Such behavior violates the prohibition on religious discrimination contained in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. ![]() In its Jdecision, the Supreme Court held that an employer may not refuse to hire an applicant if the employer was motivated by avoiding the need to accommodate a religious practice. Elauf receive the monetary damages awarded to her by a jury in 2011." ![]() "We are now even more pleased to have final resolution of this case and to have Ms. "We were extremely pleased with the Supreme Court ruling in our favor, which has reinforced our longstanding efforts to enforce Title VII's prohibition against religious discrimination," said EEOC General Counsel David Lopez. The company has paid $25,670 in damages to Elauf and $18,983 in court costs. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals accepted Abercrombie's request that the court dismiss its appeal of EEOC's case against the company, as part of Abercrombie's decision to resolve EEOC's claims following the U.S. Elauf filed her charge with the EEOC in 2008. The case involved Abercrombie's refusal to hire Samantha Elauf, a Muslim, because of her religious practice of wearing a hijab. Abercrombie & Fitch, which was first filed in 2009. ![]() This represents the final resolution of EEOC v. WASHINGTON - A federal appeals court has granted Abercrombie & Fitch's request to dismiss its appeal of EEOC's successful religious discrimination suit against the company, the federal agency announced today.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |