1.Miñagorri's had complained that she suffered harm when she was assaulted by the principal through grabbing her arm and threatening her as interpreted by Florida's Private Sector Whistleblower Act (2006). Minnagorri asserts that her complain to the Archdiocese was met by the termination of her employment, which prompted her to file a case.
2.The organization disputes the court’s incapability to resolve this case under the “First Amendment's bar” governing judicial court criticism of religious policies and management, which is stipulated in the Florida's Private Sector Whistleblower Act section 448.102(3). The organization reaffirms that the issues regarding discipline and faith, religious rules, customs, and laws governing these issues have been enacted by the church judicial system; therefore, the legal courts must adhere to the decisions made by the body as paramount and mandatory.
3.The court says in as much as they lack power over the church’s rules, customs, and laws the Supreme Court allows third parties to file negligent-hiring and negligent supervision claims against churches. The civil courts can also resolve cases whereby internal church issues do not involve third parties.
4.Gonzalez vs. Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila (1926) case proves that courts lack the capacity to review cases involving the clergy and their affiliated churches since most issues entail church disciplinary committee and faith, and churches have their own rules, customs, and laws that govern them.
The interpretation christened “ecclesiastical abstention doctrine” prohibits courts from exercising power where an employment decision concerns a member of the clergy or an employee in religious institutions.
In case an individual has a concern with the employment decision of a religious organization, the matter to be examined concerns whether the employee serves a ministerial function or subscribes with the clergy. If this is true, a judicial court will handle this case as depicted in the case involving Alicea-Hernandez vs. Catholic Bishop of Chicago (7th Cir. 2003).
The law recognizes religious freedom especially in matters concerning the employment relationship that links together church ministers and religious institutions. Thus, this suffices as the constitutional right of the institution, which shields its employee selection process from interference by the judiciary.
5.Yes, the team does agree with me. The human resource practice take would be that employees whether in the religious or secular sector should be treated in a similar manner especially on matters regarding employment. This is because despite all the beliefs of a person, one offers the same labour services. In addition, the employer should ensure that sexual offences are taken seriously, so that other employees do not take advantage of their colleagues as a way of payback for something done at the place of work. Strict measures are to be taken on employees found violating this policy to ensure an excellent environment for each and every employee.
On the issue of age, gender and race, employees should not be discriminated on the basis of such factors rather they should be treated equally regardless of such factors.
Termination procedures need to be followed strictly so that an employee is not sacked verbally but rather the contract letter signed at the beginning should be followed to the letter in order to ensure that the employee and the employer are fully satisfied with the whole process. After the termination of the contract, the employer needs to make sure that all the dues of the employee who has been fired have been paid.
In cases whereby the employee is found to be innocent, and the allegations he or she has made against the supervisor are true, the employee has to be given all the compensation as required for the damages caused him or her.