Taxing Matters
Overtaxed Member
The issue is not as clear cut as I think some of the other responses would make it. They are dismissing the possibility of a claim against the "Christian-based organization" (the client organization) because they see the staffing organization that you worked for as the only possible employer. Moreover, even if you were not an employee of the client organization it might still be liable for illegal discrimination.
Although you were apparently an employee of a staffing company, that does not mean that you were not also the employee of the client, too. Under federal law, it is possible to be considered a joint employee of both the staffing company and the client. The EEOC explained in guidance regarding staffing companies:
The staffing firm and/or its client will qualify as the worker's employer(s) if, under the factors described in Question 1, one or both businesses have the right to exercise control over the worker's employment. As noted above, no one factor is decisive, and it is not necessary even to satisfy a majority of factors. The determination of who qualifies as an employer of the worker cannot be based on simply counting the number of factors. Many factors may be wholly irrelevant to particular facts. Rather, all of the circumstances in the worker's relationship with each of the businesses should be considered to determine if either or both should be deemed his or her employer. If either entity qualifies as the worker's employer, and if that entity has the statutory minimum number of employees (see Question 6), then it can be held liable for unlawful discriminatory conduct against the worker. If both the staffing firm and its client have the right to control the worker, and each has the statutory minimum number of employees, they are covered as "joint employers."
The statutory minimum number of employees is currently 15. That is, an employer is subject to the federal laws regarding discrimination against employee if it has at least 15 employees.
The staffing company almost certainly was your employer. If the client organization had significant control over the work you did while working for it then it very likely was also your employer. If the client was a joint employer here and it had at least 15 employees, then your termination by the client would violate federal law if the reason was your religion or your wife's religion, with one exception. And that exception is if the client organization would qualify as "a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by such corporation, association, educational institution, or society of its activities." 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-1(a) (Civil Rights Act of 1964 § 702(a)). Those religious organizations are exempt from the federal law that prohibits discrimination based on religion. The classic example is where the employer is a church, temple, mosque, synagogue, etc. Thus, the law allows a Christian church to hire only Christians as employees. Your description of the client as a "Christian-based organization" is a bit vague and does not tell me exactly what it does so I cannot tell if it might fall within this exemption.
Even if the client was not your employer, it might still be liable for illegal discrimination based on race if it had 15 or more employees and was not a religious organization. The EEOC states:
An entity that has enough employees to qualify as an employer under the applicable EEO statute can be held liable for discriminating against an individual who is not its employee. The anti- discrimination statutes not only prohibit an employer from discriminating against its own employees, but also prohibit an employer from interfering with an individual's employment opportunities with another employer. Thus, a staffing firm that discriminates against its client's employee or a client that discriminates against a staffing firm's employee is liable for unlawfully interfering in the individual's employment opportunities.
And it gives this example:
The client does not qualify as a joint employer of the worker because it had no ongoing relationship with the worker, did not pay the worker or firm based on the hours worked, and had no authority over hours, assignments, or other aspects of the means or manner by which the work was achieved. However, if the client's request to replace the worker was due to racial bias, and if the client had fifteen or more employees, it would be liable for interfering in the worker's employment opportunities with the staffing firm.
You have evidence that the client terminated your assignment because of your religion because the client told the staffing firm you work for that you were "not religious enough". If the client organization had at least 15 employees and does not qualify as a religious organization then you may indeed have a good case for illegal discrimination, either because the client was a joint employer or because it interfered with your employment with the staffing firm.
I do agree though that based on what information you provided here there is no claim against the staffing agency if it terminates you because it has no other jobs to send you to work on. It isn't terminating you because of your religion.
There may be enough here to pursue the client organization. I'd suggest you consult an attorney who litigates employment discrimination cases and it's probably a good idea to get in a complaint with the EEOC on time. Consult the attorney ASAP so you can ensure you get the complaint done right and submitted on time, and that you also meet whatever you need to do to pursue a claim under state law, too.