On June 29, 2023, the United States Supreme Court unanimously
adopted a new “undue hardship” standard for religious accommodations under Title
VII of the Civil Rights Act (“Title VII”). The decision came in Groff v.
DeJoy, No. 22-174 (June 29, 2023), which concerned an Evangelical Christian
postal worker who opposed working on Sundays due to his sabbath observance. Although
the US Postal Service (“USPS”) attempted to accommodate Groff’s requests, it
could not always find coverage for Groff’s Sunday shifts, and he was disciplined
when he was scheduled to work on Sundays but refused. Groff ultimately resigned over the issue and
sued USPS.
The US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
sided with USPS, and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals agreed. Both Courts applied the prior standard
offered by Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison, 432 U.S. 63 (1977), which
required employers to demonstrate that the requested accommodation was an undue
hardship by showing that the accommodation would require more than a de minimus
cost. The District Court and Third Circuit
Court of Appeals both found that the “more than a de minimus cost” threshold
was met because Goff’s requested accommodation imposed on his coworkers,
disrupted the workplace and workflow, and diminished employee morale.
The Supreme Court disagreed and determined the “more than a de
minimus” threshold should no longer apply.
The Court held that that the undue hardship standard only applies when
granting an accommodation would result in “substantial increased costs.” This new
threshold is fact specific, and requires the requested accommodation be viewed
in the context of the employer’s size, operating cost, and nature of business.
The Court clarified that forcing employees to work overtime
to cover the accommodation would not be sufficient to constitute an undue hardship.
Further, an undue hardship does not
exist due to the imposition on the employer to manage co-worker animosity
toward the accommodated religion.
We expect the issue of religious accommodations to be further developed under the new “substantial increased costs” threshold for the undue burden standard. The Court’s decision in Goff makes it clear that employers can no longer rely on some additional costs solely constituting an undue burden under Title VII.
