DETROIT — In a landmark decision Friday, a federal jury in Detroit awarded over $12 million to a former employee of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, who claimed her dismissal was the result of religious discrimination after she chose not to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. The significant sum included $10 million in punitive damages, highlighting the jury’s stance on the insurer’s handling of the situation.
Lisa Domski, a longstanding IT specialist at Blue Cross, argued her termination violated her Catholic beliefs. Despite her tenure exceeding three decades at the company, her 2021 plea for a religious exemption from the vaccine mandate was denied. Domski, who was working entirely remotely during the pandemic and had been 75% remote pre-pandemic, maintained that her unvaccinated status posed no threat to her colleagues or workplace safety.
The jury’s award also comprised approximately $1.7 million for lost wages and an additional $1 million for emotional distress and noneconomic damages. This verdict comes after a contentious legal battle where Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan vigorously denied any form of discrimination, contending that Domski did not have a genuinely held religious belief.
Throughout the trial, Domski’s counsel emphasized her remote working arrangement, stressing that her lack of physical presence in the office nullified any potential health risks her unvaccinated status might pose to others.
Post-verdict, Blue Cross expressed disappointment, stating respect for the jury’s decision but disagreeing with the outcome. The company hinted at potential legal avenues it might pursue, suggesting that an appeal could be forthcoming. In their statement, they communicated a commitment to reviewing their legal strategies moving forward.
This case underscores the ongoing debates surrounding employer vaccine mandates and the accommodations businesses must make for employees’ religious beliefs. It also highlights the potential legal repercussions companies face when navigating these complex areas.
As employers nationwide have implemented health and safety measures in response to the pandemic, the intersection of public health policy, religious freedom, and workplace rights continues to present legal challenges.
This case from Detroit will likely serve as a significant precedent for how similar cases might be handled in the future, especially regarding remote workers and religious accommodations.
Note: This article was generated by Open AI and may contain inaccuracies. For corrections or removal requests, please contact [email protected].