Court of Appeal decision – Church is accountable to employment legislation.
Methodist Church leaders said they would seek a ruling from the Supreme Court after Court of Appeal judges concluded that a minister of religion “may be an employee”, could be “unfairly dismissed” and was eligible to take a claim to an employment tribunal.
Lawyers representing the Church had argued that the “office of the Christian ministry depends on the call of God”, during a dispute with former minister Hayley Preston, who worked in Redruth.
But three appeal judges on Tuesday ruled against the Church, following a hearing in London.
The Rev Dr Martyn Atkins, general secretary of the Methodist Church in Britain, said it would challenge the decision.
“We are treating this matter with great seriousness as something which would affect all of our ministers and the culture of our Church,” he said. “The Church values all of its ministers, and it is clear to us that relationship cannot easily be reduced to a simple contract of employment.
“The call to Methodist ministry cannot be treated as just another job – it is based on a lifetime calling, expressed through a covenant relationship with the church.”
Yesterday’s Court of Appeal decision marked the latest stage of a two-year dispute between Methodist leaders and Mrs Preston. Appeal judges heard that Mrs Preston had resigned, and claimed “unfair constructive dismissal”, in 2009.
An employment tribunal concluded that she was “not an employee” and dismissed her claim. An employment appeal tribunal overturned that decision. Yesterday the Court of Appeal backed the employment appeal tribunal’s stance and dismissed an appeal by Church leaders.
Oliver Hyams, for Methodist Church leaders, had referred appeal judges to the Methodist “Deed of Union” doctrine, which said: “Christ’s ministers in the Church are stewards in the household of God and shepherds of his flock.
“It is the universal conviction of Methodist people that the office of the Christian ministry depends on the call of God, who bestows the gifts of the Spirit, the grace and the fruit, which indicate those whom He has chosen.”
Appeal judge Lord Justice Maurice Kay, who sat with Lord Justice Longmore and Sir David Keene, said Mr Hyams had tried to “imbue” the dispute with a “doctrinal element” by referring to a clause from the deed.
But the judge added: “This reflects ‘the priesthood of all believers’ but it surely does not embrace a doctrinal belief that a Minister who is treated with unfairness or discrimination must be denied common legal redress.”
He concluded: “… a Minister of religion may be an employee. If he is, he is an eligible applicant in relation to unfair dismissal and it will be for the employment tribunal … to decide whether the statutory criteria of unfairness are satisfied.”
Lord Justice Longmore and Sir David agreed.
After the judgment Mrs Preston said she was delighted the ruling had been upheld but was “deeply saddened that the Methodist Church has been so determined in its pursuit to remain outside the law”.
She added: “Why is transparency, accountability and good practice perceived by them to be such a threat that they will go to such lengths to avoid having to comply with employment legislation? There was once a time when the Methodist Church could have prided itself on its lead in areas of reform and social justice but it would now seem that the message that it preaches is very much one of ‘do as we say not as we do’.
“Unfortunately, hiding behind tradition and a law of privilege has enabled those in authority in the Methodist Church to do whatever they wanted without question or redress for far too long that they think, in their arrogance, that they have become untouchable. As a result many ministers and their families have been utterly broken, driven out, disregarded and often used as a scapegoat to avoid dealing with the real problems that exist in many circuits.”
Legal summary at:
http://www.mulberryfinch.com/blog/haley-preston-minister-methodist-employe/