The Mayo Clinic violated federal law when it refused to grant a security guard’s request for a reasonable religious accommodation to its mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy, and instead threatened to fire the employee, effectively forcing him to receive the vaccine and violate his conscience and religious beliefs to save his job, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit filed in Minnesota last week.
According to the EEOC’s suit, the employee requested an accommodation to Mayo’s vaccination policy because he was opposed to getting the COVID-19 vaccine based on his religious beliefs.
The employee, a security guard in a non-medical role, explained the basis of his religious beliefs, and offered that he would be willing to receive tests for COVID-19 and to wear a mask. However, the employer rejected his request for a religious accommodation because it did not believe the employee’s religious beliefs were sincere. Faced with termination, the employee submitted to the vaccination policy in order to avoid being fired, the EEOC said.
The clinic’s alleged conduct violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of religion, which includes failing to provide accommodations to an employee’s religious practice unless such an accommodation imposes an undue hardship on the conduct of the employer’s business.
The EEOC filed suit (EEOC v. Mayo Clinic, Case 0:25-cv-03066 D. Minnesota) in U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its administrative conciliation process. The EEOC seeks monetary damages, including compensatory and punitive damages, and seeks injunctive relief and policy changes designed to prevent such unlawful conduct in the future.
Source: EEOC
Topics
Lawsuits
Was this article valuable?
Here are more articles you may enjoy.
Interested in Lawsuits?
Get automatic alerts for this topic.