September 20, 2011

Religious Discrimination Exemption Bars Employee's Title VII Claims against Catholic Facility Based on Religious Attire

Religious Discrimination: Adopting a broad interpretation of the word "employment" in Title VII's exemption for religious organizations, the Fourth Circuit nullified the employee’s workplace harassment, retaliation, and discriminatory termination claims. In the case, Lori Kennedy, a geriatric nurse, sued her former employer, St. Catherine, alleging employment discrimination stemming from Ms. Kennedy's religious attire. As a member of the Church of the Brethren, Ms. Kennedy wore "modest garb” including long dresses or skirts and a hair covering. St. Catherine, a Catholic facility, told Ms. Kennedy that her attire was inappropriate for the facility. Ms. Kennedy was fired after she refused to change her attire.

Title VII includes various exemptions, including one for religious organizations as follows:

This subchapter [of Title VII] shall not apply to . . .a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by such corporation, association, educational institution, or society of its activities.

The EEOC Compliance Manual had stated that, for purposes of this exemption, “employment” should be narrowly construed to mean only "employment decisions," such as hiring and firing. Relying on the EEOC’s interpretation, the district court had concluded that St. Catherine’s decision to terminate Ms. Kennedy was an exempt “employment decision” that was outside of Title VII’s reach, but that the workplace harassment and retaliation claims were not “employment decisions” and therefore could be the basis for Title VII claims.

The Fourth Circuit disagreed, and held that limiting the religious organization exemption to “employment decisions,” as opposed to all aspects of the employment relationship, was “simply incompatible” with the statute. As a consequence, Ms. Kennedy's harassment and retaliation claims -- like her discriminatory firing claim -- could not survive.

According to the dissent, “in one fell swoop,” through this opinion, the Fourth Circuit has “shielded religious organizations from every Title VII claim alleging either religious harassment or retaliation for opposing such harassment."

Lori Kennedy v. St Joseph's Ministries, Inc., d/b/a St. Joseph’s Ministries, No. 10-1792, Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore, Paul W. Grimm, Magistrate Judge. Decided: September 14, 2011 before KING, SHEDD, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Reversed and remanded by published opinion. Judge Shedd wrote the majority opinion, in which Judge Wynn joined. Judge King wrote a dissenting opinion.

Bookmark and Share

July 2, 2010

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e, et seq., as amended

As a courtesy to employers and employment lawyers, The Employment Law Chronicle provides links to the text of key Federal, Virginia, and District of Columbia labor and employment laws published on government sites.

Title VII prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion or sex.

Here are answers to some frequently asked questions about Title VII:

WHAT IS TITLE VII?

Title VII is a federal law that prohibits employers and other covered entities from discriminating against an employee or job applicant because of the person's race, color, religion, sex or national origin. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act is incorporated into Title VII. Title VII also protects against retaliation and requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for religion.

WHAT TYPE OF EMPLOYER ACTS ARE ILLEGAL UNDER TITLE VII?

Title VII protects employees and applicants from discrimination in all terms, conditions or privileges of employment. For example, it is illegal to engage in sexual harassment or to harass an employee based on any other protected category, such as race, religion, or national origin. It is also illegal to discriminate in hiring, job advertisements, recruitment practices, tests, assignments, training opportunities, promotions, pay, benefits, discipline, discharge, employment referrals, breaks, leave, perks, or other terms, conditions or privileges of employment.

Continue reading "Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e, et seq., as amended" »

June 30, 2008

D.C. Employment Law: District of Columbia Human Rights Act (DCHRA), D.C. Code §§ 2.1401.01 et seq.

As a courtesy to employment lawyers and employers, The Employment Law Chronicle provides links to the text of key Federal, Virginia, and District of Columbia labor and employment laws published on government sites.

The DC Human Rights Act prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin. sex, age, marital status, personal appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, family responsibilities, genetic information, disability, matriculation, or political affiliation.
June 30, 2008

Virginia Employment Law: Virginia Human Rights Act, Virginia Code Chapter 39, §§ 2.2-3900 et. seq.

As a courtesy to employers and employment lawyers, The Employment Law Chronicle provides links to the text of key Federal, Virginia, and District of Columbia labor and employment laws published on public sites.

The Virginia Human Rights Act prohibits discrimination because of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, age, marital status, or disability.