![]() ![]() Employers should, therefore, ordinarily assume that an employee’s religious accommodation request is based on a sincerely held religious belief.Īn exception to this assumption exists, however, if an employer is aware of objective facts that question the sincerity of an employee’s claimed belief. ![]() While federal and local law may differ regarding legally-protected religious practices, the EEOC guidance defines religion broadly and protects beliefs and practices with which employers may be unfamiliar. The EEOC guidance concerning religious objections to mandatory vaccination directs employers to provide a reasonable accommodation for employees with sincerely held religious beliefs, practices, or observances that prevent an employee from taking a Covid-19 vaccine unless an accommodation poses an undue hardship to the employer.īefore an employer balances a religious accommodation against the undue hardship to the workplace (such as implementing mask-wearing, social distancing, or alternative working conditions), the employer must first ascertain if the employee’s religious objection is, indeed, a sincerely held belief. Legal Contours of Religious Objections to Vaccination Medical exemptions are subject to objective documentation from health care providers (who may risk penalties for failing to adhere to accepted medical practices), but there is no readily verifiable basis to determine whether an employee’s religious objections to mandatory vaccinations are sincere and subject to workplace accommodation. Legal exemptions from mandatory vaccination include medical exemptions under the Americans with Disabilities Act and exemptions based on sincerely held religious beliefs pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (and equivalent state laws for both federal statutes). See publications for additional data sources.Employers implementing mandatory Covid-19 vaccination programs must manage, and in some cases accommodate, exemption requests.National, State, and Local Area Vaccination Coverage Among Children Aged 19-35 Months - United States, 2012. Factors associated with refusal of childhood vaccines among parents of school-aged children. Salmon DA, Moulton LH, Omer SB, DeHart MP, Stokley S, Halsey NA.Additionally, over the past several years, vaccination coverage measured using data from the National Immunization Survey indicate that <1% of children 19–35 months received no vaccines of any type. A study of schoolchildren with nonmedical exemptions found that 75% of these children had received at least one vaccine previously. Based on available information, we believe parents refusing all vaccines for their children is an uncommon occurrence. The parent refused all vaccines for their child.The parent refused a specific vaccine series for their child. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |