

As an employment attorney based in New Jersey and New York, I’ve witnessed how rapidly workplace law evolves — and in 2025, few issues have become as complex as religious freedom. Employees want to express their beliefs openly. Employers want to ensure inclusion and equality. The challenge lies in balancing those two rights without tipping too far toward either side.
Recent legal and cultural shifts have made this balance harder to maintain. Courts are expanding religious protections under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, while workplaces are becoming more diverse than ever. The question is no longer whether to accommodate religion, but how far those accommodations must go.
To understand how these tensions intersect with broader discrimination trends, it helps to look at the trend of rising discrimination complaints across industries — an issue reshaping how employers handle bias of all kinds.
Ty Hyderally, an employment lawyer with decades of experience representing both employees and employers, explains that today’s workplace religious freedom disputes hinge on balance. Federal law requires employers to accommodate employees’ sincerely held religious beliefs unless doing so causes undue hardship.
In 2025, the new standard from Groff v. DeJoy demands that employers show real, significant difficulty to deny requests — ensuring both faith and fairness coexist at work.
Ty Hyderally is a respected employment law attorney based in Montclair, New Jersey. He is the principal of Hyderally & Associates, a law firm focused on employment-related legal matters such as:
With decades of experience in representing both employees and employers, Mr. Hyderally is frequently sought out for his deep understanding of New Jersey labor law, including his perspective on the rising number of workplace discrimination complaints.
Title VII prohibits discrimination based on religion and requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations unless they cause undue hardship.
That hardship threshold changed after the 2023 Supreme Court case Groff v. DeJoy, which raised the bar for employers. Minor inconvenience is no longer enough; companies must show meaningful business impact to reject a request.
Religious protections now apply broadly — not only to organized faiths but also to moral or ethical beliefs sincerely held. Courts increasingly focus on sincerity rather than affiliation.
| Issue Type | Example | Outcome Trend |
| Religious attire | Wearing a hijab or turban | Accommodation typically granted |
| Work schedules | Sabbath observance | Flexible scheduling encouraged |
| Religious symbols | Displaying scripture or jewelry | Context-based decisions |
As I tell clients, sincerity matters more than denomination. The law recognizes that faith takes many forms — and employers must do the same.
For additional context on how religious claims connect to broader bias cases, you can explore recognizing and proving workplace discrimination under federal and state law.
Recent federal actions have emphasized the right to religious expression in the workplace. In 2025, new executive orders and EEOC initiatives prioritized protecting religious employees, particularly in federal and public-sector jobs.
However, these moves have also reignited tension with workplace inclusion efforts. Some diversity advocates worry that stronger religious protections could be used to justify exclusionary behavior.
| Challenge Area | Employee Rights | Employer Risks |
| Religious attire | Must be accommodated | Potential bias claims if denied |
| Pronoun policies | Must balance both rights | Hostile environment risk |
| DEI objections | Must consider sincerity | Morale and compliance impact |
Ty Hyderally, a New Jersey workplace discrimination attorney, observes that this isn’t about taking sides — it’s about balance. The law protects belief, but not bias.
Requests range from modest to complex:
Under the new legal standard, employers must explore these options unless they present significant operational strain.
Can religious expression at work become harassment?
Religious expression crosses into misconduct when it targets or excludes others.
Examples include pressuring colleagues to share beliefs or citing faith to criticize protected groups.
Organizations must now review their DEI programs, handbooks, and social media guidelines to ensure fairness on all fronts.
Employment attorney Ty Hyderally recommends consistency and documentation — every request and decision should be handled the same way to reduce claims of favoritism.
Employees have clear protections under federal law. You have the right to practice your religion and request reasonable accommodations without retaliation.
| Step | Action | Timeframe |
| 1 | Submit written accommodation request to HR or management | As soon as conflict arises |
| 2 | Employer reviews and responds | Reasonable timeframe |
| 3 | File an EEOC complaint if denied | Within 180–300 days of last incident |
“Documentation tells your story better than memory ever could,” says employment lawyer Ty Hyderally.
If an employer denies your request, ask for the reason in writing. If you believe discrimination occurred, you can file a complaint with the EEOC or your state civil rights agency.
Employers should approach accommodation requests with openness, not defensiveness.
Managers often make snap judgments that create liability. Training should include:
| Step | Action for Employers |
| 1 | Listen and acknowledge the request respectfully. |
| 2 | Gather facts about the belief or practice. |
| 3 | Explore reasonable alternatives together. |
| 4 | Document every discussion and decision. |
Ty Hyderally advises: “Employers who document and communicate clearly almost always avoid litigation.”
Each example reinforces a consistent message: communication is cheaper — and fairer — than litigation.
Faith is protected; discrimination is not. That’s where many workplaces struggle.
If an employee uses religion to justify hostility toward others — for example, refusing to work with LGBTQ+ colleagues or sharing offensive content — it may constitute harassment. Employers have a duty to intervene even if the behavior stems from sincere belief.
The EEOC is clear: accommodation cannot create a hostile environment. Balancing respect for belief with respect for dignity is the heart of the modern workplace.
This challenge isn’t unique to the United States.
Employment lawyer Ty Hyderally predicts religious conflicts will rise as workplaces grow more multicultural. But he also believes education and empathy can transform tension into understanding.
“The best workplaces,” says Ty Hyderally, “treat belief and identity as parts of the same conversation — not opposing sides.”
“Religious freedom and equality aren’t enemies,” I tell my clients. “They’re partners in creating workplaces where everyone belongs.”
The new legal environment challenges both employers and employees to communicate better. Faith should be seen as part of identity, not as an obstacle to it.
In 2025 and beyond, employment attorney Ty Hyderally encourages workplaces to embrace transparency, dialogue, and fairness. When employees feel heard — and employers act with empathy — the tension between religion and rights gives way to trust.
Because in the end, the goal isn’t winning a legal argument. It’s building a workplace that honors both belief and belonging.