Earlier this month, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement, commenced litigation against Rock Snowpark on July 2, 2025, for allegedly retaliating against an employee that posted a series of Bible verses on social media that the Snowpark considered discriminatory against the LGBTQ+ community.
The Complaint
According to the complaint, Rock Snowpark’s Operations Manager met with the unnamed complainant in June of 2023 to discuss some posts on the complainant’s personal social media account. The exact language that the complainant used in his posts is unknown, although the complaint alleges that they contained Christian Bible verses. The Operations Manager told the complainant that some of the scripture he posted was discriminatory towards the LGBTQ+ community, and asked the complainant to refrain from posting any discriminatory statements. Three days after this initial conversation, the complainant made another post containing a Bible verse, and his employment was subsequently terminated.
The complaint alleges that the employee made these posts on his personal social media account, where he did not identify himself as an employee of Rock Snowpark. It also alleges that these posts were not “directed” towards an employee of Rock Snowpark, and that Rock Snowpark did not receive any direct complaints about the posts.
The Response
Rock Snowpark has released a statement that it “want[s] to make clear that the internal employment decision that apparently led to the EEOC’s lawsuit was not made on the basis of the employee’s religious beliefs. Rather, it was a business decision based on performance issues and policy violations.” The company added that it “want[s] to make clear that we, as an employer and a member of the community, treat all of our employees and customers equally and with respect, regardless of who they are and what we believe. We also expect all of our employees to similarly respect each other and the customers that we are here to serve.”
The EEOC’s Position
EEOC Acting Chair, Andrea Lucas, also made the following statement about the complaint:
“All employees have the right to earn a living free from discrimination based on their religious beliefs. While employers must remain alert to potential harassment in the workplace, religious statements made outside of work that do not reference or impact anyone in the workplace do not constitute unlawful harassment.”
This statement is consistent with Acting Chair Lucas’ previous public comments, including her statement earlier this year that the EEOC’s priorities under the current administration include “rooting out unlawful DEI-motivated race and sex discrimination; protecting American workers from anti-American national origin discrimination; defending the biological and binary reality of sex and related rights, including women’s rights to single-sex spaces at work; protecting workers from religious bias and harassment, including antisemitism; and remedying other areas of recent under-enforcement.”
Recommendations and Best Practices
While this matter is still evolving, and the outcome remains to be seen, employers can take certain steps to mitigate risk in this area.
Navigating the tension between accommodating employees’ sincerely held religious beliefs and ensuring non-discrimination toward LGBTQ+ individuals requires employers to maintain a delicate balance in the workplace.
Employers should always approach potential religious discrimination claims with care and intention, following company policy on internal investigations into complaints and setting aside personal views and biases. It is important to thoroughly investigate any allegations of religious discrimination while remaining mindful of the experiences and rights of LGBTQ+ employees.
Notably, employers are not obligated to accommodate religious beliefs in a way that results in discrimination against others. While employees should be free to express their religious views, this expression must not compromise the rights of LGBTQ+ colleagues to enjoy a safe and nondiscriminatory workplace.
When the line between accommodating religious beliefs and preventing discrimination against LGBTQ+ employees becomes murky, employers should turn to their own workplace policies for guidance. If an employee’s actions violate anti-harassment rules or create a hostile work environment, management is justified in requesting that such behavior cease. Should the employee refuse to end the harassing or discriminatory behavior, this may be interpreted as insubordination. Ultimately, employers should focus not on the substance of an individual’s beliefs, but on whether any conduct engaged in by the employee breaches established policies or legal standards.
To ensure that workplace behavior aligns with company values, employers should regularly review and update their employment policies. Strong, clear policies are essential for addressing harassing conduct and holding employees accountable. Consulting with legal counsel can help employers craft policies that are both comprehensive and compliant with current laws.
Employers should also promote transparent dialogue to help achieve solutions that are acceptable to everyone involved. Still, there will be times when it’s impossible to satisfy all parties. It is important for employers to recognize when a decision could expose them to liability, or when determining the best course of action may involve a complex legal analysis. In these instances, employers should escalate the issue to leadership, consult with internal or external counsel, or engage a third-party investigator.
Striking a balance between religious and sex discrimination claims rarely has a straightforward solution. Each case presents its own complexities, and potential legal outcomes depend on the specific circumstances involved. Consulting with legal counsel can provide tailored advice and help employers assess the risks associated with different courses of action.
Written with the assistance of Grace Herrmann, a summer associate in Husch Blackwell’s Milwaukee office.
[View source.]
