Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison Et Al.

• 1976 • 432 U.S. 63 • Burger Court
In the case of Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison et al., 1976, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Trans World Airlines (TWA). The dispute arose when Larry G. Hardison, an employee at TWA and a member of the Worldwide Church of God, was fired for refusing to work on Saturdays due to his religious beliefs. He filed a lawsuit against TWA and his union claiming they failed to accommodate his religious practices as required by Title VII Civil Rights Act which prohibits employment...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Burger Court
Term: 1976
Docket: 75-1126
432 U.S. 63
97 S. Ct. 2264
53 L. Ed. 2d 113
1977 U.S. LEXIS 115
Argued: Mar 30, 1977

Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison Et Al.

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison et al., 1976, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Trans World Airlines (TWA). The dispute arose when Larry G. Hardison, an employee at TWA and a member of the Worldwide Church of God, was fired for refusing to work on Saturdays due to his religious beliefs. He filed a lawsuit against TWA and his union claiming they failed to accommodate his religious practices as required by Title VII Civil Rights Act which prohibits employment discrimination based on religion among other things. The court held that employers are not obligated under Title VII to make accommodations for employees' religious practices if doing so would result in more than "de minimis" cost or burden - meaning minimal or negligible - to their business operations. In this case, accommodating Hardison's request would have involved additional costs such as paying premium wages for another worker or violating seniority provisions in collective bargaining agreements with unions; hence it was deemed more than de minimis.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for TRANS WORLD AIRLINES, INC. v. HARDISON et al., Justice Marshall argued that the majority misinterpreted Title VII's requirement of an employer to make reasonable accommodations for an employee's religious practices. He contended that TWA had not made sufficient efforts to accommodate Hardison’s religious needs and instead placed undue hardship on him by requiring him to work on his Sabbath day against his beliefs. The company could have sought volunteers or paid overtime as alternatives but chose not to do so, which according to Marshall was a violation of Title VII provisions. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority’s interpretation of “undue hardship,” arguing it should be seen in terms of more than just monetary considerations; rather it should also include factors such as impact on co-workers or disruption of operations.

Opinion written by Justice BRWhite
Decided: Jun 16, 1977
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms