Title VII "Ministerial Exception" Does Not Apply to Technology Teacher in Catholic School
1 min read
Apr 5, 2012
A federal district court in Ohio has found that Title VII's "ministerial exception" does not apply to a non-Catholic technology teacher at a Catholic school. The Ohio case, Dias v. Archdiocese of Cincinnati, et al., was one of the first to analyze the ministerial exception following the U.S. Supreme Court's January 2012 ruling that the exception applied to a teacher at a Lutheran school in Hosanna-Tabor Church v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
The Ohio case involved a technology teacher at a Catholic school who was terminated after her employer learned that she had become impregnated by artificial insemination. The teacher sued for discrimination on the basis of pregnancy under Title VII and the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. The Archdiocese of Cincinnati argued that she fell within the "ministerial exception" based upon her inherent role as a model of Catholic values for students. The federal court rejected that argument for two reasons. First, the court found important differences between the case before it and the facts of Hosanna-Tabor -- where the Lutheran teacher in that case had felt that she was"called" to her position by God, taught religious education, led worship, and studied in a theological program; here, the technology teacher did not teach any religion, did not participate in any worship, and, in fact, was not even Catholic herself. Second, the Ohio court found, the teacher's status as an educator in a Catholic school and alleged duty to act as a Catholic role model was not sufficient to make her a "minister"; such a rule, the court found, "would create an exception capable of swallowing up the rule."
This decision is helpful to religious employers who are concerned about the scope of the ministerial exception. The case shows that, even after Hosanna-Tabor, real ministerial activities and status are still necessary to in order to claim the exception. Religious employers should expect that all employees will continue to be protected by nondiscrimination laws unless there is strong evidence that the employee is actually a religious minister. Hinshaw will keep tabs on this issue, as it will surely develop in further cases.
Topics
Featured Insights

Press Release
Sep 18, 2026
Paris Glazer Named to Chicago Daily Law Bulletin’s 2026 40 Attorneys Under Forty

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Sep 17, 2026
Federal and State Regulators Continue Crackdown on Junk Fees

Press Release
Sep 17, 2026
Defense Verdict Reduces $134 Million Demand to $2 Million in Catastrophic Motorcycle Injury Case

Insights for Insurers Alert
Sep 16, 2026
America 250: The Nation’s Unique Contributions to Insurance Coverage Law and Litigation

In The News
Sep 15, 2026
Lucy Wang Discusses the California Insurance Commissioner’s Role in Protecting Consumers

Press Release
Sep 10, 2026
Hinshaw Attorneys Recognized as 2027 Lexology Index Thought Leaders: USA

In The News
Sep 10, 2026
Nicholas Ajello and Gregory Emry Analyze FAA’s Proposed BVLOS Drone Regulations

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Sep 9, 2026
“Play Now, Arbitrate Later”—“Not So Fast,” Ninth Circuit Says

In The News
Sep 9, 2026
Jennifer Driscoll Discusses “Patchwork” of Laws Targeting Personalized Pricing

Employment Law Observer
Sep 8, 2026
Five Workplace Issues Every Employer Should Address Before They Become a Costly Lawsuit

Press Release
Sep 8, 2026
Jim Sandy Appointed Chair of ABA Debt Collection and Bankruptcy Subcommittee

