A Process Is Not an Accommodation

You asked for a religious accommodation, and HR told you that you were welcome to apply for a transfer. That felt like an answer. It was not one.

This comes up often enough that a federal appeals court just ruled on it directly. In Cherry v. Washington Dep’t of Fish & Wildlife, five employees sought a religious exemption from a vaccine mandate and offered to mask, distance, or telework. The department responded that reassignment “remains a possibility, although opportunity may be limited,” then pointed them to an application process. When one employee actually approached the reassignment specialist, she was told there was “just nothing available.” Out of 122 reassignment requests that year, the department granted seventeen.

The Ninth Circuit reversed the lower court’s dismissal of the employees’ claims. Simply opening an application process, the court held, is not by itself a reasonable accommodation. The employer’s duty is to propose a specific, concrete option, such as a named transfer position, before the reasonableness of that option can even be discussed.

California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Gov. Code § 12940(l), imposes an independent religious-accommodation duty that runs alongside federal law, and California courts frequently look to this exact kind of reasoning when applying it. If your employer’s response to a religious accommodation request was an invitation to apply somewhere, rather than a concrete proposal, that response may not have satisfied the legal duty at all.

If “you’re welcome to apply” was the entire substance of your employer’s response to a religious accommodation request, that alone does not settle whether you were accommodated.

Contact Michael Trust Law, APC for a no-charge initial consultation. The facts determine whether you have a claim – and how much of a conversation that takes.

This post shares general information based on common patterns I see in California workplaces. It is not legal advice, does not create an attorney-client relationship, and outcomes depend on specific facts – no lawyer can guarantee a result. Past results do not guarantee or predict future outcomes. AI may have been used to create this post. All content reviewed by a CA attorney before publication.