The Mayo Clinic violated federal law when it refused to gran
t a security guard’s request for a reasonable religious accommodation to its mandatory COVID-19 vaccin
ation policy, and instead threatened to fire the employee, effectively forcing him to receive the vaccine and violate
his conscience and religious beliefs to save his job, the U.S. Equal Emplo
yment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit filed in Minnesota last week.
According to the EEOC’s suit, the employee requested an ac
commodation to Mayo’s vaccination policy because he was oppose
d to getting the COVID-19 vaccine based on his religious beliefs.
The employee, a security guard in a non-medical role, explained the basis of his religious beliefs, and offered that h
e would be willing to receive tests for COVID-19 and to wear a mask. However, the employer rejected his request for a religious accommodation beca
use it did not believe the employee’s religious beliefs were sincere. Faced with termination, the employee submitted to t
he vaccination policy in order to avoid being fired, the EEOC said.
Watch More Image Part 2 >>>
The clinic’s alleged conduct violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employers f
rom discriminating against employees on the basis of religion, which in
cludes failing to provide accommodations to an employee’s religious practice unless such an accommodation i
mposes an undue hardship on the conduct of the employer’s business.
The EEOC filed suit (EEOC v. Mayo Clinic, Case 0:25-cv-03066 D. Minnesota) in U.S. District Court for the District
of Minnesota after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its administrative conciliation process. Th
e EEOC seeks monetary damages, including compensatory a
nd punitive damages, and seeks injunctive relief and policy changes designed to prevent such unlawful conduct in the future.