Employment Litigation · Primary-source case analysis

Groff: A New Hardship Inquiry Required Remand, Not an Automatic Employee Victory

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published September 12, 2026 · Updated October 17, 2026

Decision: Groff v. DeJoy, 600 U.S. 447 (2023).

Groff v. DeJoy arose from a postal employee’s request not to work on Sundays for religious reasons and clarified the employer’s undue-hardship defense under Title VII.

The wrong threshold affected the summary judgment

The district court granted USPS summary judgment, and the Third Circuit affirmed using a more-than-de-minimis test—a threshold its precedent described as easy to pass. The Supreme Court vacated that judgment. A reader should distinguish an appellate correction of the governing test from a finding that Groff had proved every disputed fact or was entitled to damages. Groff, slip op. at 3–4 & 21.

The Court clarified Title VII rather than importing ADA law

The shorthand came from Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison, 432 U.S. 63 (1977). Groff explained that undue hardship requires substantial increased costs in relation to the particular business, considering the accommodation’s practical effects and the employer’s nature, size, and operating costs. It declined both a wholesale importation of ADA case law and blanket approval of existing EEOC interpretations. Similar words in another accommodation statute are not a substitute for reading Title VII’s test. Groff, slip op. at 16–19.

Rejecting one option did not end the accommodation inquiry

Title VII requires reasonable accommodation, not simply a verdict on the employee’s first proposal. The Court said an employer could not stop after concluding that forcing coworkers to work overtime would be a hardship; it also had to consider other options, such as voluntary shift swapping. A file should show what alternatives were actually explored, the operational facts supporting a rejection, and which questions remain unresolved. This is not a rule requiring every suggested option to be adopted. Groff, slip op. at 20.

The lower courts still had work to do

The Court identified incentive pay and coordination with nearby stations as possibilities the earlier low threshold may have caused the lower court to dismiss too quickly. It left application of the clarified standard, and the need for further factual development, to the lower courts without foreclosing a USPS victory. Preserve the evidence underlying the original hardship decision and identify what changes when the correct test is applied. The coworker-impact analysis separately explains why hostility to religion cannot supply the defense. Groff, slip op. at 21.

Key takeaways

• Identify the legal threshold actually used in the denial and judgment.
• Compare the requested option with alternatives genuinely considered.
• Keep business-size, coverage, and cost evidence tied to the actual proposal.
• A corrected standard and remand do not establish automatic liability.