gavel.JPG
A federal appeals court has ruled that FirstEnergy did not discriminate against a potential intern after he would not provide a Social Security number on an application.
(File photo)
CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Even if you believe a Social Security number is connected to an evil, demonic being, a federal appeals court has again ruled that you still have to provide it to an employer to get hired.
The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a published opinion issued Wednesday, ruled that a person's religious beliefs against using Social Security numbers is not a basis for a religious discrimination lawsuit. The Internal Revenue Service requires employers to provide their employees' Social Security numbers, and not doing so would constitute breaking the law.
The case was brought by Donald Yeager, an Austintown resident who was accepted to be a student intern at FirstEnergy in Shippingport, Pennsylvania in summer 2012.
The Christian Fundamentalist disavowed his Social Security number when he turned 18. He believes the number is a "mark of the beast," a reference to a passage in the Book of Revelations. The number 666, commonly known and popularized in at least one heavy metal song, is also the statute number where Social Security numbers are referenced in U.S. law.
Yeager lost the internship because FirstEnergy would not process his application without a Social Security number. He sued the company in March 2014 in the U.S. District Court Northern District of Ohio, claiming the company violated state and federal laws by discriminating against him because of his religion.
Less than a month after the suit was filed, FirstEnergy moved to dismiss, pointing out that case law has long established that employers do not have to accommodate religious objections to using Social Security numbers.
U.S. District Judge James Gwin in Cleveland agreed, writing in June that both the employee and the employer face potential penalties from the IRS if a Social Security number is not provided.
Yeager appealed, arguing that Gwin made an error. But the Cincinnati-based appeals court, in a three-page opinion authored by Judges Alice Batchelder, Karen Moore and Jeffrey Sutton, upheld Gwin's decision.
The judges pointed out that Yeager's claim fails because "FirstEnergy's collection of Yeager's social security number is a 'requirement imposed by law' and therefore not an 'employment requirement.'"
Yeager's attorney, Michael Rossi of Youngstown, did not return a phone call.