Dole v. Shenandoah Baptist Church
899 F.2d 1389, 1990 WL 34653 (1990)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Applying the minimum wage and equal pay provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to a church-operated school does not violate the First Amendment's Free Exercise or Establishment Clauses. Congress clearly intended the Act to cover such schools, and the government's compelling interest in fair labor standards outweighs any incidental burden on religious practice.
Facts:
- Shenandoah Baptist Church, believing Christian education to be a vital part of its religious mission, founded the Roanoke Valley Christian Schools in 1973.
- The church instituted a 'head-of-household' salary supplement, based on its scriptural interpretation that the husband is the head of the family.
- Between 1976 and 1986, this supplement was paid to all married male teachers but was denied to married female teachers, including a woman whose husband was a student and another whose disabled husband had left her.
- No woman received a supplement before 1981, after which three divorced female teachers with dependents were granted it.
- Between 1976 and 1982, the school paid ninety-one support staff members, including bus drivers, custodians, and kitchen workers, less than the federal minimum wage.
- The church's pastor testified that no church doctrine prevents paying women as much as men or paying the minimum wage, and that the church complied with other government regulations like tax withholding and safety codes.
Procedural Posture:
- The U.S. government sued Shenandoah Baptist Church in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia, alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
- The government sought back pay, interest, and a permanent injunction against future violations.
- The district court granted partial summary judgment to the government on the minimum wage claim.
- Twenty-one support staff employees intervened in the case to support the church's position.
- After a trial with an advisory jury, the jury found that the school paid female teachers less than male teachers for equal work and that the difference was not based on a factor other than sex.
- The district court adopted the jury's findings, awarded back pay for both the minimum wage and equal pay violations, but denied the government's request for prejudgment interest and an injunction.
- Shenandoah Baptist Church appealed the judgment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, and the government cross-appealed the denial of interest and injunctive relief.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the application of the Fair Labor Standards Act's minimum wage and equal pay provisions to a church-operated school violate the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses of the First Amendment?
Opinions:
Majority - Sprouse, Circuit Judge
No. Application of the Fair Labor Standards Act's minimum wage and equal pay provisions to the church-operated school does not violate the First Amendment. The court reasoned that Congress demonstrated a clear 'affirmative intention' to include religious schools within the FLSA's definition of an 'enterprise.' The school's lay teachers and support staff are 'employees' under the 'economic reality' test, not ministers, because they perform no sacerdotal functions and do not belong to a recognized religious order. Regarding the Free Exercise claim, the court found the burden on Shenandoah's religious beliefs to be limited, as church doctrine did not mandate the pay differential, and the financial cost of compliance is not a determinative burden. This limited burden is outweighed by the government's compelling interests in ensuring a 'minimum standard of living' and remedying 'a serious and endemic problem of employment discrimination.' For the Establishment Clause claim, the court held that the FLSA passes the Lemon test: it has a secular purpose, does not prefer one religion over another, and its record-keeping requirements do not create excessive government entanglement with religion, being no more intrusive than standard zoning or safety regulations.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the principle that religious organizations are subject to neutral and generally applicable laws, particularly in the realm of employment. It narrowly construes the 'ministerial exemption' under the FLSA, limiting its application to individuals with clergy-like functions and rejecting its extension to lay teachers in a religious school. The case establishes a strong precedent within the circuit that a religious employer's First Amendment claims will likely fail against the government's compelling interest in enforcing fundamental labor protections like minimum wage and equal pay. This ruling curtails the ability of religious institutions to use free exercise claims to justify discriminatory pay practices or sub-minimum wage compensation for their lay employees.
