Tech Company Agrees to $15 Million Settlement in COVID-19 Shot Bias Claim

An unidentified technology company has agreed to pay $15 million to resolve a federal investigation into alleged discrimination tied to COVID-19 shot exemption requests, according to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The matter was investigated by the EEOC’s Phoenix District Office and focused on the company’s handling of employee requests for religious accommodation during the COVID shot workplace mandate.¹

The EEOC did not file a public complaint, and the company’s identity was not disclosed as part of the resolution. The matter was resolved during the investigative phase rather than through litigation.²

Employees Denied Accommodations

The EEOC examined whether employees who sought religious exemptions from the company’s COVID shot mandate were denied accommodation and subjected to adverse employment action. Certain employees were terminated or disciplined after requesting exemptions, while others were denied accommodation without individualized review of their requests.^{3 4}

The agency’s inquiry focused on whether the employer applied a process that functioned as a categorical denial of religious exemption requests, rather than conducting individualized assessments of accommodation requests under Title VII, which the EEOC treated as inconsistent with federal accommodation requirements.⁵

Title VII Governs Religious Accommodation

The investigation arises under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on religion and requires employers to provide reasonable accommodation for sincerely held religious beliefs, practices, or observances.⁶ Under the statute, an employer must accommodate an employee’s religious practice unless doing so would impose an undue hardship on the conduct of the employer’s business. The US Supreme Court has clarified that undue hardship requires a showing of substantial increased costs or operational burden, and not just minimal inconvenience.⁷

In the context of COVID workplace policies, federal guidance states that employers may require the controversial COVID shots, but they must evaluate religious accommodation requests individually and consider reasonable alternatives.⁸ Denying religious exemption requests without individualized review violates Title VII. Adverse action following denial of accommodation, absent undue hardship, constitutes religious discrimination.^{9 10}

According to EEOC chairperson Andrea Lucas:

There was no pandemic exception to workers’ civil rights and liberties… the EEOC is focused on accountability and delivering results for American workers.¹¹

Settlement Requires Payment and Religious Exemption Policy Changes

The settlement resolves the EEOC’s investigation and concludes the agency’s enforcement action arising from these claims.¹² The agreement includes non-monetary provisions requiring the company to revise its religious accommodation procedures and provide training to personnel responsible for reviewing religious exemption requests.¹³ The $15 million resolution is among the largest reported EEOC settlements involving COVID shot religious accommodation claims.¹⁴

Director of the EEOC’s office in Phoenix Melinda Caraballo said:

We are pleased we were able to reach a resolution of this matter. The company’s agreement to review and revise its equal employment opportunity policies and report these changes to the EEOC are important steps in ensuring a workplace free of discrimination.¹⁵

Company Identity Remains A Mystery

The EEOC did not identify the company involved in the settlement, as part of the negotiated resolution. The agency has not publicly explained the basis for withholding the company’s identity.¹⁶

Because the matter was resolved during the investigative phase without filing a complaint, there is no public pleading, evidentiary record, or judicial ruling addressing the alleged conduct. The only details available come from the EEOC’s description of the investigation and the terms of settlement.¹⁷ The settlement reflects the EEOC’s enforcement position, but it is not a court ruling and does not establish liability or interpret Title VII as applied to these facts.¹⁸

Enforcement Activity Following COVID-19 Shot Workplace Mandates

EEOC investigations following COVID shot workplace policies have focused on employers who denied requests for religious exemption from COVID shot requirements and then imposed discipline, including termination, on employees who did not comply with mandates. EEOC guidance states that employers may require COVID shots but must evaluate requests for religious accommodation and may deny those requests only upon a showing of undue hardship.¹⁹

EEOC enforcement in this area has also addressed employers who denied religious exemptions and imposed discipline after employees refused COVID shots. In one action, a health care system agreed to pay more than $1 million to resolve claims that employees were denied religious accommodations and either terminated or required to pay a surcharge on health insurance if they remained unvaccinated.²⁰

In another case, The University of Tennessee-Battelle paid in excess of 2.8 million to settle an allegation that the University denied a COVID shot exemption to an employee, who had previously received an exemption to the influenza vaccine requirement.²¹

This resolution reflects the EEOC’s focus on whether the employer conducted an individualized assessment of religious accommodation requests and whether punitive employment action followed the denial of those requests.²²

If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.