Supreme Court Raises the Bar for Denying Religious Accommodations in Groff v. DeJoy

What Changed

On June 29, 2023, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling in Groff v. DeJoy, Postmaster General that significantly raises the standard employers must meet to deny a workplace religious accommodation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The Court held that the "undue hardship" standard — which determines whether an employer is required to provide a religious accommodation — means "substantial increased costs in relation to the conduct of its particular business." This replaces the decades-old interpretation from Trans World Airlines v. Hardison (1977), which held that anything more than a "de minimis" (trivial) cost constituted undue hardship.

In practical terms, it is now significantly harder for employers to deny religious accommodation requests.

Who Is Affected

All employers covered by Title VII — generally, private employers with 15 or more employees, as well as state and local government employers, employment agencies, and labor organizations.

Key implications:

Employers must engage in a more rigorous interactive process when evaluating religious accommodation requests
A coworker's dislike of a religious expression is not sufficient to establish undue hardship
Impacts on coworkers alone are not enough unless they create corresponding effects on the conduct of the business
Employers who previously denied accommodations under the lower "de minimis" standard should reconsider those denials

Where It Applies

Nationwide. This is a U.S. Supreme Court decision interpreting federal Title VII, which applies to all covered employers across the country.

When It Takes Effect

The ruling was issued June 29, 2023, and applies immediately to all pending and future religious accommodation requests.

Why It Matters

This is a landmark shift in religious accommodation law. For nearly 50 years, employers operated under the Hardison "de minimis" standard, which made it relatively easy to deny religious accommodations by showing even minimal cost or disruption. Under the new Groff standard, employers must demonstrate that accommodating the employee would result in substantial increased costs to the business — a significantly higher bar.

The Court also clarified that:

The analysis must focus on the employer's particular business, not abstract generalizations
Requiring overtime from other employees is not automatically undue hardship — employers must explore alternatives like voluntary shift swaps
The assessment should consider the employer's size, resources, and the nature of the accommodation requested

Employers who routinely denied religious accommodations under the old standard face increased litigation risk if they do not update their approach.

The Humareso Take

This ruling changes the game for religious accommodations. If you have been applying the old "de minimis" standard — and most employers have, whether they realized it or not — you need to recalibrate. The interactive process matters more than ever now, and "it would inconvenience the schedule" is no longer going to cut it as a denial. We recommend revisiting any recently denied religious accommodation requests and making sure your managers understand that the bar has moved substantially upward.

Recommended Action Steps

Update your religious accommodation policies and procedures to reflect the new "substantial increased costs" standard from Groff v. DeJoy.
Retrain managers and HR staff on how to evaluate religious accommodation requests under the heightened standard.
Review any recently denied religious accommodation requests to determine if they should be reconsidered under the new standard.
Strengthen your interactive process for religious accommodations — document all alternatives considered and the specific business costs of each.
Update your employee handbook to reflect the employer's commitment to providing religious accommodations consistent with current law.
Contact your Humareso representative for updated religious accommodation training and policy language.