EEOC sues Blue Bell Creameries over Sylacauga employee’s religious accommodation firing

SYLACAUGA, Ala. (WBRC) - The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has filed a lawsuit against Blue Bell Creameries, claiming a Jewish employee at the company’s Sylacauga production facility was unlawfully fired after he requested a religious accommodation.

The EEOC is filing the federal lawsuit on behalf of the employee, who alleges he was treated differently and retaliated against because of his religion.

According to the lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, the employee worked as a body shop technician refurbishing fiberglass vehicle parts. The company says that role requires a fully sealing respirator, which it claims is incompatible with certain facial hair.

Blue Bell held a respirator training and mask fit test for the department on Feb. 10, 2025. The employee was on leave and did not attend. The lawsuit alleges that none of the coworkers who did attend were required to shave their beards afterward, including some who had similar beards and did similar work requiring a respirator.

Because he missed that session, Blue Bell held a make-up respirator training for the employee on Feb. 12, 2025. It was at this training that he was asked to shave his beard. He refused, telling the safety coordinator leading the session that he would not do so because of his religious beliefs.

According to the lawsuit, the safety coordinator told the employee it did not matter that he is Jewish, that he would have to shave anyway “since the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) was ‘above that,’” and made air quotes with his fingers when he said the employee was “Jewish,” which the employee took as a sign the coordinator didn’t believe he was actually Jewish.

About two weeks later, on Feb. 28, the employee met with the fleet manager and plant manager.

The employee claims the plant manager said his refusal to shave his beard “caused a big issue and/or big problem” and that the company attorney said a mask should be ordered to fit over his beard.

Blue Bell terminated the employee on March 7, 2025, citing “theft of company time.” According to timecards cited in the lawsuit, the employee left his duty station twice the day before without clocking out, once for 18 minutes to bring back breakfast for coworkers, and again for seven minutes to drop off food to his son, who lived a few blocks from the worksite.

The lawsuit alleges that briefly leaving the premises on the clock, including breakfast runs for the work group, was common practice in the fleet maintenance department, and that the fleet manager knew about it. The suit claims that before the employee’s termination, the fleet manager had verbally admonished another body shop technician for the same kind of conduct but did not fire him.

The EEOC argues Blue Bell’s stated reason for the firing was pretext for religious discrimination and retaliation.

The agency points to the timeline, noting the employee was terminated within a month of refusing the accommodation request, and to what the lawsuit calls a “convincing mosaic of circumstantial evidence” of discriminatory intent, including the fleet manager’s repeated questioning of whether the employee was really Jewish.

Before filing suit, the EEOC said it found reasonable cause to believe Title VII was violated, issuing Blue Bell a Letter of Determination on May 19, 2026, and inviting the company to resolve the matter through conciliation.

After the company and the agency could not reach an acceptable agreement, the EEOC issued a Notice of Failure of Conciliation on July 8, 2026, clearing the way for the lawsuit filed Sept. 18, 2026.

Acting EEOC Birmingham District Director Linda Sales-Long added, “Employees should never be penalized for seeking accommodation of their religious beliefs and practices. The EEOC remains steadfast in ensuring that workers’ religious beliefs are respected with the full dignity and protection guaranteed by Title VII.”

The lawsuit seeks a permanent injunction barring further religious discrimination or retaliation, policy changes at Blue Bell, reinstatement of the employee, back pay, compensatory and punitive damages, and a jury trial.

WBRC reached out to Blue Bell for comment. Read their full statement below.

Get news alerts in the Apple App Store and Google Play Store or subscribe to our email newsletter here.