Publix Super Market, Inc. agreed to pay $50,000 to settle a religious accommodation discrimination lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the federal agency announced Tuesday.
According to EEOC’s lawsuit, Publix violated federal law when it made an offer of employment to an applicant, a member of the Rastafarian religious sect, at a Publix store location in Nashville and then asked the applicant whether he was withdrawing his application after he refused to cut his hair to meet Publix’s grooming policy. The applicant, who wears dreadlocks as part of his sincerely held Rastafarian religious belief, requested a religious accommodation that Publix allow him to continue to wear his dreadlocks without cutting them. Because Publix denied the applicant’s request for a religious accommodation, the applicant chose not to work for Publix.
Publix's alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bans religious discrimination in the workplace. The EEOC filed suit in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division, (Civil Action No.3:17cv1308), on Sept. 27, 2017 after attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process.
In addition to the monetary relief, the two-year consent decree, entered by Judge Eli Richardson, requires, amongst other things, Publix to consider applicants’ requests for religious accommodations; reasonably accommodate qualified employees or applicants whose religious beliefs conflict with Publix’s Grooming Standards; and to distribute and provide training on Publix's non-discrimination and religious-accommodation policy to all human resource employees, managers, supervisors at Publix Store 12 in Nashville.
“Employers must consider an applicant’s sincerely held religious belief and not judge the merits of a particular religion when deciding whether to provide a religious accommodation,” said Faye Williams, regional attorney of the EEOC’s Memphis District Office. “Going forward, Publix will not only consider requests for reasonable religious accommodation but will conduct training sessions for its managers and supervisors to ensure they know about Title VII and its requirements.”
Edmond Sims, acting district director of the Memphis District Office, said, “The Memphis District Office is pleased with the outcome of this case. It sends a clear message to employers that they should not require applicants and employees to choose between gainful employment and their religious beliefs.”