The California Supreme Court has recently decreed that religious nonprofits are exempt from California’s employment bias rules. But, as we’ll explain, this doesn’t mean that religious organizations are completely free to discriminate or to violate a host of other employment-related laws.
Methodist Hospital Hit With Age Bias Lawsuit
Alacoque Kelly, a nurse for Methodist Hospital in Arcadia, was terminated after she failed to return to work following a medical leave. Kelly, 50, filed a lawsuit claiming the real reason she was fired was because of her age. The hospital tried to get the case dismissed, arguing that nonprofit religious institutions are exempt from California’s anti-discrimination laws. Kelly contended that the exemption didn’t apply because the hospital’s primary purpose wasn’t religious, but medical. She also argued that even if there were an exemption, it would only apply to discrimination based on religion. The hospital would still be prohibited from engaging in discrimination based on age or any other protected classification.
400+ pages of state-specific, easy-read reference materials at your fingertips—fully updated! Check out the Guide to Employment Law for California Employers and get up to speed on everything you need to know.
Discrimination Laws Don’t Apply
The California Supreme Court ruled in favor of the hospital. It held that the exemption covers any entity, including a hospital, with religious motivation and substantial religious affiliation, even if its activities are not purely spiritual. Plus, so long as the employer is a religious nonprofit—such as a thrift shop, soup kitchen, parochial school or hospital—the exemption applies regardless of whether or not the employee’s job involved religious duties. Because of this exemption, religious nonprofits generally can’t be sued under the state Fair Employment and Housing Act even if they discriminate on the basis of sex, race, disability or other protected categories.
Ruling Will Have Limited Impact
There are several reasons why this new decision isn’t as far-reaching as it may seem. First, a new law took effect on January 1, 2000 (after Kelly had filed her suit), which limits the exemption for religious health care employers, allowing them to discriminate only on religious grounds. Second, under federal anti-bias laws, a religious organization may discriminate only on the basis of religion, but not on any other prohibited grounds, such as race, sex, age or disability. And third, this decision has no impact on liability for other types of employment claims, such as wage and hour, defamation, privacy or retaliation.