On Monday the Supreme Court issued its decision in the Samantha Elauf/Abercrombie & Fitch case ruling in favor of Elauf. The Court held “Title VII forbids adverse employment decisions made with a forbidden motive, whether this motive derives from actual knowledge, a well-founded suspicion or merely a hunch.” Abercrombie denied Elauf employment because she wore a headscarf to her interview that Abercrombie says conflicted with its dress code. But Abercrombie did not tell Elauf of the dress code during the interview so Elauf did not know to request a religious accommodation allowing her to wear it. Abercrombie then argued that Elauf never brought it up, so Abercrombie should be off the hook. The Supreme Court found that Abercrombie at least suspected that Elauf wore the headscarf for religious reasons and it could have easily offered her the accommodation of allowing her to wear it. This case makes it clear that employers can’t just put their head in the sand when it appears an applicant may request a religious accommodation.
This is an update on Jon’s original blog post from March 2, 2015 titled We Don’t Allow Hats. You Got A Problem With That? . Click on the title to read the original post.