Dive Brief:
- A statistical science director at Thermo Fisher Scientific alleged the company violated his sincerely held religious beliefs by failing to accommodate his request for a 401(k) plan option that doesn’t invest in fossil fuels (Hartley v. Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.).
- According to the complaint, the worker sent a letter to the company’s accommodations team requesting the addition of a fossil fuel-free investment option to TFS’ menu of 401(k) funds. He was allegedly told his request “does not meet the criteria for a religious accommodation,” asked to close his request and told his request would be sent to the investment committee. He tried for a year to get a menu option added but the team stopped responding, per the lawsuit.
- As religious rights gain strength in the court system, the lawsuit may test Groff v. DeJoy, a U.S. Supreme Court decision that lowered the bar for workers to secure religious accommodations.
Dive Insight:
The worker, described as a committed Christian and active member of the United Methodist Church, said his faith calls him to care for and steward the earth, and that he believes it is “deeply immoral” to profit from and hold an ownership stake in fossil fuel companies that are aggravating the climate crisis.
He bolstered his argument by noting his climate-friendly personal habits, including eating a plant-based diet, bicycling almost exclusively, making banking and investment choices that avoid funding fossil fuel companies and donating a large portion of his income to environmental causes. He also registered his involvement with several environmental Christian groups.
Legal advocacy group ClientEarth, which provided attorneys for the plaintiff, said the lawsuit “could set a precedent” for those whose religious beliefs motivate their desire to fight against climate change.
“I’ve spent years trying to align my life with my beliefs, but every month I would witness my employer investing the money I’ve earned in the very climate destruction I’ve committed my life to fighting,” the plaintiff said in a ClientEarth press release. “There are many Americans who also object to this but feel they have no power to change that. I’m hopeful that as a result of this lawsuit, they soon will.”
ClientEarth said the lawsuit is aided by the 2023 Groff v. DeJoy decision, which established that employers cannot deny religious accommodation requests absent undue hardship. “Adding a single fossil-fuel-free fund to a 401(k) menu, [the plaintiff] argues, cannot clear that bar,” ClientEarth said.
After an explosion of religious accommodation requests related to vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic, workers have explored new approaches to align their sincerely held beliefs to workplace decisions and requirements. Workers have asked to be excluded from diversity-related training on the basis of their beliefs, for example. And some attorneys have said they anticipate claims related to the use of artificial intelligence, with which employees may raise religious issues.
Attorneys have generally advised caution when scrutinizing the sincerity of a worker’s beliefs, and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has noted that beliefs “need not be confined to traditional concepts of religion.” Hartley, then, may provide an early post-DeGroff case study for resistance to climate destruction in a religious framework.
Thermo Fisher Scientific told HR Dive it does not comment on pending litigation.
