Laws $3930$

Individual Activity: Case Study $3$ Due $$ Abercrombie$$s $$Look$$ Policy

In $2008,$ Samantha Elauf, a practicing Muslim who wears a headscarf as part of her religious practice, applied

for a sales floor position at an Abercrombie and Fitch retail store in Oklahoma. During Elauf$$s interview, to

which she wore her headscarf, Elauf did not mention the fact that she was Muslim, discuss the headscarf, or

indicate that she would need an accommodation from Abercrombie$$s $$Look Policy,$$ which prohibited

employees from wearing $$caps$.$ While the interviewer gave Elauf a rating that qualified her for hire, she was

concerned that Elauf$$s headscarf was a forbidden $$cap$$ under the $$Look Policy.$$ The interviewer then

sought guidance from an Abercrombie district manager and told him that she believed Elauf wore the

headscarf because of her faith. The district manager concluded that the headscarf violated Abercrombie$$s

$$Look Policy$$ and directed that Elauf not be hired. Elauf files a claim through the EEOC against Abercrombie.

Questions for Discussion:

$1.$ What Cause$($s$)$ of Action would Elauf have against A&F$?$

$2.$ What legally recognizable defense$($s$)$ could A&F raise for the answer stated above?

$3.$ How should the Court decide, and why? Brief the case $($place the case in FIRAC format$).$

$4.$ What types of steps could A&F take to avoid similar scenarios in the future?