This is part of a series of articles by Wright Lindsey Jennings’ labor and employment team examining key trends for employers and the workplace in 2025, authored by attorney Daveante Jones. The series was featured in Arkansas Business. 

Due to some recent legal changes, employers should ensure their process for determining whether an employee can be reasonably accommodated — or if it would be an undue hardship on the company — is up to date.

Religious Accommodations in the Wake of Groff v. DeJoy

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides employees with a right to religious accommodation absent undue hardship. The Supreme Court’s decision in Groff v. DeJoy in June 2023 modified what constitutes an “undue hardship.” Specifically, employers must now demonstrate that the burden of granting an accommodation would result in substantial increased costs in relation to the conduct of its particular business.

A number of federal courts have examined what “substantial increased costs” means when handling religious objections to COVID-19 vaccine mandates, mandatory civil rights training/policies related to LGBTQ+ individuals, and schedule and uniform policy accommodation requests.

Some common takeaways include:

• Exploring multiple alternatives is key when determining whether an employee’s religious practice or observance can be accommodated. 
• Incurring temporary or administrative costs or having to institute voluntary or occasional shift swapping is likely not “substantial” enough to constitute an undue hardship.
• Articulating concrete financial harm (e.g., the business will sustain X amount of dollars in additional costs to provide this accommodation) rather than speculating unascertained or a hypothetical chance of increased costs is critical. 
• Finally, non-monetary considerations such as impacts to coworkers’ legal rights are paramount in determining whether granting an accommodation will cause an undue hardship when reviewing objections to vaccine mandates and mandatory civil rights training/policies. 

This amount of legwork was not necessary under the old standard a lot of times.  

Expanded Accommodation Rights for Pregnant Employees

In June 2023, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) expanded rights for pregnant employees, with implementation regulations issued in June 2024. Generally, the PWFA requires employers to provide reasonable accommodation to a qualified employee’s or applicant’s known limitations related to, affected by, or arising out of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, absent undue hardship on the operation of the business. If it sounds familiar, PWFA drafters intentionally drew specific terms from Title VII and the ADA like “reasonable accommodation,” “interactive process,” and “undue hardship” to aid in understanding the new law.

While the PWFA generally tracks Title VII and the ADA, there are some differences. One difference is that a reasonable accommodation must be provided for a “known limitation.” Put another way, there is no threshold level of severity required to trigger the obligation to consider providing a reasonable accommodation. This means some accommodations will be pretty straight forward like allowing an employee to carry or keep drink and snacks near, to take more frequent restroom and snack breaks, or to sit instead of stand when needed. Another difference is a tweak to the ADA’s requirement for a qualified employee to be able to perform the essential functions of a job. That is not the case under the PWFA. Under the PWFA, temporarily suspending one or more essential functions of a job may be a reasonable accommodation.

Continuing Impact of Medical Marijuana

Most states have legalized the use of medical marijuana for certain qualifying health conditions in some form. Many qualifying conditions meet the definition of a disability under the ADA. This leaves employers having to balance their need to provide a safe workplace with their potential obligation to accommodate employees’ use of medical marijuana or the underlying disability that has necessitated that use. 

States like Arkansas, Illinois, Missouri, and Oklahoma prohibit discrimination in the hiring, discipline, and firing of employees based solely on their status as a certified medical marijuana user in some way. For more dangerous or safety-sensitive positions, however, some of these states provide an exception that allows employers to prohibit certified medical marijuana users from working in those positions. This exception may look simple on its face but learning of an applicant’s or employee’s use of medical marijuana due to an underlying health condition may trigger the duty to engage in the interactive process under the ADA to explore whether the individual needs an accommodation. 

Takeaways to Fine-Tune the Accommodation Process

Accommodation requests must be handled case-by-case. This can be overwhelming at times.

Here are some tips to help fine-tune the process:  

• Review job descriptions to verify all duties are accurate and identify the essential job functions that will factor into exploring potential accommodations.
• Train management on how to recognize situations that implicate the company’s duty to engage in the interactive process.
• Put in place a written accommodation policy that names points of contact for employees to speak with regarding potential accommodation options.
• Draft communications to aid in gathering relevant information from employees or employees’ healthcare providers.
• Examine operational costs related to staffing and production that may result from redistributing duties in order to modify an employee’s schedule or responsibilities.
• Establish tracking procedures to make sure accommodation requests are being handled consistently and granted accommodations are being implemented correctly. 

Taking these steps will not only ensure legal compliance but will also hopefully lead to a workplace where employees feel cared for and want to stay.