Chris, You may find the following case helpful: Altman v. Sterling Caterers, Inc., 879 F. Supp. 2d 1375 (S.D. Fla. 2012). It deals primarily with the ministerial exception, but contains the following: “But the Court need not grapple with the core issue of whether the ministerial exemption applies to FLSA cases. Instead, the Court can decide the competing summary judgment motions by concluding that the ministerial exemption (if it applies at all) is inapposite here because Sterling is a for-profit commercial caterer, not a religious institution.”
Best, Michael From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Gregory S. Baylor Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 1:35 PM To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: RE: For-Profit Corporations and the Section 702 Exemption For what it’s worth, the EEOC compliance manual<http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/religion.html#_Toc203359493> indicates that not-for-profit status is a “significant factor” in the analysis, although “no one factor is dispositive.” It cites Townley and Kamehameha. [cid:image001.png@01D05B39.BC4D4B30]<http://www.alliancedefendingfreedom.org/> Gregory S. Baylor Senior Counsel 202-393-8690 (Office) 202-888-7628 (Direct Dial) 202-347-3622 (Fax) gbay...@alliancedefendingfreedom.org<mailto:gbay...@alliancedefendingfreedom.org> www.alliancedefendingfreedom.org<http://www.alliancedefendingfreedom.org> From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu<mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu> [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 3:40 PM To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Re: For-Profit Corporations and the Section 702 Exemption True enough; but if recollection serves, all three judges write a great deal about the importance of the for-profit/nonprofit distinction. On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Doug Laycock <dlayc...@virginia.edu<mailto:dlayc...@virginia.edu>> wrote: World Vision is a more recent review of the cases. But World Vision is a non-profit. Douglas Laycock Robert E. Scott Distinguished Professor of Law University of Virginia Law School 580 Massie Road Charlottesville, VA 22903 434-243-8546<tel:434-243-8546> From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu<mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu> [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu<mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu>] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 3:14 PM To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: Re: For-Profit Corporations and the Section 702 Exemption the split decision in World Vision is probably more relevant now than Townley, FWIW: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2011/01/25/08-35532.pdf On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Christopher Lund <l...@wayne.edu<mailto:l...@wayne.edu>> wrote: Does anyone have any cases addressing the applicability of the Section 702 exemption to for-profit employers? The Section 702 exemption, remember, is what exempts religious groups from the federal ban on religious discrimination in hiring. I have the 9th Circuit decision in Townley Engineering (1988). But I didn't know if there were other lower court cases, and figured the listserv might be a good resource. Thanks! Best, Chris ___________________________ Christopher C. Lund Associate Professor of Law Wayne State University Law School 471 West Palmer St. Detroit, MI 48202 l...@wayne.edu<mailto:l...@wayne.edu> (313) 577-4046<tel:%28313%29%20577-4046> (phone) (313) 577-9016<tel:%28313%29%20577-9016> (fax) Website-http://law.wayne.edu/profile/christopher.lund/ Papers-http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=363402 _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu<mailto:Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu<mailto:Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. This e-mail message from Alliance Defending Freedom and any accompanying documents or embedded messages is intended for the named recipients only. Because Alliance Defending Freedom is a legal entity engaged in the practice of law, this communication contains information, which may include metadata, that is confidential, privileged, attorney work product, or otherwise protected from disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this message in error, are not a named recipient, or are not the employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to a named recipient, be advised that any review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message or its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the message. PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION/ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT.
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
