New Amendments To FEHA Clarify Religious Accommodation Requirements

Recent amendments to Californiaā€™s Fair Employment and Housing Act (ā€œFEHAā€) provide clarity regarding an employerā€™s duty to provide religious accommodations to its employees. FEHA protects employees from discrimination and harassment based on religion and requires employers to reasonably accommodate employeesā€™ requests for religious accommodation unless such accommodation would cause ā€œundue hardshipā€ to the employer.

Under the 2013 amendments, to prove undue hardship, an employer must demonstrate ā€œsignificant difficulty or expenseā€ associated with the religious accommodation. This definition requires an employer to make every practical effort to provide religious accommodations to its employees, including considering alternative accommodations rather than simply denying an employeeā€™s request for accommodation.

FEHA also protects employeesā€™ ā€œreligious observances.ā€ The new amendments clarify that religious clothing, dress, and grooming practices fall under the category of religious observances. Therefore, if a dress or grooming practice is an essential component to an employeeā€™s religious practice, then an employer must accommodate the practice unless doing so would cause an undue hardship. Practically speaking, this means that employees may be entitled to religious accommodations from their employersā€™ official dress code policies.

Finally, the new amendments prohibit California employers from segregating employees from customers to accommodate employeesā€™ religious beliefs. Thus, employers will now have to suggest alternative reasonable accommodations that do not include relocating employees to a back office or away from public view.

To schedule your free initial evaluation, contact us onlineĀ or call (619) 342-8000 today!

SHARE

COMMENTS & DISCUSSIONS

Related Posts

w=2500

Federal Court Holds All Plaintiffs in Precedent-Setting Title IX Case Can Sue San Diego State University for RetaliationĀ Ā 

Haeggquist & Eck, LLP is proud to co-counsel on this landmark case with Bailey & Glasser, LLP and Casey Gerry  ...
Read More
Title IX sex discrimination case HAE

Title IX Sex Discrimination Case Against SDSU Moves Forward Again: Court Holds All Women Athletes Can Sue For Damages, Future Discrimination Can Be BarredĀ 

Haeggquist & Eck, LLP is proud to co-counsel on this landmark case with Bailey & Glasser, LLP and Casey Gerry.   ...
Read More
Court makes landmark decision in favor of student athletes in Title IX lawsuit

Sex Discrimination Case Against SDSU Moving Forward on All Counts: Equal Athletic Financial Aid, Retaliation, and Equal Treatment

SDSU Women Win Nationā€™s First Ruling that Female Student-Athletes Denied Equal Athletic Financial Aid Can Sue Their Schools for Damages ...
Read More
Translate Ā»