Workplace Religious Accommodation Post-Groff: Heightened Undue Hardship Standard, Notable Cases, Employer Impact
Reviewing Accommodation Requests; Demonstrating Substantial Increased Costs; Defending Discrimination Claims
Course Details
- smart_display Format
Live Online with Live Q&A
- signal_cellular_alt Difficulty Level
Intermediate
- work Practice Area
Employment and Workers Comp
- event Date
Wednesday, October 1, 2025
- schedule Time
1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT
- timer Program Length
90 minutes
-
This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.
This CLE webinar will address the U.S. Supreme Court's Groff v. DeJoy decision which heightened the standard for employers to demonstrate that an employee's religious accommodation request poses an undue hardship on the company, thereby making it more difficult for companies and their counsel to use this defense. The panel will discuss the "substantial increased costs" standard and its impact on employers as demonstrated in notable cases since the Groff decision. The panel will also describe best practices for mitigating the risk of a religious discrimination claim and preparing to defend such claims.
Mr. Paul has extensive trial and appellate experience with handling labor and employment law litigation in federal and state courts, and before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Department of Labor, Department of Justice, and several other federal and state agencies. He also holds the national Society for Human Resource Management’s “SHRM-SCP” certification, is the Immediate-Past State Director for the Missouri SHRM State Council, and regularly advises employers on all labor and human resource management issues in an effort to prevent or resolve employee issues before they escalate into legal disputes. As Co-Chair of the firm’s Disability Access practice group, Mr. Paul advises clients regarding legal requirements for accommodating disabled individuals and defends Americans with Disabilities and Rehabilitation Act lawsuits nationally. He is a former Assistant Attorney General for the state of Missouri where he represented the Missouri Department of Labor and Industrial Relations, the Missouri Division of Labor Standards, and the Missouri Commission on Human Rights by enforcing state discrimination and wage and hour laws.Â
Mr. Oliveira joins the firm with nearly 15 years of experience as a federal investigator with the EEOC. During his time as an investigator, Mr. Oliveira handled all aspects of the administrative process including systemic and class investigations and the negotiation of complex conciliations under every type of discrimination claim. That experience has given him expertise in practicing before state and federal agencies such as the Missouri Commission on Human Rights and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
In its Groff v. DeJoy decision, the U.S. Supreme Court heightened the standard for employers to demonstrate that a religious accommodation request was denied because it posed an undue hardship on the company. For over 40 years until Groff, the courts used the "de minimis cost" standard first articulated in TWA v. Hardison as the governing standard to determine "undue hardship." However, in Groff, the Court found that the "de minimis cost" standard did not provide the type of protection intended by Title VII, so it created the "substantial increased costs" standard.
The standard requires an employer to show that "the burden of granting an accommodation would result in substantial increased costs in relation to the conduct of its particular business." The standard requires the courts to conduct a fact-specific inquiry by looking at "all relevant factors in the case at hand, including the particular accommodations at issue and their practical impact in light of the nature, size and operating cost of an employer."
The Groff decision and the associated publicity surrounding it limits employers' use of the "undue hardship" defense, and has increased religious accommodation requests from employees. Employers and their counsel should prepare with policies, training, and a process to address these accommodation requests to avoid discrimination and retaliation claims.
Listen as our expert panel discusses the undue hardship standard articulated in Groff and examines the impact on employers in notable cases since the Groff decision. The panel will also address employer considerations when deciding whether to grant religious accommodation requests and offer best practices to mitigate risk and limit liability.
I. Introduction: overview of religious accommodation pre-Groff
A. Title VII
B. TWA v. Hardison (de minimis cost standard)
C. EEOC guidance
II. Groff v. DeJoy
A. Clarifying Hardison
B. "Substantial increased costs" standard
C. EEOC effect
D. Notable cases impacting employers since the Groff decision
III. Employer best practices to mitigate risk
A. Policy and procedure review
B. Management training
C. Other considerations
IV. Preparing for and defending a discrimination claim
A. How to demonstrate "substantial increased costs"
B. What to expect from the EEOC and courts moving forward
The panel will review these and other important issues:
- How does the "substantial increased costs" standard differ from the prior "de minimis cost" standard?
- What considerations should be made by counsel and their clients when deciding whether to grant an employee's religious accommodation request?
- What are best practices for addressing and documenting employee requests, evaluating "undue hardship," and defending against discrimination and retaliation claims?
- What can counsel and their clients expect from the EEOC and courts moving forward?
Related Courses
Workplace Religious Accommodation Post-Groff: Heightened Undue Hardship Standard, Notable Cases, Employer Impact
Wednesday, July 16, 2025
1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT