wfn.org | Judicial Council says 12-year rule for staff execs is constitutional

[NewsDesk <NewsDesk@UMCOM.UMC.ORG>]

April 26, 1999	Contact: Joretta Purdue*(202)546-8722*Washington
10-71B{224}

ORLANDO, Fla. (UMNS) - The 12-year rule for certain United Methodist Church
executives has been declared constitutional by the denomination's highest
court.

The churchwide Board of Higher Education and Ministry had asked the Judicial
Council to determine if a conflict exists between the church's constitution
and the statement: "No elected general program agency staff shall hold the
same position more than 12 years.

"Years of service prior to Jan. 1, 1989, are not counted. The agency
responsible for the election of such staff may annually suspend this
provision by two-thirds ballot vote." The rule was passed by the 1988
General Conference, the denomination's top lawmaking assembly.

The guideline was one of the issues considered by the Judicial Council
during its spring session, April 21-23.

Arguments against the rule were made by Hector M. Navas, chairman of the
personnel policy committee of the Board of Higher Education and Ministry, in
the only oral hearing of the session. Navas was aided by Kent M. Weeks, an
attorney who had filed a brief on behalf of the board.

They said the rule discriminates against the top executives of the program
agencies because it applies only to the elected staff of those agencies and
not to the comparable general secretaries and associate general secretaries
of other churchwide agencies.

Navas also asserted that the 12-year rule discriminates against lay people,
who - unlike the clergy - have no guaranteed jobs waiting for them. Finally,
he averred, it denies the program agencies the ability to fully exercise
fiduciary and administrative oversight of their own boards, as granted by
the Book of Discipline. The book contains the denomination's rules and
doctrines.  

 The council, however, disagreed in its April 23 ruling. "All of the
arguments which the Board of Higher Education and Ministry uses . . .  are
made on the basis of expanding the meaning of membership to include matters
of employment." The constitutional guarantees cited by the board
representatives referred to members duly elected as directors or members of
the agencies, programs and institutions of the church, the council said.

In another case, the Tennessee Annual Conference had sought a declaratory
decision on the rule that ends Judicial Council service at the conclusion of
General Conference, if the member has had his or her 70th birthday before
the opening day of the session. 

Since annual conference requests for declaratory decisions are limited to
"matters relating to annual conferences or the work therein," the council
said it could not accept jurisdiction on this question. The Rev. John G.
Corry, vice president of the Judicial Council and a member of the Tennessee
Annual Conference, recused himself from the discussion.

Reconsideration was granted to the Norway Annual Conference. At the
council's fall meeting, the court had disagreed with the presiding bishop
about the acceptability of the conference plan for restructuring. Additional
information submitted for this session led the council to withdraw its
previous decision and refer the case to the Judicial Court of the Northern
Europe Central Conference.

In another case, the council agreed with an earlier decision of the
Northeastern Jurisdiction Committee on Appeals that it had no jurisdiction
to hear the appeal of a former probationary member who was not accepted for
full membership in the conference - that is, granted credentials as a
clergyman. The council said that since the person had not been charged with
an offense, there was no trial and no appeal.

"The record does not reflect any violations of fair process," according to
the decision. The council noted that in cases of involuntary discontinuance
such as this, fair process requires timely notice, a hearing and the right
to have an advocate. Violations of the process are to be taken up with the
presiding officer in a timely manner, the council said.

Two cases from the Northern Illinois Annual Conference were also decided.
One was brought forward from the council's fall session so that more
information could be provided by the annual conference. It related to the
convening of a special clergy session in May 1998, when the regular session
was scheduled less than three weeks later. The council affirmed the bishop's
decision that the special session was properly called and limited to the
powers stated in the call.

In the other case, the council said requests for rulings at a special
session of the Northern Illinois Annual Conference last Nov. 14 were
improperly presented and out of order. They were declared null and void.

The California-Nevada Annual Conference bishop's ruling, during the 1998
annual conference session, that conference budget support for its
Reconciling Congregations program is not discriminatory or exclusive was
affirmed by the council. It agreed with the bishop's refusal to answer other
questions posed at the same time that were moot and hypothetical.

The council also ruled that the clergy sexual ethics policy of the
California-Pacific Annual Conference as adopted in annual conference session
last year does not violate the 1996 Discipline and previous Judicial Council
decisions.

The council denied a request from the Board of Discipleship to reconsider an
October decision. In it, the court denied the legality of having the General
Conference pass enabling legislation before ratification of the
constitutional changes on which such legislation would be based.

In other business, the Judicial Council is asking every annual conference
that has had a restructuring case before the court to submit a copy of its
final conference structure by Aug. 15. If the restructure is not in final
form, the annual conference is being asked to submit a statement  detailing
the current status.

# # #

______________
United Methodist News Service
http://www.umc.org/umns/
newsdesk@umcom.umc.org
(615)742-5472