Jurisdiction of Labor Arbiter Does Not Apply to Termination for Acts of Purely Religious in Nature

Acquire Mastery of HR/Labor Doctrines, Rules and Principles with Atty. Elvin’s HR Bundle Books at Discounted Rate

Termination of a religious minister’s engagement at a local church due to administrative lapses, when it relates to the perceived effectivity of a minister as a charismatic leader of a congregation, it’s a prerogative best left to the church affected by such choice.

If a religious association enacts guidelines that reserve the right to transfer or reassign its licensed ministers according to what it deems best for a particular congregation, ministry or undertaking in pursuit of its mission, then the State cannot validly interfere.

Thus, the SC held in the following case:

Pasay City Alliance Church vs. Benito
G.R. No. 226908, November 28, 2019

Jurisdiction; The labor tribunal has no jurisdiction over termination of a pastor pertaining to acts which reflect on the effectivity as minister and not effectiveness as administrator; The Court cannot interfere with the implementation of the policy, much less subject a religious congregation to a minister in whom it appears to have lost confidence; Termination; Termination of a religious minister’s engagement at a local church due to administrative lapses, when it relates to the perceived effectivity of a minister as a charismatic leader of a congregation, is a prerogative best left to the church affected by such choice; If a church or religious association has the sole prerogative to exclude members perceived to be unworthy in light of its doctrinal standards, all the more does it have sole prerogative in determining who are best fit to minister to its members in activities attached with religious significance

Facts:

Petitioner Pasay City Alliance Church (PCAC) is one of the local churches of its co-petitioner, Christian and Missionary Alliance Churches of the Philippines (CAMACOP), a religious society registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (Collectively, PCAC, et al.)

Respondent Fe P. Benito (Benito), on the other hand served as PCAC’s Head of Fellowship and Discipleship. Thereafter, he was appointed Head of PCAC’s Membership and Evangelism Ministry, which was renamed Pastoral Care and Membership in 2009. Benito served without a written contract.

The controversy arose from CAMACOP and PCAC’s policy requiring pastors or ministers without written contracts to tender a courtesy resignation every year as express in CAMACOP’s Amended Local Church Administrative and Ministry Guidelines.

Pastors who are not reappointed to their previous posts may reapply, in which case, they are assigned to another position, local church or specialized ministry. In compliance, Benito tendered her courtesy resignation as Head of Pastoral Care and Membership. The Church Ministry Team (CMT) reappointed Benito to the same position for another year.

When the CMT convened the following year, it then decided not to reappoint Benito and recommended that she reapply to a more suitable position. The decision not to extend Benito’s term was not immediately pursued by the CM, and Benito held the post for another year.

After the term had ended, Benito complied anew and submitted courtesy resignation, without prejudice to the CMT’s evaluation. Upon instructions, Benito also submitted her credentials to help the CMT in determining whether or not her term should be extended. Meanwhile, she was instructed to endorse her workload and turn over the prayer ministry to another pastor.

Benito was informed in writing of the CMT’s decision to uphold its 2012 recommendation to the District Ministry Supervisor regarding the non-extension of her engagement as PCAC’s head of Pastoral Care and Membership.

Aggrieved, Benito filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and money claims before the Labor Arbiter (LA) anchored on the claim that she had already attained regular status by operation of law and entitled to security of tenure in view of her long years of service with PCAC. In response, PCAC questioned the LA’s jurisdiction and asserted that Benito’s vocation and ministry are not governed by the Labor Code, but by CAMACOP’s Local Church Administrative and Ministry Guidelines and its By-Laws.

According to PCAC, Benito’s insistence on her right to security of tenure, which she takes to mean a lifetime assignment to her position, undermines CAMACOP’s guidelines in routinely assigning their licensed ministers from one local church or ministry to another. It added that non-renewal or non-extension of her term is not even identical or tantamount to illegal dismissal as she was not even dismissed as a minister, but she simply refused to participate in the process of her transfer.

Benito countered that PCAC hired her, provided her with a monthly wage, decided which ministry she would be assigned, issued directives on her behavior and, in this instance, dismissed her from her duties. From these, she insists that all the elements of an employer-employee relationship are present.

LA Ruling:

The LA ruled that an employment relationship existed between the parties, in view of the various letters and memoranda from PCAC concerning Benito’s time-in and time-out, work assignments, and performance evaluations. The LA also considered her payslips and deductions for Social Security System (SSS), PhilHealth, and Pag-Ibig contributions.

The LA held that Benito was illegally dismissed due to her involuntary resignation and the lack of evidence to justify non-renewal of her appointment. PCAC, et al. appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC).

NLRC Ruling:

The NLRC overturned the LA’s Decision.

The NLRC held that the non-renewal of Benito’s appointment to her previous position, due to a church policy requiring ministers to tender a courtesy resignation yearly for their possible reassignment, should be treated as an ecclesiastical matter outside of the labor tribunal’s jurisdiction.

Benito moved for reconsideration, but this was denied by the NLRC. She challenged the NLRC’s Resolution before the Court of Appeals (CA).

CA Ruling:

The CA annulled the NLRC Resolutions.

The CA held that the decision not to renew Benito’s appointment was secular in nature and not ecclesiastical affair.

PCAC, et al. filed a motion for reconsideration but it was denied by the CA. Hence, they filed a petition to the Supreme Court (SC).

Issue/s:

Whether or not activities such as activities such as evangelism, baptism, and Sunday praise or worship pertain to the effectivity of a minister as a charismatic leader and not efficiency as administrative officer

Whether or not the non-renewal of a pastor’s appointment due to failure to fulfill activities such as evangelism, baptism, and Sunday praise or worship is an illegal dismissal within the jurisdiction of the labor arbiter

Whether or not termination of a religious minister at a local church due to administrative lapses, when it relates to the perceived effectivity of a minister as a charismatic leader is a prerogative left to the church

Whether or not the State can validly interfere with the religious association’s guidelines that reserve the right to transfer or reassign its licensed ministers according to what it deems best for a particular congregation, ministry or undertaking in pursuit of its mission

SC Ruling:

The SC found merit in the petition.

The SC held that in our jurisdiction, the Court holds the Church and the State to be separate and distinct from each other. It quoted “Give to Ceasar what is Ceasar’s and to God what is God’s.”

The constitutionally protected policy is non-interference by the State in matters that are purely ecclesiastical. It is also settled that religious associations can be employers for whom religious ministers often perform dual roles. They not only minister to the spiritual needs of their members in most instances, but also take on administrative functions in their organizations.

For the SC, the sole concern in this case is whether or not the matter at hand is an ecclesiastical matter over which labor tribunals are deprived of jurisdiction. Citing Pastor Austria vs. NLRC as reiterated in United Church of Christ in the Philippines, Inc. vs. Bradford United Church of Christ, Inc., the SC revisited the definition of matters that are outside the jurisdiction of civil courts and tribunals.

The SC held that an ecclesiastical affair is one that concerns doctrine, creed, or form of worship of the church, or the adoption and enforcement within a religious association of needful laws and regulations for the government of the membership, and the power of excluding from such associations those deemed unworthy of membership. Base on this definition, an ecclesiastical affair involves the relationship between the church and its members and relate to matters of faith, religious doctrines, worship and governance of the congregation. To be concrete, examples of this so-called ecclesiastical affairs to which the State cannot meddle are proceedings for excommunication, ordinations of religious ministers, administration of sacraments and other activities attached with religious significance.

In contrast with the case of Pastor Austria PCAC, et al. already questioned the LA’s jurisdiction at the inception of this case.

At the center of the present controversy is the enforcement of a religious denomination’s internal rules in the governance of its member churches.  PCAC, et al.’s contention that there was no dismissal to speak of and the matter concerns their right to transfer or reassign one of their licensed ministers is well taken by the SC. It found the claimed right to be infused with religious color because it bears down on the relationship of a church and its members in faith-based matters. If a church or religious association has the sole prerogative to exclude members perceived to be unworthy in light of its doctrinal standards, all the more does it have sole prerogative in determining who are best fit to minister to its members in activities attached with religious significance.

The SC disagreed with the view that the non-renewal of Benito’s appointment was due to her inefficiency as an administrative officer for her ministry and, thus, purely secular. For the SC, this conclusion ignores the significance of her position under contention, as the Head of Pastoral Care and Membership, formerly known as Membership and Evangelism Ministry. It also overlooks the fine line between efficiency and effectiveness. Here, the CMT cited failure on her part to share with new attendees, her inaction on the death of a member, and several other administrative lapses that impact on the conduct of PCAC’s ecclesiastical activities, such as evangelism, baptism and Sunday praise or worship activities.

The SC held that the termination of a religious minister’s engagement at a local church due to administrative lapses, when it relates to the perceived effectivity of a minister as a charismatic leader of a congregation, it’s a prerogative best left to the church affected by such choice. If a religious association enacts guidelines that reserve the right to transfer or reassign its licensed ministers according to what it deems best for a particular congregation, ministry or undertaking in pursuit of its mission, then the State cannot validly interfere.

The SC declared that it cannot interfere with the implementation of the policy, much less subject a religious congregation to a minister in whom it appears to have lost confidence.