Update: store’s refusal to permit display of facial jewelry not unlawful

West Springfield, Mass.: despite support for her position from the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Kimberly Cloutier has failed to convince the First Circuit federal appeals court that she suffered unlawful religious discrimination when her employer, the Costco discount chain, fired her for refusing to remove or mask the jewelry in her various facial piercings. Cloutier said she was a member of the Church of Body Modification which ascribes religious significance to piercings. We covered the case Oct. 18-20, 2002. (decision, Cloutier v. Costco, Dec. 1) (via Michael Fox, Jottings By an Employer’s Lawyer, who comments). More: Appellate Law & Practice‘s apparently anonymous “S. COTUS” considers the original headline of this posting (“Update: facial jewelry not religiously protected”) misleading, since the circuit did not rule out religiously based protection for facial jewelry as a general matter but instead rested its decision on the grounds that “the only accommodation Cloutier considers reasonable would impose an undue hardship on Costco”. Headline accordingly fixed.

Tagged as: workplace