Robinson v. Children’s Hosp. Boston — Apr. 2016 (Summary)

FLU VACCINE AND RELIGIOUS ACCOMMODATION

Robinson v. Children’s Hosp. Boston
Civil Action No. 14-10263-DJC (D. Mass. Apr. 5, 2016)

The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts granted a hospital’s motion for summary judgment on wrongful termination claims made by an administrative associate who refused to obtain a flu vaccine, in contravention of hospital policy.  The employee worked in the emergency room and was typically one of the first hospital employees to interact with patients and their family members who arrived in the emergency department.  Pursuant to hospital policy, all employees interacting with patients were required to obtain a flu vaccine, except for employees who obtained an exemption for medical reasons (because the vaccine would cause a serious health risk).

The associate objected to the vaccine on religious grounds and, when she learned that was not a viable exemption under the hospital’s policy, asserted that she was also entitled to a medical exemption due to previous bad reactions to vaccination.  The hospital gave the employee extra time to obtain the vaccination, offered to supply a vaccine made without any pork byproducts (which the employee said violated her religious beliefs), gave her time to gather medical records to support her claim for a medical exemption, and even worked with the employee to find a position where she would not interact with patients.  In the end, the employee was terminated from employment as a result of her refusal to obtain the vaccine and failure to find another position exempt from the vaccination requirement.  Though she was terminated, the hospital treated her separation as a voluntary resignation so that she would be eligible to re-apply for other hospital positions in the future, should a position open up for which she was qualified and wished to apply.

In granting summary judgment in favor of the hospital, the court reasoned that due to the associate’s position, which included close contact with many patients, it would have been an undue hardship for the hospital to accommodate her request not to be vaccinated.  Further, the court noted the many steps the hospital took to bend over backwards to accommodate the employee’s requests for religious accommodation – even though the ultimate outcome for this employee was termination.