Illness, Disability, and Workplace Performance: A Guide for Employers
NLRB Authority in Jeopardy, Pregnant Worker Protections, Non-Compete Order Rescinded, EEOC Right-to-Sue Rule - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
Navigating Employee Leave and Reasonable Accommodation Requests Under the FMLA, ADA, and PWFA
Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) Update
Employment Law Now VIII-152 - Part 2 of 2 on the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (Attorney Interview)
Employment Law Now VIII-151 - EEOC Commissioner Interview: Part 1 of 2 on the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
Employer Obligations to Accommodate Before Employees Arrive to Work
DE Talk | Using Employment Networks to Connect with Individuals with Disabilities in an Ever-Changing Workforce
Managing Employee Leave Under the FMLA and ADA
What's the Tea in L&E? Why You Need Policies for Temps and Other Contractors
(Podcast) California Employment News: Understanding ADA/FEHA Requirements and the Interactive Process
Compliance Unveiled: 10 Must-Know Tips for the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act & Independent Contractor Rules
The Burr Broadcast: Key Differences Between PWFA and ADA
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Expands Title VII, EEOC’s Final PWFA Rule, AI Screening Tools - Employment Law This Week®
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Episode 13: The Americans with Disabilities Act with Stefania Bondurant
The Burr Morning Show: Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Episode 3: Top Labor & Employment Issues for 2024 with Jennie Cluverius, Cherie Blackburn, and Christy Rogers
Workplace Accommodation after COVID: Legal Update
Podcast: What Employers Should Know about the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act [More with McGlinchey, Ep. 62]
Employment Law Now VII-136 - Summer 2023 Wrap-Up Part 2
Particularly since pandemic-era vaccination requirements, American employers have faced increasing enforcement actions and litigation regarding religious accommodation requests. Additionally, in 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court...more
Two years ago, the long dormant duty to accommodate employees’ religious beliefs and practices was awakened by the U.S. Supreme Court in Groff v. Dejoy. Gone were the days when an employer could justify the denial of a...more
Regulators and courts in both the U.S. and UK have been seeking to navigate the complex balance between employees’ rights to religious expression and employers’ interests. In particular, recent developments—namely, two U.S....more
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has recently issued significant decisions against two federal employers for failing to provide reasonable religious accommodations to their employees. These decisions...more
The legal framework surrounding religious accommodations in the workplace has evolved significantly, driven by recent court decisions, EEOC enforcement actions, and federal guidance. Employers must gain a clear understanding...more
Since vaccines became available in response to COVID-19, courts have dealt with an onslaught of litigation involving religious accommodation in the workplace. Most recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit...more
On July 28, 2025, the Trump administration issued a memorandum to all heads and acting heads of federal government departments and agencies entitled “Protection Religious Expression in the Federal Workplace.” The memo...more
Six months into the new Trump administration, it is clear that the EEOC is concentrating its efforts on religious discrimination in the workplace. Since President Trump’s inauguration, 25% of the new lawsuits or enforcement...more
If you have a grooming policy based on safety factors (like no beards for firefighters), does that trump an employee’s request for a religious accommodation? Maybe not. A recent Third Circuit decision, Smith v. City of...more
The COVID-19 pandemic brought workplace vaccination policies to the forefront, raising complex questions about religious accommodations. Over four years after the initial rollout of the COVID-19 vaccine, these policies remain...more
Federal Agency Charges Healthcare Provider Refused to Accommodate Remote Employee’s Sincerely Held Religious Beliefs - RALEIGH, N.C. – Rex Healthcare, Inc., a private, non-profit healthcare provider located in Raleigh,...more
Suncakes NC, LLC, a North Carolina-based company, and Suncakes, LLC, a Texas-based company doing business as IHOP (collectively “Suncakes”), will pay $40,000 and provide other relief to settle a religious discrimination and...more
Federal Lawsuit Says Manufacturer Failed to Allow Any Exceptions to Vaccination Policy - TULSA, Okla. – AG Equipment Company, a Broken Arrow, Oklahoma compressor packaging manufacturer, violated federal law when it fired...more
The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has issued several significant decisions that employers doing business in Minnesota should be aware of. Here are a few highlights of recent Eight Circuit Decisions that have addressed...more
How should an employer react if an employee claims that mandatory anti-discrimination training conflicts with the employee’s religious beliefs? Two recent EEOC decisions shed some light on this question. In both cases, the...more
EEOC Investigation Finds Clinic Refused to Provide Reasonable Accommodation and Discharged Employee Because of Religious Beliefs - SEATTLE – Passages Family Support, a non-profit organization with a clinic in Spokane,...more
On January 25, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia’s (CHOP) motion to dismiss plaintiff Donald Glover’s complaint in Donald Glover v. The Children’s...more
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers with 15 or more employees from discriminating against employees and applicants on the basis of religion (as well as race, color, sex, and national origin), and it...more
In last term’s decision in Groff v. DeJoy, the U.S. Supreme Court significantly increased employers’ obligation to consider religious exemption requests under Title VII. Rather than the previous de minimus burden standard,...more
In Part One of this two-part bulletin, we explored the expansive meaning of religious beliefs entitled to an accommodation under Title VII and the reluctance of courts to second guess whether a belief is “religious” in...more
Consider this: an employee refuses to accept Sunday shifts because, under his religion, that day is devoted to worship and rest. Is his employer legally required to accommodate him? For decades, the answer was easy....more
In the Public Interest is excited to continue our miniseries examining landmark decisions recently issued by the United States Supreme Court. The fourth episode examines the Court’s decision in Groff v. DeJoy, a case centered...more
The U.S Supreme Court issued an opinion in Groff v. DeJoy redefining an employer’s obligations for religious accommodations under Title VII. The Court strayed away from the almost five-decade standard previously used and...more
Title VII of the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) requires employers to accommodate any employee’s sincerely held religious beliefs unless accommodation would result in an undue hardship. Historically, denial of...more
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously last month in favor of an evangelical Christian postal worker who refused to work on Sundays due to Sabbath observance....more