50,000 in
compensatory damages of $15,000 and punitive damages of $35,000. Defendant also
was assessed attorneys' fees of $147,730 plus costs of $11,944. Millazzo v.
Universal Traffic Services, #01-B-880, 289 F.Supp.2d 1251, 2003 U.S. Dist.
Lexis 19352, 92 FEP Cases (BNA) 1532 (D. Colo. 2003; rptd. 2004). {N/R}
Eighth Circuit finds that having a prayer session
at a mandatory training program was a decisive endorsement of religion, and
violated the First Amendment rights of a public employee who objected to the
prayers. The appeals panel directed the trial court to widen the injunctive
relief to include training sessions of other public employees, even if the
plaintiff was not present. "...we believe that it is the government's
endorsement of a particular religious message that constitutes the
constitutional violation here, not the effects of official prayers on [the
plaintiff's] psyche. Warnock v. Archer, #02-3322/03-1422, 2004 U.S. App. Lexis
17938 (8th Cir. 2004). {N/R}
Wiccan paganist wins suit against city council
members who ended their opening prayers with "In Christ's name we
pray." Fourth Circuit affirms an injunction prohibiting the council
"from invoking the name of a specific deity associated with any one
specific faith or belief in prayers given at town council meetings." Wynne
v. Town of Great Falls, S.C., #03-2069, 2004 U.S. App. Lexis 15186 (4th Cir.
2004). {N/R}
Ninth Circuit rejects a wrongful termination
action brought by a devout Christian who refused to remove a poster from his
workplace, which quoted Biblical passages condemning homosexuality. An
employer's duty to eliminate bias and intolerance prevails over a worker's
individualized religious beliefs. Peterson v. Hewlett Packard Co., #01-35795,
358 F.3d 599, 92 FEP Cases (BNA) 1761, 2004 U.S. App. Lexis 72 (9th Cir. 2004).
{N/R}
Supreme Court rejects appeal by a state trooper
who refused assignment on a casino boat. Endres v. Indiana State Police, #
03-1183, cert. denied 124 S.Ct. 2032, 2004 U.S. Lexis 2778 (4/19/04); ruling
below at 2003 U.S. App. Lexis 13027 (7th Cir. 2003) and in state court at 794
N.E.2d 1089, 2003 Ind. App. Lexis 1566. (2003). {N/R}
Second Circuit reverses a lower court holding
that an inference of religious discrimination cannot be drawn if the employee
was fired by another person of the same religion. Feingold v. State of New
York, #02-7985, 366 F.3d 138,2004 U.S. App. Lexis 8543 (2nd Cir. 2004). {N/R}
Appeals court sustains the termination of a
social worker that failed to call 911 to assist a person in her care, and
instead tried "to drive out the demons" for the afflicted person with
prayer and a strange language. The panel rejected her defense that she was
fired for practicing the Pentecostal Christian religion. Howard v. Family
Agency, #243973, 2004 Mich. Ct. App. Lexis 410 (2004). {N/R}
Federal court holds that a county violated an
employee's rights by firing her for repeatedly wearing a cross pendant. Draper
v. Logan County Library, #1:02CV-13 (W.D.Ky. 2003). [2003 FP Nov]
Fifth Circuit upholds a police rule against
wearing religious or other pins on uniforms. "Visibly wearing a cross pin
... takes on an entirely different cast when viewed in the context of a police
uniform." Daniels v. City of Arlington, #00-11191, 246 F.3d 500, 2001 U.S.
App. Lexis 6018 (5th Cir.); cert. den. #01-187, 2001 U.S. Lexis 9494 (2001).
[2001 FP May]
Seventh Circuit sustains the firing of a police
officer that refused to work at a casino because he views gambling as a sin.
Endres v. Indiana State Police, #02-1247, 2003 U.S. App. Lexis 13027 (7th Cir.
2003). [2003 FP Sep]
A three-judge panel has upheld a disparate treatment
complaint filed by an Islamic female public employee, who was told she could
not wear a geles (headwrap) at work. Holmes v. Marion County, #02-1377, 2003
U.S. App. Lexis 13027 (7th Cir. 2003). {N/R}
The ACLU has lost a lawsuit filed in behalf of a
veiled Muslim woman who demanded that a Florida driver's license be issued
without an unveiled facial photo. Freeman v. St. of Florida, #CIO 02-600, 9th
Jud. Cir. Ct. Fla. (2003). {N/R}
Supreme Court declines to hear the appeal of a
"Five Percent" adherent, who claimed he was fired because of his
religious beliefs. Allah v. City of N.Y., #01-9114, 47 Fed. Appx. 45, 2002 U.S.
App. Lexis 20475 (Unpub. 2nd Cir. 2002); cert. denied, 2003 U.S. Lexis 1761
(S.Ct. 2003). [2003 FP Jun]
Second Circuit finds that a Jewish deputy inspector of
police sufficiently alleged promotional discrimination because of his religion
and his public criticism of pro-Catholic bias in the agency; the appellate
panel overturned a lower court order dismissing his claims. Mandell v. County
of Suffolk, #01-7729, 316 F.3d 368, 2003 U.S. App. Lexis 650, 90 FEP Cases
(BNA) 1328 (2nd Cir. 2003). {N/R}
Federal appeals court affirms a damage suit for
the constructive discharge of a police counselor, because she observed the tenets
of Native American spirituality, instead of Christianity. Campos v. City of
Blue Springs, Mo., #01-2814, 289 F.3d 546, 2002 U.S. App. Lexis 9831, 88 FEP
Cases (BNA) 1441 (8th Cir. 2002). [2002 FP Dec]
State human rights agency orders a transit authority
to pay $50,000 to a Seventh Day Adventist who was required to work on the
Sabbath. Testimony revealed the employer allowed other workers to swap days but
ignored his requests. Marquez v. Mass. Bay Transp. Auth., Mass. Cmsn. Against
Discrim. #97-BEM-3223, 40 (1969) G.E.R.R. (BNA) 740 (MDAC 2002). {N/R}
A divided federal appeals panel holds that a
Jehovah's Witness, who was a cadet with the Washington State Patrol cadet, was
not constructively discharged for his unwillingness to salute the flag or take
an oath. He resigned before he was threatened with disciplinary action. Lawson
v. St. of Washington, #00-35458, 296 F.3d 799, 2002 U.S. App. Lexis 14001 (9th
Cir. 2002). {N/R}
Federal court in NY holds that Muslim
firefighters lacked legal standing to challenge management's choice of an
Islamic chaplain, but the Islamic Society of NYC firefighters had standing to
challenge the selection under the Establishment Clause of the Constitution.
Islamic Soc. of Fire Dept. Personnel v. City of N.Y., #00 CV 3705, 2002 U.S.
Dist. Lexis 10699 (E.D.N.Y. 2002). [2002 FP Sep]
Cook County Sheriff (Chicago) modifies his
uniform headwear regulations to accommodate two deputies, a Jewish male and a
Muslim female. In re Crystal Clark and Larry Davidson (claimants) and Michael
Sheehan, Cook Co. Sheriff (respondent). Source: Chicago Sun-Times (7/7/02).
[2002 FP Sep]
Newark and EEOC settle lawsuit over grooming
policies and overtime assignments for Muslim police officers. City agrees to
accommodate their religious practices and pay compensatory damages. U.S. v.
City of Newark, #00-CV-2368 (D.N.J. 2002). [2002 FP Aug]
Appeals panel finds that a seniority clause on
job assignments in a bargaining agreement takes precedence over the religious
beliefs of a male driver who refused to work with women on overnight
assignments. Virts v. Consol. Frtwys., #00-5501, 285 F.3d 508, 88 FEP Cases
(BNA) 801, 2002 U.S. App. Lexis 6005, 2002 FED App. 0114 (6th Cir. 2002). [N/R]
Federal appeals court upholds disciplinary action
against two health care workers who preached religious beliefs to public aid
recipients. A public employer may require its workers to abstain from
discussing religion with citizens they meet on the job. Knight v. Connecticut,
#00-9131, 2001 U.S. App. Lexis 26430 (2nd Cir. 2001). {N/R}
Supreme Court rejects the appeal of Islamic
employee who was transferred because she refused to stop wearing a head scarf.
Appellate court held that an involuntary transfer was not an ``adverse
employment action.'' Ali v. Alamo Rent-A-Car, #00-1041, 2001 U.S. App. Lexis
3389 (Unpub. 4th Cir. 2001); cert. den. #00-1813, 2001 U.S. Lexis 7353, 70 L.W.
3245 (2001). [2001 FP 155]
Federal appeals court upholds $25,000 punitive
damage award against a supervisor who wrote a negative evaluation of a
subordinate with whom she had religious disagreements. Phillips v. Collings,
#00-2176, 256 F.3d 843, 2001 U.S. App. Lexis 16000, 86 FEP Cases (BNA) 411 (8th
Cir. 2001). [2001 FP 139]
Federal appeals court sustains the involuntary
removal of an employee who refused to counsel homosexual and unmarried domestic
partners for religious reasons. Accommodation would cause a hardship in a small
office; $2,058,738 verdict reversed. Bruff v. No. Miss. Health Serv., #99-60175,
244 F.3d 495, 85 FEP Cases (BNA) 613, 2001 U.S. App. Lexis 4977 (5th Cir.).
[2001 FP 59]
Absent a hardship, the Dept. of Corrections had a
duty to accommodate requests by an officer, who was a minister, for unpaid
leave to attend religious conferences. An employer has the burden to show that
it made a good faith effort to provide accommodation or that an accommodation
would cause undue hardship on the facility. Jones v. New York City Dept. of
Correction, 99 Civ. 10031, 2001 U.S. Dist. Lexis 2669 (Unpub. S.D.N.Y.). {N/R}
Federal appeals court affirms termination of a
Jehovah's Witness who refused to work when paired with a woman. Weber v.
Roadway Exp., #98-1146, 199 F.3d 270, 2000 U.S. App. Lexis 150, 81 FEP Cases
(BNA) 1138 (5th Cir.). [2000 FP 59]
An "employer satisfies its Title VII
religious accommodation obligation when it offers any reasonable
accommodation," Shelton v. Univ. of Medicine, 223 F.3d 220, 2000 U.S. App.
Lexis 19099, 83 FEP Cases (BNA) 1060 (3rd Cir.). {N/R}
Federal appeals court upholds a sheriff who
refused to supersede a seniority plan to accommodate an applicant who refused
to work on the Sabbath. Balint v. Carson City, #96- 17342, 144 F.3d 1225; 1998
U.S. App. Lexis 10452, 76 FEP Cases (BNA) 1846. [1998 FP 123]
Federal court refuses to dismiss a challenge to
the use of the MMPI-2 and the Cal Psy. Inv. for psychological screening of Long
Island police officers. The plaintiff claimed that some questions are of a
religious nature and are unnecessary to evaluate police applicants. Bennett v.
Co. of Suffolk, 30 F.Supp.2d 353, 1998 U.S. Dist. Lexis 20221, 78 FEP Cases
(BNA) 1536 (E.D.N.Y.).
Arbitrator orders reinstatement and back pay to a
Muslim hospital worker who wore a skull cap and shirt hanging over his trousers,
in defiance of the facility's dress code. The employer failed to accommodate
his religious beliefs concerning clothing. Arbitrator also excused the
employee's public outburst at a meeting, finding it was provoked by his
supervisors insensitity to his religious beliefs. Liberty Medical Center, 109
LA (BNA) 609 (Gentile, 1997). {N/R}
President issues "Guidelines on religious
exercise and religious expression in the federal workplace," 33 Weekly
Comp. Pres. Doc. 1246, FEP Manual (BNA) 403:9101-9110 (8-14-97). [1997 FP
153-4]
Federal court rejects suit by Roman Catholic
police officer who objected to being posted to monitor protestors at abortion
clinics. Rodriguez v. City of Chicago, 1997 U.S.Dist. Lexis 12251 (N.D.Ill.).
[1997 FP 154-5]
In a divided opinion, the Supreme Court has held
that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 does not apply to state and
local governments; City of Boerne v. Flores, 117 S.Ct. 2157 (1997). The
justices left open the question whether it can be applied to federal agencies.
{N/R}
Massachusetts civil rights commission awards
Muslim officer $300,000 in punitive damages because of the way he was treated
by a coworker. Said v. Northeast Security, #91-BEM-1540, 1997 FEP Summary
Part-I (BNA) 6 (Mass.Cm.Ag.Discr. 1996). [1997 FP 43]
Vegetarian county employee settles his wrongful
termination suit for $50,000; he was fired for refusing to hand out hamburger
coupons. EEOC religious discrimination regulations includes "moral and
ethical beliefs." Anderson v. Orange Co. Transit Auth., Orange Co. Cal.
Super.Ct. No.765255; settlement reported in 11/20/96 L.A. Times A-3. [1997 FP
26-7]
Federal court in Ohio upholds a ban on long
ponytails for male correctional officers. A officer's spiritual beliefs, as a
Native American religious practitioner, and the fact that women officers are
permitted to pin up their hair, is not dispositive. Blanken v. Ohio Dept. Reh.
& Corr., 1996 U.S.Dist. Lexis 16540 (S.D. Ohio). [1997 FP 9-10]
Federal appeals panel overturns ban on religious
advocacy by state employees in state office buildings. Tucker v. St. of Cal.,
97 F.3d 1204, 1996 U.S.App. Lexis 26199 (9th Cir.). [1997 FP 12-13]
Appeals court finds that an employer did not have
a clear duty to breach the seniority provisions of the bargaining agreement, to
allow an Adventist to always take off on the Sabbath. Genas v. St. Dept. Corr.
Serv., 75 F.3d 825 (2nd Cir. 1996). [1996 FP 91]
Federal court refuses to dismiss suit for
injunctive relief brought by a Catholic police officer who was detailed to
guard an abortion clinic. Rodriguez v. City of Chicago, 69 FEP Cases (BNA) 993,
1996 U.S.Dist. Lexis 533 (N.D.Ill.). [1996 FP 76]
Federal appeals court concludes that Congress
intended to legalize the use of marijuana by Rastafarians. U.S. v. Bauer, 1996
U.S.App. Lexis 1458, 75 F.3d 1366 (9th Cir.). [1996 FP 61-2]
Federal court holds that an employer who fails to
abate a worker from bothering another employee about religious matters can be
liable for harassment. Peck v. Sony, 1995 U.S.Dist. Lexis 12322, 68 FEP Cases
(BNA) 1025 (S.D.N.Y.). [1996 FP 10]
Before sanctions for religious discrimination can
lawfully apply, the employer must be aware the conduct is viewed as
objectionable. Meltebeke v. Bur. of Labor and Indus., 322 Ore. 132, 69 FEP
Cases (BNA) 56 (1995). [1996 FP 10]
Federal appeals court reverses the termination of
a county supervisory employee for his on-duty religious activities. Brown v.
Polk County, 61 F.3d 650 (8th Cir. en banc 1995). [1996 FP 10-11]
Federal appeals court invalidates designation of
Good Friday as a government endorsed official holiday. Metzl v. Leininger, 57
F.3d 618 (7th Cir. 1995). {N/R}
Federal court upholds the Religious Freedom
Restoration Act of 1993. Wisconsin's prison administration unsuccessfully urged
the court to find the law unconstitutional. Sasnett v. Wis. Dept. Corr., 891
F.Supp. 1305 (E.D.Wis. 1995). {N/R}
Appeals court upholds rotating shift schedules
and management's refusal to further accommodate an officer who is a Seventh Day
Adventist. Beadle v. Hillsborough Co. Sheriff's Dept., 29 F.3d 589 & 40
F.3d 391 (11th Cir. 1994), cert.den. 115 S.Ct. 2001 (1995); Beadle v. City of
Tampa, 42 F.3d 633 (11th Cir. 1995) [1995 FP 93]
Federal court in New York refuses to dismiss a
complaint, filed by an Adventist correction officer; employer unsuccessfully
argued that a seniority provision in the collective bargaining agreement was a
per se defense to a claim for reasonable accommodation. Genas v. St. Dept. of
Corr. Svcs. 1994 U.S. Dist. Lexis 20037 (S.D.N.Y.); 67 FEP Cases (BNA) 27. See
also: State v. Council 82 AFSCME, 575 N.Y.S.2d 175 (A.D. 1991); Appeal denied,
592 N.E.2d 799. (N.Y. 1992). See also: 75 F.3 825 (2nd Cir. 1996). [1995 FP 93]
Federal court allows an employer to deny
employment to those who, for religious reasons, refuse to provide a social
security number. Hover v. Florida P&L, 67 FEP Cases (BNA) 71, 1994
U.S.Dist. Lexis 19920 (S.D. Fla.). [1995 FP 94]
Congress passes the Religious Freedom Restoration
Act, 42 U.S. Code Sec. 2000bb. It prohibits governmental burdens on the
exercise of religion, absent (1) a compelling governmental interest and (2) the
challenged law or regulation is the least restrictive means of furthering that
interest. The act applies to all Federal, state and local laws and regulations,
including public agency personnel rules and policies. {N/R}
O.S.H.A. exempts persons who refuse to wear
hard-hats for religious reasons, pursuant to the Religious Freedom Restoration
Act of 1993; the exemption reinstates a 1978 exception (withdrawn in 1990) for
the Old Order Amish and Dharma Brotherhood, and extends it to "any
employee" who objects for religious reasons. OSHA Instruction STD 1-6.5
(June 20, 1994) summarized in 1994 FEP Summary (BNA) 83 (7/18/94). {N/R}
Sheriff’s Dept. did not discriminate against a
Seventh Day Adventist in maintaining a neutral shift rotation plan. Dept.
allowed the employee to swap shifts with other officers, and to announce at rollcall
his need for alternative working periods. Beadle v. Hillsborough Co. Sheriff's
Dept., 65 FEP Cases (BNA) 1069 (11th Cir. 1994). {N/R}
Religious Freedom Act of 1993 prompts the Dept.
of Labor to exempt workers who have a religious objection from OSHA hard-hat
requirements. Law also applies to regulations adopted by state and local
government employers. Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, 42 U.S. Code
Sec. 2000bb, P.L. 103-141, 107 STAT. 1488-9. [1994 FP 154-5]
Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 is held
retroactive. Lawson v. Dugger, 844 F.Supp. 1538 (S.D.Fla. 1994). [1994 FP
154-5]
Arbitrator rules that public employers cannot
prevent Jewish employees from taking religious holidays. Absences shall be
unpaid, except that employees may use their "personal days" for
religious observance purposes. Vicksburg Comm. Sch. and Kalamazoo Co. Ed.
Assn., 101 LA (BNA) 771 (Daniel, 1993). [1994 FP 140]
County could prohibit its employees from praying
and reciting scriptures during working hours. Brown v. Polk County, 832 F.Supp.
1305 (S.D. Iowa 1993). [1994 FP 27]
Police officer who was summarily terminated
because he refused to wear a firearm for religious reasons awarded damages.
Although a federal appeals court affirmed the award because of due process
violations, the panel hastened to state that "we do not hold that (a city)
must hire or retain a police force of pacifists." Miner v. City of Glens
Falls, 999 F.2d 655 (2nd Cir. 1993). [1994 FP 20-1]
Federal court in DC enjoins U.S. Marshal's Office
from unfair disciplinary action and religious or ethnic harassment directed at
Jewish deputy. Turner v. Barr, #91-3101, 30 (1493) G.E.R.R. (BNA) 1606 (D.D.C.
11/25/92). [1993 FP 28]
Government did not violate Title VII when it
refused to change an employee's work schedule to avoid the Sabbath. Mann v.
Frank, 795 F.Supp. 1438 (W.D.Mo. 1992). [1993 FP 58] Affirmed 3-to 0; 63 FEP
Cases (BNA) 634 (8th Cir. 1993). {N/R}
Mere fact the superior who initiated disciplinary
action and the reviewing officer were of the same religion, does not create a
presumption of religious discrimination. Burden of proof of discriminatory
animus rests on the plaintiff. Shapolia v. Los Alamos Natl. Lab., 61 FEP Cases
(BNA) 1172 (10th Cir. 1993). [1993 FP 108]
Federal court upholds disciplinary suspension of
a DCPD sergeant who, for religious reasons, refused to participate in the
arrests of anti- abortion protestors. Parrott v. Dist. of Col., 1991 WL 126020,
1991 U.S.Dist. Lexis 12647, 58 Emp. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 41,369 (D.D.C. 1991).
{N/R}
A fire dept. paramedic sued, following his
termination, alleging that the county failed to accommodate his
religiously-based objection to being assigned with female partners because
"it is morally and spiritually wrong to sleep unsupervised in a room with
another woman other than his wife." A federal court rejected his claims,
finding that the county's rotating schedule furthered a legitimate need to
reduce overtime costs and fairly distribute work assignments. Miller v.
Drennon, 1991 U.S. Dist. Lexis 20382, 56 FEP Cases (BNA) 274 (D.S.C.). {N/R}
Federal appeals court upholds termination of FBI
agent who refused to investigate pacifist groups for religious reasons. Ryan v.
U.S. DoJ, 950 F.2d 458, 57 FEP Cases (BNA) 854 (7th Cir. 1991). [1992 FP 11-12]
Ex federal agent was entitled to a trial on
whether religious discrimination prompted his dismissal. Ultimate proof of his
claim can be adduced from indirect & circumstantial evidence. Rosen v.
Thornburgh, 928 F.2d 528 (2d Cir. 1991). [1992 FP 75-6]
Seventh Day Adventist loses a wrongful
termination suit brought against the Dept. of Corrections and his union for
failing to accommodate a demand to not work on the Sabbath. Blair v. Graham
Corr. Ctr., 782 F.Supp. 411 (C.D.Ill. 1992). [1992 FP 93-4]
Appellate court overturns arbitrator who directed
management to permit a corrections officer to refuse to work on the Sabbath.
State Dept. of Corr. Serv. v. Council 82 AFSCME, 575 N.Y.S.2d 175 (A.D. 1991).
[1992 FP 157]
The fact that an employer and an employee may
hold and express conflicting religious beliefs does not necessarily make the
employer's expression of his beliefs intimidating, hostile or offensive to
those of the employee. EEOC v. Townley Eng., 859 F.2d 610 (9th Cir. 1988).
{N/R}
Federal court upholds city policy requiring
employees who take off on non-designated religious holidays to do so on unpaid
leave. Man-of-Jerusalem v. Hill, 769 F.Supp. 97 (E.D.N.Y. 1991). See also:
Ansonia Bd. of Educ. v. Philbrook, 499 U.S. 60, 107 S.Ct. 367 (1986). [1992 FP
140-1]
Employer not required to excuse sergeant from
duty on Sabbath despite his sincere religious beliefs; termination upheld.
Penn. St. Univ. v. Comm. Human Rel. Cmsn., 505 A.2d 1053 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1986).
Federal appeals court concludes that witchcraft
(practiced by the Church of Wicca) is a bona-fide religion. Dettmer v. Landon,
799 F.2d 929, 1986 U.S. App. Lexis 29400 (4th Cir.). {N/R}
EEOC upholds termination of a Utah police officer
who practiced bigamy. Religious discrimination complaint fails. EEOC Decision
No. 85-3, 1985 EEOC Lexis 2 (Feb. 12, 1985). {N/R}
Officer could not let his religious feelings
interfere with his behavior to a citizen; discipline appropriate. Hershinow v.
Bonamarte, 735 F.2d 264 (7th Cir. 1984).
Article: “Soul Rebels: The Rastafarians and the
Free Exercise Clause,” 72 Geo. L.J. 1605 (1984).
Department must resort to breath tests when
employee, accused of drinking, voices religious objections to blood test. Hall
v. N.Y. Transit Auth., 435 N.Y.S.2d 543 (A.D. 1981).
Federal court finds that U.S. Attorney General
has standing to bring suit in behalf of private citizen; federal regulations
provide relief. U.S. v. Co. of Hawaii, 473 F.Supp. 261 (D. Hawaii).
Seventh Day Adventists do not have to join a
closed shop union; Title VII supercedes bargaining laws. Tooley v.
Martin-Marietta Corp., 476 F.Supp. 1027 (D. Ore. 1979).
City wins civil rights suit of firefighter over
time-off for religious holidays. U.S. v. City of Albuquerque, 545 F.2d 110
(10th Cir. 1976).
EEOC rejects an employer's defense that an
employee’s sect was not a recognized religion, noting that “intensely personal”
convictions -- which some might find “incomprehensible” or “incorrect” -- come
within the meaning of “religious belief.” EEOC Decision No. 71-2620, 1975 EEOC
Lexis 61 (1975), relying on Welsh v. U.S., 90 S.Ct. 1792 at 1796 (1970). {N/R}
A state has a compelling interest in enforcing a
university rule requiring an x-ray of all new students for TB despite the
beliefs of a Christian Scientist student. State ex rel. Holcomb, #31857, 39
Wash.2d 860, 239 P.2d 545, 1952 Wash. Lexis 259 (1952). {N/R}
See also: Hairstyle & Appearance Regulations;
Physical Fitness Standards; Union
Activity and EEOC regulations at www.eeoc.gov/regs/