A former cook at In-N-Out's Long Beach location on Los Coyotes Diagonal is suing the burger chain, alleging religious discrimination and wrongful termination after nearly five years of working a schedule that let her attend church on Sundays without incident. Arianna Rodriguez claims that arrangement fell apart after a new manager started at the store in October, turning her Sunday availability into a recurring source of conflict.
According to the lawsuit, first reported by TMZ, Rodriguez says she went nearly five years without any schedule issues before the new manager's arrival changed things. She alleges she raised concerns about her availability, her church attendance, and what she felt was unfair treatment, first with the manager and then, when that went nowhere, with upper-level management, who she says dismissed her concerns.
Rodriguez says she also complained to human resources about unequal treatment around the same time, escalating the dispute beyond her direct supervisors. Her suit alleges that pattern of pushback over her Sunday scheduling set the stage for what came next: her first-ever write-up, followed by disciplinary action that ultimately cost her the job.
A Food Incident Becomes a Flashpoint
The situation reportedly came to a head on June 24, 2026, when Rodriguez reported an incident involving food that she believed constituted waste under a practice she says was observed at the restaurant. In-N-Out investigated the incident and reported Rodriguez to human resources the same day, according to the lawsuit as detailed by TMZ. The company suspended her that day as well.
Rodriguez's suit claims other employees had done something similar in the past and received only warnings for similar conduct, with no suspensions or firings. She argues that distinction is central to her discrimination claim: on July 3, 2026, In-N-Out fired her for an alleged policy violation tied to the food incident, according to the lawsuit.
What the Lawsuit Is Seeking
Rodriguez's suit alleges both religious discrimination and wrongful termination, and she is seeking reinstatement to her cook position, unpaid wages, and unspecified damages. The case sets up a legal fight over how much accommodation an employer owes a worker observing a religious Sabbath.
Under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, employers with five or more workers must provide reasonable accommodations for sincerely held religious beliefs, including Sabbath observance, unless doing so causes undue hardship involving significant difficulty or expense, according to the California Civil Rights Department. State law also requires employers to engage in a good-faith interactive process with employees seeking such accommodations before taking adverse action.
Federal law adds another layer. The U.S. Supreme Court's unanimous 2023 ruling in Groff v. DeJoy raised the bar for employers denying religious accommodations under Title VII, requiring them to show that granting a request would create substantial increased costs relative to their business, a higher standard than the old test that only asked whether the cost was more than minimal.
A Notable Irony in In-N-Out's Branding
The lawsuit lands with a particular irony given In-N-Out's public identity. The chain has printed discreet Bible verse references on its packaging since 1987, including John 3:16 on fountain cups, Proverbs 3:5 on milkshake cups, and Nahum 1:7 on Double-Double wrappers, a tradition started by former president Rich Snyder and continued by current CEO Lynsi Snyder, according to Taste of Home. In-N-Out remains owned by the deeply religious Snyder family.
Founded in Baldwin Park in 1948 by Harry and Esther Snyder, In-N-Out is still 100% privately held by their granddaughter Lynsi Snyder, operating more than 400 locations while famously refusing to franchise or go public, per Wikipedia. The company is also in the middle of a corporate relocation, having announced in February 2025 plans to move its West Coast headquarters from Irvine back to Baldwin Park by 2029 while opening a major hub in Franklin, Tennessee, according to CoStar.
Part of a Broader Pattern of Workplace Disputes
Rodriguez's case is not the first time In-N-Out's internal policies have drawn legal scrutiny in recent years. In June 2025, a former Black employee filed a $3 million lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court alleging racial discrimination and wrongful termination under California's CROWN Act, stemming from disputes over sideburns and dress code enforcement, as reported by the Los Angeles Times.
The chain has also faced pushback over uniform and appearance rules in other contexts. In 2018, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals sided against In-N-Out, upholding a National Labor Relations Board finding that the company could not bar employees from wearing non-company buttons based solely on a generalized public image argument. And in 2019, a former worker filed a class-action lawsuit alleging the chain violated California labor law by requiring low-wage employees to buy specific uniform items without reimbursement, according to Complex.
Hoodline has also previously covered face-mask policy backlash after In-N-Out barred employees in five states from wearing masks without a doctor's note in 2023. Taken together, the disputes point to a company that has repeatedly enforced strict internal standards even as those rules have run into state labor protections and federal civil rights law. Whether Rodriguez's claims hold up will likely hinge on whether In-N-Out can show it met its obligation to negotiate a workable schedule before firing her.
