Supreme Court hears religious holiday case

Freedom of religion meets the expanded workweek

Religious liberty was back at the Supreme Court on Tuesday as the justices heard arguments on the case of a postal worker who felt that working on Sunday violated his religious beliefs. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court after a lower court had ruled against the worker, saying that accommodating him would place an “undue burden” on the Postal Service.

Gerald Groff, the plaintiff in Groff v. DeJoy, began working as a rural carrier for the US Postal Service in 2012. Groff is an evangelical Protestant who believes that Sunday is a holy day of rest. (The facts of the case are online here in the lower court ruling.)

Photo by Anna Sullivan on Unsplash

That was fine until 2013 when the USPS contracted with Amazon to begin Sunday deliveries. By 2015, the service had been expanded to Quarryville, Pennsylvania where Groff worked. Groff informed his manager of his inability to work Sundays due to his religious beliefs and was originally allowed to cover other shifts throughout the week in exchange for not being assigned to work Sundays.

That was fine until May 2016 when the USPS signed an agreement with the National Rural Letter Carriers Association that allowed only two reasons for exempting employees from Sunday work. The deal required that employees either request leave or exceed the 40-hour weekly limit by working Sunday. Even then, the Postal Service tried to work with Groff. They moved him to a smaller post office in Holtwood, Pa. that did not do Amazon deliveries.

That was fine until 2017 when Holtwood began to do the Sunday deliveries. Initially, the postmaster there tried to accommodate Groff by allowing him to either take another day off work as a day of worship or come in on Sunday after church. Groff was also allowed to be excused from Sunday work if a replacement carrier could be found.

Problems arose when Groff was scheduled to work on Sunday and simply did not show up. In 2017 and 2018, Groff missed his Sunday work assignments at least 24 times. Groff was administratively punished for his absences and other workers, who had to work more weekends because of Groff’s absenteeism, began to complain and resent his behavior, but he was apparently never singled out for his religion. Ultimately, Groff resigned on January 18, 2019, and filed suit for disparate treatment and failure to accommodate his religious beliefs.

A federal court in Pennsylvania ruled against Groff and dismissed his case. The court found that the USPS did not discriminate against Groff when it disciplined him for refusing to work on Sunday. The lower court also said that a conflict did not have to completely rectify a conflict to accommodate religious employees, especially when doing so would place an undue hardship on the company. This ruling was upheld by the US Court of Appeals in a 2-1 ruling.

As the district court judge noted in his ruling, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, “a sufficient religious accommodation need not be the 'most' reasonable one (in the employee's view), it need not be the one that the employee suggests or prefers, and it need not be the one that least burdens the employee (Shelton v. Univ. of Med. & Dentistry of NJ).”

Further the judge also noted that the agreement between the Rural Carriers Asssociation and the Postal Service was collective bargaining agreement and one that did not permit Groff’s schedule to be adjusted to his liking. Scheduling Groff for no Sundays would create a hardship by violating the agreement in addition to many other hardships including short-staffing and morale issues.

At the Supreme Court, the justices seemed sympathetic to Groff. CNN reports that Justice Alito seemed ready to rule for Groff, but Justices Barrett and Kavanaugh seemed concerned about the morale and scheduling problems that would placed on the Postal Service if the company had to agree to Groff’s demands.

I am sure that Groff’s religious beliefs are deeply and sincerely held, but I don’t believe that he has been reasonable. The Postal Service offered several accommodations and Groff refused them. His Sunday absenteeism put him at odds with other workers, many of whom may also have wanted to attend church or spend time with their families on Sundays.

Groff says that he was treated differently because he was a Christian. I think that much is true. He was offered scheduling advantages that other workers did not receive, but that still was not enough for him.

I’m sympathetic to Groff. I’m also Christian and I like to attend church on Sunday. Nevertheless, I realize that in the modern world, many jobs require work on the weekends. If not working weekends was my top priority, I could find another job.

Groff’s situation is a bit different since he originally did not have to work Sundays. His job requirements changed, which is something that many of us experience. Still, his employer did make good faith attempts to work with Groff, who refused to meet the Postal Service halfway.

As friendly as the Court is to religious freedom, I really can’t imagine that they will rule in favor of Groff. The upheaval that would be created by allowing employees to pick their favorite holy day of the weekend not to work would simply be too great.

Would businesses be required to offer all practicing Christians Sundays off? How about Saturday for Jews and Friday for Muslims? Are we to expect private employers to classify and schedule their employees by religion? Could we get a three-day weekend for ecumenical worship?

The Supreme Court’s current term ends in June and we should have a decision on the case by then. If I was Gerald Groff, I wouldn’t hold my breath.

MAGA GROOMER: Ali Alexander, an organizer of the Stop the Steal rally back in 2021 and a member of Donald Trump’s inner circle admitted to sending “inappropriate messages” that reportedly involved nude photos of underage boys. Alert the QAnon pedophile patrol.

FOX SETTLEMENT: Fox News reached a settlement with Dominion Voting Systems in the defamation lawsuit relating to Fox’s stolen election claims. Fox will pay $787.5 million but reportedly does not have to admit to wrongdoing on the air. Steve Berman gave his thoughts on the settlement this morning.

BUD LIGHT UPDATE: The Great Bud Light Boycott hit a snag after it was realized that Anheuser Busch is a major Republican donor. Republicans are split over whether to forgive Bud Light’s indiscretion.