The ‘reasonable accommodation’ of religion: Is this a better way of advancing equality in cases of religious discrimination?

Abstract

Freedom of religion and the manifestation of religious belief can clash with working life in a number of ways, including time away from work for religious observance, conflicts over religious clothing and jewellery in an employer's dress code or a request for a variation of duties based on a particular religious belief. Guidance issued by the Equality and Human Rights Commission following Eweida and others v. UK [2013] 57 EHRR 8 seems to suggest that employers in Great Britain should consider the 'reasonable accommodation' of religion in the workplace and, in particular, how an individual chooses to manifest that religious belief. Subsequently, there has been much debate about whether this is a better way of dealing with religious discrimination cases than the current complex legal framework of direct and indirect discrimination in the Equality Act 2010. Section 20 of the Equality Act 2010 already allows for reasonable adjustments to be made to working practices and the physical working environment for disabled employees. Should this duty be expanded to include religion and what would be the consequences and impact of such an accommodation or adjustment on the employment relationship?

A practical response to ableism in leadership in UK higher education

“…Disability is the only protected characteristic in the Equality Act 2010 subject to a reasonable adjustment duty, although there has been much academic debate about whether other characteristics would also benefit from such a duty (there are discussions about religion in particular: see Vickers 2010;Gibson 2013;Griffiths 2016). As a result of this unique treatment, those with a disability are sometimes viewed as being treated more favourably than others without a disability, or it can seem that there is some kind of positive discrimination at work.…”

Accommodating Religious Practices in the Workplace: The Case of Indonesian Workers in Taiwan

“…The other factor is wider acceptance that workforce diversity is not only ethically correct, but also economically beneficial. Griffiths (2016), for instance, argues that accommodating the employees" religious needs in the workplace can improve important company goals; "employees" well-being, a company"s public image and help with the recruitment and retention of staff". The other scholars point out that the issue of generational differences has a significant impact on the religiosity in the workplace.…”