EEOC sues Mayo Clinic over COVID vaccine exemption denial

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has filed a federal lawsuit alleging that the Mayo Clinic illegally denied an exemption to a security guard who expressed religious objections to receiving a COVID vaccine.

In October 2021, Mayo Clinic implemented a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy for its employees. They were required to receive the vaccine by Dec. 3, 2021, unless they had a medical or religious exemption. Unvaccinated employees would be terminated unless they had received an exemption.

Cody Schultz was employed as a security guard at Mayo Clinic in Rochester when this policy was enacted. Schultz said he was a member of the Assemblies of God Church. He stated that after he contracted COVID-19 in 2020, he used his faith to guide him through the illness. He said this experience caused him to develop religious beliefs opposed to receiving the COVID vaccine.

According to the lawsuit, Schultz says the church emphasizes “divine healing.” As such, Schultz asserted that his body “is the Temple of the Holy Spirit.” He claimed that the vaccine included ingredients that were inconsistent with his religious beliefs, meaning that he could not put the ingredients in his body. To support his claim, Schultz cited a variety of biblical passages. Schultz also told Mayo Clinic that, if he were to die from the vaccine, that it would be equivalent to committing suicide and undermine his faith.

Schultz submitted an accommodation form to Mayo Clinic, claiming that his religious beliefs conflicted with taking the vaccine. He also volunteered to wear a mask and accept COVID-19 testing.

However, Mayo denied the exemption request, stating that Schultz did not meet the religious exemption criteria. Schultz restated his religious objection to taking the vaccine and submitted a request for reconsideration.

This request for reconsideration was denied, and Schultz was told that he needed to get the vaccine or face termination. Schultz received the vaccine on Dec. 1, 2021.

After attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement, the EEOC filed suit July 31 in federal district court in Minnesota. It claims that Mayo Clinic engaged in unlawful employment practices, violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by not providing Schultz a reasonable accommodation. Citing the U.S. Supreme Court case Groff v. DeJoy, the EEOC claims that Mayo Clinic did not prove that it would have suffered an undue hardship if it provided a reasonable accommodation.

The EEOC has demanded a jury trial. It seeks a permanent injunction to enjoin Mayo Clinic from denying reasonable accommodations to employees who have sincerely held religious beliefs opposed to the COVID-19 vaccination policy. It is also pursuing compensation for past and future pecuniary and nonpecuniary losses, including from apparent emotional distress that Schultz suffered. The EEOC is asking for punitive damages for “malicious and reckless conduct.”

“Employees have a right to request reasonable religious accommodations without fear of punishment or termination, including for vaccination policies,” EEOC acting Chair Andrea Lucas said in a news release. “Effectively forcing employees to submit to vaccinations against sincerely held religious beliefs can violate federal civil rights laws. The EEOC will hold employers accountable for such violations of Title VII.”

Mayo Clinic did not respond to a request for comment.

In a similar religious discrimination claim, Infinity Rehab, which has locations in 18 states including Minnesota, recently settled with the EEOC. In that case, an employee sought a religious exemption to a COVID vaccine mandate but was denied. That occupational therapist was fired, and she received a cash settlement after the EEOC intervened.