The employees objected to LAUSD’s COVID‑19 vaccination requirement based on sincerely held religious beliefs and proposed alternative measures to continue working safely, including testing and schedule or work‑assignment adjustments (and, where feasible, remote work). They contend the District applied a categorical rule that foreclosed any meaningful, individualized consideration of those alternatives and that they experienced hostility after raising religious objections, culminating in adverse employment action.
After the Los Angeles Superior Court entered summary judgment for LAUSD, the employees appealed. The appeal asks whether an employer may enforce a uniform vaccination policy without individualized evaluation of proposed religious accommodations, and whether the surrounding conduct and communications can support claims for discrimination, harassment, and retaliation under FEHA.
Status: Pending appeal in the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District (No. B340852).