The EEOC alleges that a Blackwell supervisor told a Muslim hiree that it was company policy that all employees be clean shaven. When the employee requested an exemption from the policy to accommodate his religious practice, Blackwell told him to shave his beard or be terminated. To avoid losing his job, the employee complied and shaved his beard. The EEOC charge and its lawsuit followed.
According to Greg Gochanour, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Chicago District Office, "Title VII requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for employees' religious practices when doing so does not impose an undue hardship on the employer’s business. The accommodation requested here was a simple one that imposed no burden on anyone, and there was no need for this employee to be forced to choose between his religion and his livelihood."
Let me put it another way — where's the harm in allowing this employee to keep his beard?
Or another way — following SCOTUS's Groff decision, an employer can only deny a religious accommodation request if the burden of granting an accommodation would result in substantial increased costs in relation to the conduct of its particular business. Blackwell's denial of beard accommodation isn't even in the same universe as "substantial increased costs."
Simply, this was an indefensible denial given the nature of the job in question and the accommodation requested.