News & Analysis as of

Title VII › Hiring & Firing › Abercrombie & Fitch

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act is a United States federal law enacted in 1964 and aimed at preventing discrimination in the workplace on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, and religion. Title VII... more +
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act is a United States federal law enacted in 1964 and aimed at preventing discrimination in the workplace on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, and religion. Title VII has been subsequently extended to discrimination on the basis of pregnancy and sexual stereotypes and to prohibit sexual harassment. Title VII applies to all employers with fifteen or more employees including private employers, state and local governments, and educational institutions.  less -
Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Despite Abercrombie, Fifth Circuit Again Rejects Claim From Employee Fired for Refusing to Read Rosary

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on

Earlier this year in its Abercrombie decision, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that an employee suing for religious discrimination did not have to demonstrate actual knowledge of an employee’s religious practices to trigger...more

Fisher Phillips

Retailers Should Heed Supreme Court Guidance On Religion

Fisher Phillips on

Earlier this summer, the U.S. Supreme Court held that retail giant Abercrombie & Fitch committed religious discrimination by refusing to hire an applicant (EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch, read Alert here). The company believed...more

Maynard Nexsen

Supreme Court Expands Religious Discrimination Liability

Maynard Nexsen on

Most employers know that Title VII prohibits discrimination against applicants or employees based on religion. They also know that Title VII requires employers to provide reasonable, religion-based accommodations to employees...more

Laner Muchin, Ltd.

U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against Abercrombie In Headscarf Religious Accommodation Case

Laner Muchin, Ltd. on

The U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the EEOC’s lawsuit against Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., alleging that Abercrombie violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by refusing to hire a Muslim applicant, who wore a...more

Sherman & Howard L.L.C.

Supremes Say Abercrombie Not So Hip

Sherman & Howard L.L.C. on

The U.S. Supreme Court just issued its much-awaited religious discrimination decision in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch, 575 U.S. ___ (June 1, 2015) (No. 14-86). Samantha Elauf applied for a job with A&F and was denied the job...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Employer’s Motive, Not Confirmed Knowledge Of Accommodation Need, Is Basis Of Religious Accommodation Violation

Fenwick & West LLP on

Federal anti-discrimination laws (“Title VII”) prohibit an employer from refusing to hire a candidate to avoid accommodating a suspected, but unconfirmed religious practice, according to a recent United States Supreme Court...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Fenwick Employment Brief - June 2015

Fenwick & West LLP on

Employer’s Motive, Not Confirmed Knowledge Of Accommodation Need, Is Basis Of Religious Accommodation Violation - Federal anti-discrimination laws (“Title VII”) prohibit an employer from refusing to hire a candidate to...more

McGuireWoods LLP

Supreme Court Holds Employers Must Make Religious Accommodations Even Without Actual Knowledge of Need for Accommodation

McGuireWoods LLP on

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) prohibits employers from, among other things, refusing to hire an applicant because of his or her religion or religious practice. As a general rule, employers must...more

Stoel Rives LLP

U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch: It’s All About the Motive

Stoel Rives LLP on

In a case Justice Antonin Scalia described as “really easy,” the Supreme Court held that an employer can be liable for failing to accommodate a religious practice even if the employer lacks actual knowledge of a need for an...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Religious Institutions: June 2015

Holland & Knight LLP on

Religious institutions commonly make payments to or receive payments directly or indirectly from governmental agencies for services rendered; e.g., day cares that benefit from public scholarships, hospitals that participate...more

Baker Donelson

EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Continued: Did the Supreme Court Pave the Way for ADA Claims Based on Nonobvious Disabilities?

Baker Donelson on

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court decided EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch, a Title VII case involving religious discrimination. While the case did not directly involve the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Employment Law - June 2015

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP on

Actual Knowledge by Employer Not Necessary for Title VII Religious Discrimination Claim, U.S. Supreme Court Rules - Why it matters: In a closely watched case, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with a teenage applicant to...more

Mintz - Employment, Labor & Benefits...

Supreme Court Holds That Employers Do Not Need Actual Knowledge of an Applicant’s Need for a Religious Accommodation Before They...

Mintz - Employment, Labor & Benefits... on

The Supreme Court recently held that job applicants may hold their potential employer liable for intentional discrimination under Title VII if the applicant can show that his or her need for an accommodation was a motivating...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell? When It Comes to Religious Accommodation, the Supreme Court Offers Guidance (Well, Sort Of…)

Foley & Lardner LLP on

What if it looks like someone may need a religious accommodation, but the individual never asks? Does the company still have a duty to accommodate? In a much awaited opinion, the Supreme Court, in an 8-1 decision, determined...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Supreme Court Ruling Highlights Risks for Employers at Interview - Plaintiff Can Prove Title VII Claim by Showing That Employer...

Holland & Knight LLP on

The United States Supreme Court issued an 8-1 ruling in favor of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc.The Court ruled that Abercrombie violated Title VII by refusing to...more

Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP

Employment Law Reporter – June 2015

Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP on

Abercrombie & Fitch’s “Look Policy” Needs A Makeover After The Supreme Court Looked At It - The Abercrombie & Fitch clothing company is famous for their scantily clad models with six-packs and very little actual clothing...more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

EEOC V. Abercrombie’s Lesson For Employers – In 5 Minutes Or Your Money Back

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP on

In a nutshell, the Supreme Court decision in EEOC v. Abercrombie means this: if an employment decision is motivated by religion – even if the employer does not actually know the religious need of the individual – then the...more

Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel LLP

Heads or Tails? New Guidance from the Supreme Court Nearly Flips Religious Accommodations Law on Its Head

Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel LLP on

Arabic businesswoman in officeOn Monday, June 1, 2015, the United States Supreme Court held that an employer may not refuse to hire an applicant if the need for a religious accommodation was a motivating factor in the...more

McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC

Supreme Court: Motive Matters in Hiring Decisions

McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC on

Last week, in EEOC. v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., the Supreme Court addressed religious accommodations under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The background of the case dates to 2008. A young woman...more

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

Supreme Court Abercrombie & Fitch Ruling: It’s the Motive that Matters

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP on

As most lawyers and HR professionals know, on June 1, 2015, Justice Antonin Scalia authored a concise opinion, overturning the Tenth Circuit and holding that Abercrombie & Fitch had intentionally discriminated against...more

FordHarrison

Supreme Court Finds Employer's Lack of "Actual Knowledge" of Need for Accommodation No Defense to Religious Discrimination Claim

FordHarrison on

The U.S. Supreme Court recently held that an employer cannot escape liability for religious discrimination under Title VII by arguing that it did not have actual knowledge of an individual's need for a religious...more

Williams Mullen

Supreme Court Sides with EEOC in Longstanding Hijab Dispute with National Clothing Retailer

Williams Mullen on

On June 1, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the EEOC in the well-chronicled case involving a Muslim job applicant who the EEOC claimed was illegally denied employment because of her religion. In EEOC v. Abercrombie &...more

Jackson Walker

Accommodating Religious Practices in the Workplace: Time to Check Those Dress Codes

Jackson Walker on

Use of a Dress Code Gone Bad - Employers catering to the public, or relying upon in-person customer contacts to promote their businesses, have frequently established employee "dress codes" to regularize the appearance of...more

Baker Donelson

Religious Protection or Religious Preference? – Supreme Court Rules in Abercrombie Headscarf Case

Baker Donelson on

On Monday, June 1, the Supreme Court decided a religious discrimination case involving Abercrombie & Fitch and the EEOC. The Court held that "[a]n employee may not make an applicant's religious practice, confirmed or...more

Littler

What Matters is Motive: Religious Accommodation Need as a "Motivating Factor" in Employment Decisions

Littler on

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc. resulted in an expected outcome but provided an unexpectedly small amount of practical guidance for employers. ...more

39 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2
Next »

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide