Hunton Employment & Labor Perspectives

The Second Circuit has clarified that, when analyzing Title VII religious accommodation claims, the employer’s motive—not knowledge—is the central question.  In its July decision, Bergin v. New York State Unified Court System, the Second Circuit found that its longstanding three-part prima facie test was abrogated by the U.S. Supreme Court in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch.  Under the revised test, plaintiffs must now show that they (1) “actually required” a religious accommodation, (2) “the employer's desire to avoid” providing that accommodation was “a motivating factor,” and (3) an adverse employment decision.  Bergin, 2026 WL 2724974, at *1 (2026).

In other words, the Second Circuit found that motive—not knowledge—is the key inquiry in analyzing these claims.  Plaintiffs need not prove that an employer had actual knowledge of the need for an accommodation or harbored animus toward religion.  Instead, they must show that the denial was due to religion, rather than some other reason.  Consistent with Abercrombie & Fitch, the Second Circuit further acknowledged that informal religious accommodation requests may be sufficient for Title VII protections to attach.

Need to Know

• Document the "why." Because motive is central, employers should make sure that their emails and notes accurately reflect the non-discriminatory reasons behind any religious accommodation denials.  Contemporaneous, consistent reasoning is an employer’s best evidence.
• Don’t rely on technicalities. A defect in how a request was submitted may not insulate an employer from liability.
• Update your policies. Review existing accommodation policies, and update your language when appropriate.