Ask FELTG: Can an employee request religious accommodation if they themselves are not a member of a religion?

June 2, 2026

Ask FELTG (cont.): For example, can they request an exemption from attending a mandatory event because the event has religious undertones?

They very well could, and a case nearly three decades old provides an excellent example of how this type of request might come up, Harmon v. DOT, EEOC Req. No. 05980433 (Dec. 8, 2000).

The complainant, an Air Traffic Control Specialist, became addicted to prescription narcotics. He disclosed this to the agency, so the agency moved into an administrative position, and required him to attend a mandatory drug rehabilitation program in order to continue his employment. The rehab required attendance at Narcotics Anonymous (NA) meetings for one year.

Herein rose the issue: the complainant found the NA meetings were religious in nature, because they included “promoted praying and other religious activity,” id. at 2, and the “concept of a Higher Power,” id. at 6. The complainant was an agnostic, did not believe in the tenets of the program, and requested a comparable non-religious alternative rehabilitation program, which the agency denied.

In order to establish a prima facie case of failure by the agency to accommodate complainant’s religious beliefs or practices, a complainant must show that:

  • He has abona fide religious belief, the practice of which conflicted with an employment duty;
  • He informed the agency of this belief and conflict; and
  • The agency nevertheless enforced its requirement against complainant.

Partridge v. USPS, EEOC App. No. 01943980 (1996).

If the agency denies the accommodation the burden shifts to the agency to demonstrate that it cannot reasonably accommodate complainant without incurring undue hardship. Title VII, § 701(j); Harmon at 7; see also Groff v. DeJoy, 600 U.S. 447 (2023).

So, where did this all end up?

There was no question the complainant stateda prima facie case; even the agency’s attorney admitted as much. But, the agency disputed the complainant’s claim that the NA program was religious in nature, and that offering alternative programs would not provide effective rehabilitation and instead would cause an undue hardship. Id. at 8. However, because the agency only raised the undue hardship issue on reconsideration, and not at the hearing, the Commission did not address it.

This left the Commission needing only to address the remedy. Because the complainant did not suffer any actual injury he was not entitled to compensatory damages, but was entitled to attorney fees and costs. Id. at 3. In addition, the Commission ordered the agency to:

  • Provide alternative treatment programs for those who do not wish to participate in NA because of their religious beliefs;
  • Discontinue the practice of requiring individuals to participate should their religious beliefs conflict with the program; and
  • Ensure that future violations do not recur, in part by informing prospective NA program participants of the religious nature of the program.

Id. at 9.

Entitlement to religious accommodations (and freedom from harassment or discrimination based on religion) extend to those who do not identify with any religion. If they didn’t, many employees could be forced to participate in activities that violate their sincerely held beliefs, or treated differently simply because those beliefs do not take the form of a religion. info@feltg.com

Related training

This information is for educational purposes only and is not legal advice. Contacting FELTG does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please consult an attorney for legal advice.