The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued Hat Trick, Inc., a Chick-fil-A franchisee, alleging religious discrimination.

The EEOC accuses the franchisee of refusing to reasonably accommodate an employee's request not to work on Saturdays, so she could observe her Sabbath.

From September 2023 to February 2024, the employee held a fleet supervisor position. The employee allegedly informed Hat Trick Inc., that her religious beliefs required that she observe the Sabbath from sundown on Friday to sundown on Saturday. The employee was allegedly not scheduled to work on Saturdays until February 2024 when she was told Saturday work would be required.

The employee claimed that after she was notified about Saturday work requirements, she submitted a written request for religious accommodation and had several meetings with management.

Management allegedly told the employee that to avoid work on Saturdays, she would have to accept a reassignment to a non-managerial job as a delivery driver.

This reassignment would include lower pay, reduced hours, and reduced benefits.

The employee allegedly proposed several other accommodations that would allow her to keep her managerial role, which were all denied. Hat Trick, Inc. alleged the employee walked out of a meeting with management and failed to show up for her next shift. After this, Hat Trick Inc. changed her employment status to "termination for job abandonment."

Source: https://www.newsweek.com/chick-fil-a-franchisee-denies-employee-fired-observing-saturday-sabbath-12198039; https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/eeoc-sues-hatch-trick-inc-religious-discrimination

Commentary

Job reassignment is a possible reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act. However, it has often been considered an accommodation of last resort, to be applied when no other accommodation is available.

If a proposed reassignment as a reasonable accommodation would result in a significant difference such as reduced pay, cut hours, fewer benefits, or loss of supervisory status, it may appear to be an adverse employment action instead of a good faith accommodation.

This is particularly true when an employee has proposed several other accommodation options, as in the above case, that would allow the employee to maintain managerial status.

If job reassignment to a non-equivalent position must be considered or offered as a reasonable accommodation, organizations should consider the following to help reduce the risks:

· Document why each proposed accommodation alternative that would keep the employee's current pay, benefits, status, etc. would not suffice, including a detailed description of why it is being rejected as an alternative

· Document the lack of equivalent job vacancies at the time of the interactive process to show that no equivalent jobs existed which the employee could be reassigned to while maintaining the same pay, benefits, status, etc.

· Never start the interactive process by offering a job reassignment that is a demotion

· Always consider other alternative accommodations that would allow the employee to maintain their current job or maintain their current pay, benefits, status, etc. in an equivalent job

· Work with local legal counsel before finalizing any reassignment decision which includes a demotion

The final takeaway is job reassignments carry significant litigation and liability risks and should be an accommodation of last resort.