August 2003 United StatesCourt of Appeals Goldmeier v. Allstate Insurance Co.

Religion discrimination case doesn't hold a prayer

The U. S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of Allstate Insurance Company, dismissing a claim of religion discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The plaintiffs in this case were Sabbath-observant Orthodox Jews. They resigned their positions as insurance agents after the company announced plans to require offices to remain open on Friday evening and Saturday mornings.

The court held that the plaintiffs failed to make a prima facie case because they had not suffered discipline or discharge over this conflict, but instead resigned prior to the effectiveness of the new policy. Allstate wanted the new working hours to be more customer-friendly to the public. Allstate offered the plaintiffs the alternative of being open on Sunday instead of Friday evening and Saturday.

The court specifically rejected the plaintiffs' claim that the 1991 amendments to the Civil Rights Act eliminated the requirement of discharge or discipline to make out a prima facie case. The court noted that reading out of the law that discipline or discharge is required would allow a plaintiff to recover money without any actual employer detriment to the employee. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ United StatesCourt of Appeals Peterson v. Hewlett-Packard Co. Christian eye for the queer guy? Richard Peterson worked for Hewlett-Packard ("HP") for 21 years. HP began a diversity program "consisting of five posters, each showing a photograph of a HP employee above the caption 'Black,' 'Blonde,' 'Old,' 'Gay,' or 'Hispanic'." Peterson, a "devout Christian," believed homosexuality was a sin, and, in response, posted three biblical passages in his cubicle opposing homosexuality. HP attempted to compromise with Peterson, but told his supervisors, "I don't see any way that I can compromise what I am doing that would satisfy both HP and my own conscience," short of HP removing its posters, or Peterson displaying his posters. Peterson was terminated, and sued alleging religious discrimination.

Judge Reinhardt of the U. S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit affirmed summary judgment for HP. Peterson was not disparately treated because HP's goals to "eradicate discrimination against homosexuals in its workplace were entirely consistent with the goals and objectives of our civil rights statutes generally."

Finally, Peterson's claim that HP failed to accommodate his religious beliefs failed because "the only accommodation Peterson was willing to accept would have imposed undue hardship on HP." HP was not compelled to "accept the burdens that would result from allowing actions that demean, degrade, or are designed to demean or degrade members of its workforce," and Peterson's "accommodation" would "have infringed upon [HP]'s right to promote diversity and encourage tolerance and good will among its workforce."