interoffice memorandum to: | Richey Richman, CEO | from: | Elementary division manager | subject: | employee’s claim of constructive discharge | date: | June 10, 2013 | | |
Constructive discharge is when an employee feels he or she has been forced to resign or quit their job because the employer has made their working conditions intolerable to a point that any reasonable person would have also resign or quit. The employee does not have to explain why they were forced to quit or resign.
In cases where religion is sited, he or she may think, or feel, they must quit or resign because of a conflict with their religious beliefs, and being able to perform their job to managements expected levels.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, volume 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a) (1); states in pertinent part:
(a) Employer practices
It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer -
(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; or
This section of the US code prohibits discrimination against a person based on their religious beliefs and/or convictions. Also, Title VII requires an employer to provide reasonable accommodation for an employee's religious practices and observances, unless doing so would cause an undue hardship to the employer. (Ross Runkel, 2013) “For example, this might require an employer to modify schedules to allow someone a day off for a holy day, or require an employer to allow the wearing of religious buttons.”
In our case, the constructive discharge claims the religious belief of the employee conflicted with our recent policy change to shift work, and discriminates against the employees believe of not working on a holy day. This employee quite after the policy took effect.
Most constructive discharge claims for religion arise from an employee’s request to be treated differently in order to accommodate their religious believes or needs, but the employer denies their request. Then the employee must show that they have met the three elements for a prima facie case for a Title VII religious accommodation claim. Those three elements are as follows: 1) The employee has a sincerely held religious belief. 2) The employee informed the employer of their belief and the conflict it created with employment conditions. 3) The employer threatened or subjected the employee to adverse employment decisions for failing to fulfill their job requirements that are in conflict with his or her religious belief.
In response to our complaint, I recommend we first, acknowledge receipt of the claim. This is an EEOC requirement. By acknowledging the receipt of the claim, we are only letting the EEOC know the name and title of the person handling the complaint for the company.
The EEOC may also offer us voluntary mediation, but in our case, I believe there is no wrong doing on the part of our company and we should not accept voluntary mediation. If for some reason you should choose to proceed with mediation, I recommend we mediate for an amount less than the anticipated cost of litigation. I do not believe our company committed any wrong doing based on the complaint. Therefore, I recommend we prepare a position statement in response to this claim, in which we document the employee’s work history, and the manner in which the employee quit. It should include how far in advance the company notified the employees of the upcoming change to our policy as well as how long our new policy was in force before the employee quit.
We should include the company’s policy on handling employee complaints. We must also include whether or not the employee followed the company’s policy for complaints. We should provide a summary of any complaints filed by the employee, and the findings of any investigation as a result of said complaints. Finally, we need to provide the written resignation letter and/or any statements the employee made during their exit interview, if one was done. We need to provide an explanation of our defense. This should include case law that supports why we believe our company had no wrong doing. My suggested response would be the following:
Our company made a decision to alter the production workers’ schedules due to an increase in sales of our product. This was the only way to way to keep up with the consumer demand. The change from M-F 8:00am to 5:00pm was changed to an around the clock 12 hour rotating shift 7 days a week. This change was made to our entire production staff, not just this employee. At no time did the employee speak with management to notify us of their religious belief, and/or request a modification to their work schedule. The employee left of their own free will.
By changing our work schedule, our company was in no way trying to force any of our employees to quit. This change affected all the production personnel, but this employee was the only one who quit.
This employee did not state their religious beliefs as their reason for leaving. Had the employee done so, we would have tried to find an accommodation that fit the employee’s beliefs, as long as it didn’t create an undue hardship for our company.
Please note the following citations from case law that supports our position:
Johnson v. Bunny Bread Co., “the plaintiff claimed that the ‘close monitoring and harsh treatment’ that he received from his supervisors formed the basis of a constructive discharge.” All other employees were treated in the same manner. The court upheld the finding that the plaintiff’s handling was not done with the intent to force him to resign. “Certainly the employer did not wish to force all of its employees to resign.”
Cooper v. Oak Rubber Company, “The employee bears the burden establishing a prima facie case, and sustains that burden by showing that he holds a sincere religious belief that conflicts with an employment requirement; that he has informed his employer of the conflict; and that he was discharged or disciplined for failing to comply with the conflicting requirement. Smith v. Pyro Mining Co., 827 F.2d of 1081, 1085 (6th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 989, 108 S.Ct. 1293, 99 L.Ed.2d 503 (1988).”
Redmond v. GAF, 1978, “The employee has the duty to inform his employer of his religious needs so that the employer has notice of the conflict”
Clearly the employee and employer have a duty to not only accommodate, but to also provide notification. In this case, the employee did not make an effort to communicate their needs to us. Therefore, we did not have a duty to accommodate the employee. This employee’s resignation was of their own free will, and not forced by the company.
Based on documentation supplied, and our supporting case law, we respectfully request the EEOC return a finding of, No Reasonable Cause.
Once the EEOC has completed their investigation, one of two determinations will be made with actions taken from that determination. 1. If a determination is found to have no reasonable cause to believe that we discriminated against the employee, the employee will receive a letter from the EEOC that dismisses the claim and notifies them of their right to file a lawsuit in federal court within 90 days from receipt of the letter. We will also receive a copy of this letter. 2. If a determination finds there is reasonable cause to believe we have discriminated against the employee, a letter of determination will be sent to both parties. The EEOC will invite us and the employee to join with the EEOC in a process call conciliation. This is an informal process seeking to resolve the issue.
If conciliation fails, the EEOC may file suit in federal court for any violations of the statutes. If the EEOC does not file suit, the employee will receive a letter with notice of their right to file suit in federal court within 90 days.

Future ways for our company to avoid legal issues around Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
I recommend our company’s management consult with human resources before making any major change that could affect the hiring or firing of employees. They should also consult before there are any changes made to the employees’ benefits, privileges, or schedules. Our company’s complaint resolution process should be reviewed, and updated, as needed, in order to prevent and/or deal with issues like this in the future. We should provide continued training to our employees, of all levels, to ensure our company is a discrimination free workplace. We should encourage an open door policy so employees of all levels may feel more secure in utilizing the recommended resolution policy within our company. Properly handling employee complaints, where they feel their rights have been violated, will cutting down on potential litigation in the future.

References
Cooper v. Oak Rubber Company, 15 F. 3d 1375 (1994).

Johnson v. Bunny Bread Co., 646 F.2d 1250 (1981).

Redmond v. GAF, 574 F.2d 897 (1978).

Ross Runkel. (2013, June 22). Law Memo First In Employement Law - Religion discrimination #24. Retrieved from www.lawmemo.com: http://www.lawmemo.com/101/2006/01/religion_discri.html

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. (n.d.).