Kaite v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review
175 A.3d 1132
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2017Background
- Bonnie F. Kaite worked for Altoona Student Transportation since 2001 and was suspended in December 2015 for refusing a mandatory fingerprint background check required by a 2015 statutory/regulatory change.
- Kaite refused fingerprinting on the ground that it violated sincerely held religious beliefs (belief that markings on hands/head — e.g., fingerprints — are the “mark of the devil” and would bar her from Heaven) but said she would accept any alternative background check.
- Employer enforced the fingerprint rule; Kaite filed for unemployment compensation (UC) and the UC Service Center denied benefits under Section 402(e) (willful misconduct). A Referee and then the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) affirmed the denial.
- The Board found Kaite’s claim not credible and characterized her beliefs as personal rather than religious, concluding she lacked good cause for violating the employer’s rule.
- Kaite appealed to the Commonwealth Court, which reversed the Board, holding Kaite’s beliefs are religious and protected by the Free Exercise Clause and that denying benefits for refusing to violate sincerely held religious beliefs improperly burdens religious exercise.
Issues
| Issue | Kaite’s Argument | Board/Employer’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Whether Kaite had good cause to violate employer’s fingerprint rule | Kaite: refusal grounded in sincerely held religious belief; good cause for noncompliance | Employer/Board: rule established and violated; refusal not excused | Court: Kaite had good cause; denying benefits imposed a burden on free exercise |
| 2. Whether denial violated Free Exercise Clause | Kaite: forcing choice between faith and benefits penalizes religion (Sherbert) | Board: enforcement of work rule justified denial under UC statute | Court: denial violated Free Exercise by conditioning benefits on abandoning religious belief |
| 3. Whether Kaite’s beliefs are religious or merely personal | Kaite: beliefs are religious (Christian Evangelist home teaching), formality not required | Board: beliefs are personal; she’s not a member of a recognized/organized religion | Court: beliefs are religious in Kaite’s scheme; Board erred in requiring formal affiliation |
| 4. Whether Board’s factual finding that beliefs were personal is supported by substantial evidence | Kaite: testimony showed biblically rooted, sincere beliefs; accommodated other checks | Board: credibility finding supported denial | Court: Board misapplied law; sincerity not reasonably disputed and characterization as personal was error |
| 5. Whether Board erred by not accommodating alternatives to fingerprinting | Kaite: willing to accept alternatives; no accommodation offered | Board/Employer: enforced statutory fingerprinting requirement | Court: absence of offered alternatives and burden on religious exercise renders denial improper |
Key Cases Cited
- Emery Worldwide v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 540 A.2d 988 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (scope of review principles)
- Lee Hospital v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 589 A.2d 297 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (willful misconduct is question of law)
- Oliver v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 5 A.3d 432 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (burden shifts to claimant to prove good cause once rule and violation shown)
- Cassatt v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 642 A.2d 657 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (denial of benefits imposes burden on religion when it forces violation of religious conduct)
- Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 420 A.2d 47 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (absence for religious observance can constitute good cause)
- Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (U.S.) (conditioning benefits on abandoning religious practice burdens Free Exercise)
- Frazee v. Illinois Department of Employment Security, 489 U.S. 829 (U.S.) (formal affiliation with organized religion not required to invoke Free Exercise protection)
- Monroe v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 535 A.2d 1222 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (beliefs must be sincerely held and religious in claimant’s scheme)
- U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Consol Energy, Inc., 860 F.3d 131 (4th Cir.) (sincerity, not plausibility or clergy agreement, governs protection for religious objection to biometric scans)