03-003219 Tommie L. Watkins, Jr. vs. Greater Bethel Ame Church And Rev. John White, Sr. Status: Closed Recommended Order on Tuesday, February 24, 2004.

Summary: Petitioner failed to prove that he was terminated because of marital status.

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

TOMMIE L. WATKINS, JR., )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) Case No. 03 - 3219

)

GREATER BETHEL AME CHURCH, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

A formal heari ng in the above - styled case was held before

Florence Snyder Rivas, Administrative Law Judge, Division of

Administrative Hearings, on December 2, 2003, via video

teleconference at sites in Miami and Tallahassee, Florida.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: D avid H. Nevel, Esquire

Nevel & Greenfield, P.A.

11900 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 806

North Miami, Florida 33181

For Respondent: Robert L. Norton, Esquire

Allen, Norton & Blue, P.A

121 Majorca, Suite 300

Coral Gables, Florida 33134

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

Whether Respondent violated Section 760.10(1)(a), Florida

Statutes, by terminating Petitioner's employment on account of

his marital status.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

These proceedings were commenced on July 22, 2002, by

Petitioner, Tommie L. Watkins, Jr. (Petitioner or Watkins), by

filing of a Charge of Discrimination against Greater Bethel AME

Church (Respondent or Greater Bethel) and Rev. John White, Sr.

(White), with the Florida Commission on Human Relations (FCHR).

On July 28, 2003, the FCHR issued a no cause determination,

stating there was no reasonable cause to believe that an

unlawful employment practice had occurre d. Thereafter, Watkins

timely asserted his right to an administrative hearing. At the

hearing, Petitioner withdrew his claim against White.

The identity of witnesses, exhibits and attendant rulings

are contained in the one - volume transcript of the proc eeding

filed on January 15, 2004. The parties timely submitted

Proposed Recommended Orders, which have been carefully

considered.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Watkins was employed by Greater Bethel, a congregation

within the AME (African Methodist Episcopal) Chur ch, from June

2000 through August 8, 2001.

2. Respondent is an employer within the meaning of Chapter

760, Florida Statutes, popularly known as the Florida Civil

Rights Act (FCRA). At all times material to this case,

Respondent acted through its duly - aut horized representative,

White, who served as Greater Bethel’s senior minister and chief

executive officer.

3. At relevant times, Greater Bethel provided an AIDS

outreach ministry. White hired Watkins to direct its AIDS

prevention programs, under the dire ct supervision of Rev.

Marilyn Hardy (Hardy). It was also White who eventually fired

Watkins.

4. Watkins is gay, and his sexual orientation was known to

White at all relevant times.

5. Throughout his decade - plus tenure at Greater Bethel,

White had hired other gay individuals, married and single, to

work there. In Watkins' view, White hired Watkins for the AIDs

prevention position precisely because Watkins was gay (as well

as African - American) because, in Watkins’ words, the program

". . . targeted bla ck men who have sex with men. . . ."

6. Yet, Watkins contends, the governing bodies of the AME

Church, and individuals who served on them at times relevant to

this case, were opposed to allowing practicing homosexuals to

serve in positions of spiritual l eadership within the Church.

It is undisputed that religious organizations have a

constitutional right to ordain their clergy without the

constraints imposed by anti - discrimination laws applicable to

jobs which are performed at the church, but not specifi cally

related to its religious mission.

7. While Watkins continued to work in the AIDS program,

and White continued as Greater Bethel's pastor, both men

campaigned for election to positions involving spiritual

leadership.

8. Soon after Watkins was hired in June 2000, he sought

election to the Board of Examiners, which represents the South

Florida Conference of the AME Church (the Board). Election to

the Board is a prerequisite to becoming ordained as an AME

clergyman. For Watkins to be considered for a dmission to the

Board, his application needed to be sponsored by an incumbent

board member. Though not required to do so, White, a Board

member, supported Watkins' application. Watkins' application

was denied by the Board in October 2000.

9. Watkins ar gued, but did not prove, that his failure to

be elected to the Board and ultimately ordained, as well as his

employment termination, was related to Watkins' marital status.

Watkins claimed that by remaining single, Watkins posed an

obstacle to White's pro spects of being elected Bishop of

Florida.

10. The only competent evidence regarding White's

candidacy for Bishop of Florida was provided by White himself,

who testified that from November 1996 to November 2000, White

offered himself as a candidate for th at post. White's candidacy

was unsuccessful.

11. Watkins resented the fact he had not been elected to

the Board and, therefore, had no chance to be ordained. Watkins

was convinced that he was rejected because the then Bishop felt

that gays seeking to se rve in the AME ministry should at least

attempt to cover up their sexual orientation by participating in

a sham marriage.

12. Watkins' theory is based entirely upon his own

speculation, and is unpersuasive. Watkins admits that White

said nothing about Wa tkins’ marital status, or White's candidacy

for Bishop of Florida, until May 2001. This was some five

months after White's campaign for Bishop had ended.

13. Watkins fell far short of proving he was fired on

account of his marital status. It appears in stead, that he fell

out of favor with his boss, White, months after he was hired and

months after White's campaign for Bishop had ended when in May

2001, he launched a protest of AME's failure to elect him to the

Board.

14. Watkins wanted White's support on this issue and was

upset that it was not forthcoming. White, for his part, was

upset that Watkins wanted to challenge the Board with regard to

what Watkins perceived to be the former Bishop’s bias against

gays in the ministry.

15. Relations between W atkins and White deteriorated from

May 2001 to August 2001, when White fired Watkins and demoted

Hardy to perform White's job duties.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

16. The Division of Administrative Hearings has

jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter at t his

proceeding pursuant to Sections 120.57(1) and 120.569 and

Chapter 760, Florida Statutes (2001).

17. Under the Florida Civil Rights Act, it is unlawful to

discharge or to refuse to hire an individual on account of his

martial status. In this case, th ere is no evidence that

Respondent's decision to hire and later to fire Watkins was

related to Watkins' marital status. Rather, it was Watkins'

insistence that White join him in protesting the Board's failure

to admit him into membership and to ordain him , which resulted

in the elimination of his job.

18. It is not a violation of Chapter 760 for Greater

Bethel to become impatient, and ultimately intolerant, about

Watkins' growing militancy on the subject of gays in the AME

ministry.

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the FCHR enter a final order which

DENIES Petitioner's Charge of Discrimination and dismisses his

complaint.

DONE AND ENTERED this 24th day of February, 2004, in

Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

S

FLORENCE SNYDER RIVAS

Administrative Law Judge

Division of Administrative Hearings

The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3060

(850) 488 - 9675 SUNCOM 278 - 9675

Fax Filing (850) 921 - 6847

www.doah.state.fl.us

Filed with the Clerk of the

Division of Administrative Hearings

this 24th day of February, 2004.

COPIES FURNISHED :

Denise Crawford, Agency Clerk

Florida Commission on Human Relations

2009 Apalachee Parkway, Su ite 100

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

David H. Nevel, Esquire

Nevel & Greenfield, P.A.

11900 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 806

North Miami, Florida 33181

Robert L. Norton, Esquire

Allen, Norton & Blue, P.A

121 Majorca, Suite 300

Coral Gables, Florida 33134

Cecil Howard, General Counsel

Florida Commission on Human Relations

2009 Apalachee Parkway, Suite 100

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within

15 days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions

to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that

will issue the Final Order in this case.