Potomac Conference beats back discrimination suit brought by injured 25-year veteran teacher

[Stan]

On August 15, 2016, a Federal Court in Maryland upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit brought by a 56-year-old injured music teacher at a Seventh-day Adventist school on the basis that, as a "minister," she had no right to pursue federal claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the Family and Medical Leave Act.

The post Potomac Conference beats back discrimination suit brought by injured 25-year veteran teacher appeared first on ReligiousLiberty.TV - Celebrating Liberty of Conscience.

View the full article

[CoAspen]

If everything reported is true, than I  find the actions of the Potomac Conference, to be morally disgusting!

Do as we preach, not as we act.

[LifeHiscost]

3 hours ago, CoAspen said:

If everything reported is true, than I  find the actions of the Potomac Conference, to be morally disgusting!

Do as we preach, not as we act.

Not contending with your right to be disgusted, however the right of a follower of Christ to sue for due seems well covered in the Word.

…28bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone takes your cloak, do not withhold your tunic as well. 30Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what is yours, do not demand it back.…Luke 6

Sometimes it is difficult to yield up our rights.

God is Love!~Jesus saves!          

 

[lazarus]

The full title is Potomac Conference Corporation. The corporation aspect of the title carries a lot of weight. 

[Gregory Matthews]

The following is part of the ruling of the Court:

In fact, it is a protection for the Church.   However, it is a protection that has been breached in other situations.  The IRS has well established rules that seemingly breach this and have been upheld by the Courts.  The Selective Service seemingly breached such in its rules as to the application of ministerial exemption from the Draft.  This claim was not allowed in the so-called Marry-Kay case which involved the SDA Church.

However, as one who has worked in the field of laws related to the Americans With disability Act, etc. I believe that if her claim against the SDA school had been allowed to proceed the school had a very good chance of prevailing.  Based upon the limited information given, I believe that the teacher had a strong likelihood of losing.  The bottom line is that an employer only has to make a reasonable accommodation  in ADA cases.  I believe that a Court potentially might have ruled that the employer in this case could not make a reasonable accommodation.  Frankly, I would much have preferred that the case be allowed to proceed on this basis.  I do not like the basis for the ruling of the Court.  But, that is just me. and who am  I?  

 

The District Court noted in its ruling in Curl that a religious employer only needed to prove two elements to demonstrate that it has a ministerial exemption. First – the employer must be a religious institution. Secondly – the employee must be a "ministerial employee."

The courts are notoriously reluctant to challenge the assertion of either of these two elements or, as the Supreme Court said in Hosanna-Tabor, "adopt a rigid formula for deciding when an employee qualifies as a minister."

[Gregory Matthews]

There is an aspect of this case that I simply do not understand.  I am aquainted with other such cases in which the SDA school/denomination treated the  teacher better.  I am thinking of a relative by marriage who taught for the denomination.  While teaching one day a student stuck her foot out in an attempt to make the teacher fall.  That happened.  The injuries were sufficient to end the ability of the teacher to continue teaching.  That happened.  But, the denomination treated the teacher better than what seemingly happened in this case. 

[Outta Here]

Were they looking to just get rid of her before she got any sort of retirement??? A whole mess of corporations in my home town are doing that--firing their long-time employees and hiring newly graduated people to replace them (often the grads are overqualified and underpaid).

[Gregory Matthews]

Aubrey, No.  According to the information in the article, she has worked long enough for the denomination to earn retirement benefits.  The only question that I have on this is whether or not she  might be entitled to immediate retirement benefits, or retirement benefits at a later age.

Reading between the lines, I suspect that this situation is more involved than a simple ADA (Disability) case.  I do not know what those might be, so I will not speculate.

 

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I actually agree with the court's ruling.  If someone wants to claim the rights and privileges of working in a stated ministerial position in the church, then s/he must abide by the laws governing such positions.   

(I'm not so sure it would have been reasonable for the school to give Mrs. Curl the frequent "lying down" rest periods in a quiet darkened room that her physician said she required.  If she had to leave due to her inability to continue teaching that day, someone else would have needed to step and take over her classes.)

Courts have found that:

Quote

Education Code made it clear that "the primary purpose of Seventh-day Adventist elementary education is the redemption of each student's soul through his or her belief and faithful adherence to Seventh-day Adventist theological beliefs- and that "the Seventh-day Adventist Church relies heavily upon its full-time, elementary school teachers to carry out its sectarian purpose." Clapper v. Chesapeake Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists, 166 F.3d 1208, 1998 WL 904528, *7 (4th Cir. 1998).

Quote

Here, it is apparent that Plaintiffs role in the School was ministerial in nature. Although a portion of Plaintiffs responsibilities were secular in nature, Plaintiff acknowledges that she is personally a Seventh-day Adventist whose role at the School included teaching religious music and leading prayer services. ECF No. 14-6 ¶11 7, 14, 16. Plaintiff does not dispute that she agreed to abide by the Education Code, which "requires that schools employ only those who live in complete harmony with the beliefs and practices of the Church- and therefore required that all School teachers be "baptized Adventists committed to the Church's program of ministry.- ECF No. 6-3 at 6. Additionally, under the Education Code, School personnel were expected to ip]ractice enthusiastically and consistently the ideals of the Church-; Id]emonstrate a high sense of loyalty to Adventist educational philosophy"; and Ilfook upon Christian educational service as a holy vocation." Id. at 8. Plaintiff was also required to "maintain membership in ... constituent or academy churches and participate in church activities, programs, and finances, including the practice of tithing through the local employing organization," id. at 7, and a portion of her salary was paid by tithe funds, which are intended to be used for ministry, ED' No. 6-2 II 2F. Moreover, Plaintiffs performance was evaluated in part based on her spiritual leadership.  

And:

Quote

Although Plaintiff indicates that she was unaware that tithe funds paid part of her salary and she maintains that she "never held [herself] out as a minister,- ECF No. 14-6 U 9, 18, these representations do not suffice to create a genuine dispute with respect to Plaintiffs role in the School. The School clearly held Plaintiff out to be a minister, requiring that she lead prayer services and that she incorporate into her teaching the "Adventist educational philosophy.- ECF 21 No. 6-3 at 8. Indeed, when Plaintiff was extended a contract for the 2013-2014 school year, she was told: "You are being invited to share your ministry with our students for the 2013-2014 school year." ECF No. 6-6 at 1. Plaintiff may not have labeled herself as a minister, but under the circumstances, it is apparent that her students would have perceived Plaintiff to be "a representative of the religious institution authorized to speak on church doctrine." Kirby, 426 S.W.3d at 613-14. Moreover, given that "music is a vital means of expressing and celebrating those beliefs which a religious community holds most sacred," Raleigh, 213 F.3d at 802, and that Plaintiff has represented that she hoped to help her students "see Jesus through music,- ECF No. 6-5 If 2E, her role as a music teacher was "important to the spiritual and pastoral mission" of the School, Raleigh, 213 F.3d at 802.

If you want to read the District Court ruling on this case, it is located here:  http://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/maryland/mddce/8:2015cv03133/330998/19/0.pdf?ts=1471436310

[Gregory Matthews]

Pam, yes, reasonable accommodation is the issue that I believe would have caused the school to prevail.  At least, that is what my experience tells me.

[CoAspen]

Aren't we glad that Christ went the 2nd mile! Legally, ok, that was their right. Would be interested to know if their was some way they could have chosen to accommodate her. Was she allowed to retire with benefits...ministerial benefits, what ever they may be?

 

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

there's a point at which going the 2nd mile becomes tiresome when you end up doing the work of someone else who apparently cannot do their work, and you get paid only for doing your own work...  Been there. Done that. Irritating and unfair situation, and you end up feeling "used" rather than feeling that you've done some Christ-like Christian duty.  It's called being a CHUMP.

[CoAspen]

Okay Pam,

But what about the question of her future......

Quote

 Would be interested to know if their was some way they could have chosen to accommodate her. Was she allowed to retire with benefits...ministerial benefits, what ever they may be?

 

[Gregory Matthews]

I am strongly convinced that she has qualified for retirement benefits.  Whether immediate or delayed benefits in another question.

You ask:  Ministerial benefits?  What are you talking about,  How do you think that ministerial retirement benefits may differ from those of other people.  Please tell us.

 

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

56 minutes ago, CoAspen said:

Okay Pam,

But what about the question of her future......

 

at this point, I know too much about Mrs. Curl's personal circumstances, so I'm not going to comment on her particular situation...

[CoAspen]

It's just a question, I have no idea??

 

[CoAspen]

Pam,

As I said in the beginning, IF........

So it seems that you know more about the issue which makes it very intriguing. Was there some negotiations between the two parties before the law suit? On the face of what was posted in the original article it leads me to think that she received less 'help' because she was employed by the .org. If that is not true than my original comments would be based on incomplete data. However, if she received less 'help', than to  me it is a black eye. 

[Stan]

I would be interested in what the back-story is to this.

If it is all what it says it is,  teachers will need a union to protect them.  AND I can give horror stories about other teachers victimized.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

if SDA teachers want to be able to use State Labor & Employment laws, the Americans with Disabilities Act, State Fair Employment Practices Acts, State Handicap laws, the Family and Medical Leave Act, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act as causes for action against the SDA church and/or its subsidiaries, such as the school, then those teachers need to make it very clear on paper that they are not considered "ministers."  They will not do any religious teaching or lead out in any religious function of the school, nor [for SDA music teachers] hold a "Commissioned Ministry of Teaching License" or "Commissioned Ministry of Teaching Credential" from the church.

Apart from the "ministry" issue, necessary accommodations by a school (any school) would be difficult for a teacher who has injuries that have caused brain injury resulting in issues involving limiting the personal care of oneself, as well as limiting the ability for the person to perform manual tasks, and to see, concentrate, and think.

[CoAspen]

Thanks, first I had ever heard that teachers were classified as 'ministers'!!

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

CoA, I hadn't previously known about the Ministers classification for teachers, either.  Rather odd...  

I hate to say it, but so many Christians, including Adventists, have this weird idea that it's somehow cool or biblical for all in the brotherhood of believers to be "priests"  aka  "ministers."   I can just imagine how more lawsuits could be quashed just like the one in the OP if the secular segments of society start acknowledging the "we are all priests" statements.

I really do feel very sorry for the lady in the above lawsuit.  She had wanted a trial with a jury.  She might have won if her suits hadn't been summarily dismissed due to the "you are a minister" issue.