Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
D, operates several lines of clothing stores, each with its own “style.” D imposes a Look Policy that governs its employees’ dress. The Look Policy prohibits “caps”-a term the Policy does not define-as too informal for D’s desired image. Elauf (P) is a practicing Muslim who, consistent with her understanding of her religion’s requirements, wears a headscarf. She applied for a position and was interviewed by Heather Cooke, the store’s assistant manager. Cooke gave Elauf (P) a rating that qualified her to be hired; Cooke was concerned that Elauf’s (P) headscarf would conflict with the store’s Look Policy. Cooke was told by management that it would. Cooke was told not to hire Elauf (P). The EEOC (P) sued D on Elauf’s (P) behalf, claiming a violation of Title VII. The District Court granted the EEOC (P) summary judgment on the issue of liability and awarded $20,000. The Tenth Circuit reversed and awarded D summary judgment. It held that an employer cannot be liable under Title VII for failing to accommodate a religious practice until the applicant (or employee) provides the employer with actual knowledge of his need for accommodation. Ps appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co