TSA and State Agency Prevent Employees From Going to Church – ACLJ Takes Legal Action To Protect Clients’ Right to Worship on Sunday

Two employees who have been denied religious accommodations to go to church are now pursuing further legal action at the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

One client, a federal sector employee for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), was seeking a religious accommodation to attend church on Sundays. (We had been assisting our client throughout the federal EEO investigation.) Following the conclusion of the investigation, our client received an unfavorable final agency decision from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which concluded that our client was not discriminated against on the basis of her religion. In its decision, DHS overlooked facts that show our client’s religious accommodation was denied because it was a request to attend church. We just appealed DHS’s final agency decision to the EEOC’s Office of Federal Operations.

The other client is an employee of a California public agency who was seeking a religious accommodation to observe the Sabbath on Sundays. Our client submitted a religious accommodation request with the agency’s HR department. After submitting the request, our client was called into a meeting with HR, where “the employer’s proposed ‘accommodations’ still force[d] our client to choose between his religious beliefs and his job while penalizing him for observing the Sabbath by cutting his hours, resulting in lower pay.” We then sent a demand letter after our client’s government employer failed to grant a reasonable religious accommodation. The employer ignored our letter, and we are assisting our client in pursuing further legal action by filing a complaint with the EEOC.

Whether an employee works in the public or private sector, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act allows employees to request a religious accommodation in their employment. The employer must accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs or practices unless doing so poses an undue hardship on the employer.

As we previously explained:

The term religion is broadly defined, and a religious belief in observing the Sabbath [or attending church] falls squarely within the statute’s definition. As the Supreme Court has emphasized, an employer has an affirmative obligation to eliminate the conflict between a job requirement and an employee’s sincerely held religious belief or practice unless doing so poses an undue hardship on the employer. According to the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Groff, an undue hardship means the request would substantially interfere with the operations of the employer.

We further explained that:

The Supreme Court clarified in Groff that an “undue hardship” means “an employer must show that the burden of granting an accommodation would result in substantial increased costs in relation to the conduct of its particular business.” While some employers think they may deny an accommodation based on a fear that granting one accommodation would result in more employees coming forward with the same request, the Supreme Court has shot down that argument. The unanimous Court in Groff emphasized that bias or hostility toward a religious practice or accommodation cannot be considered a valid defense for violating an employee’s rights under Title VII.

We were prepared to take further legal action in both cases. We will continue to fight for religious liberty in the workplace.

If you or someone you know requested a religious accommodation to attend church and was denied, your rights under Title VII may have been violated. Contact us at ACLJ.org/HELP.