The issue is whether Faith+1 can invoke a successful BFOQ defense. In order for Faith+1 to be success invoking a BFOQ defense, Faith+1 must demonstrate a compelling need to have a discriminatory practice. Vigars, 805 F.Supp. at 808. In Vigars, the employer argued, being pregnant out of wedlock was detrimental to the employer because the plaintiff was a role model to the girls at the school. Id. The court held, the defendant’s role model reasoning wasn’t sufficient enough to invoke a BFOQ defense because the employee’s job must depend upon the discriminatory practice. Id.
Faith+1 will argue, Evee being a mentor and a role model to youth volunteers shows a compelling need to discriminate because not being with a new born for the majority