Melbourne Law School - Theses

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    The status of clergy of the Anglican Church of Australia: employees or office holders?
    Phillips, Barry ( 1997)
    The acceptance of the traditional view that clergy are the holders of an office has been the subject of challenge over past years and is increasingly being challenged nowadays. In particular, there have been claims by clergy and their dependents for worker's compensation benefits, claims by clergy for wrongful or unfair dismissal and claims by third parties alleging vicarious liability on the part of the Church. Changes in technology, among other matters, have led to an increase in the number of employees who work from a home office. When the remuneration, associated fringe benefits and other entitlements received by clergy are taken into account, it appears that there is little difference between the employee working from a home office and clergy holding parish appointments. This thesis re-considers the status of clergy in the Anglican Church of Australia. There is considered first the administration of the Anglican Church of Australia. This is followed by a consideration of the concept of employment and the concept of an office. Associated with this consideration are two matters which require specific examination. The first of these is the incidence of income tax. Most clergy have income tax deducted at source in accordance with the 'pay as you earn' provisions of the relevant legislation. Yet, these provisions are applicable only to employees. The issue which arises, and which is examined, is whether by participating in this method of payment of income tax clergy are estopped from denying an employment status. It is concluded that both in law and by direction of the Commissioner of Taxation this is merely a matter of convenience and does not constitute evidence of employment status. The second of the associated issues is that of the parson's freehold. The concept of a 'living' is not part of the law or practice of the Anglican Church of Australia. Had it been so, it would have added considerable weight to the argument in favour of the status of office holder. Accordingly, the support for office holder status is weakened. A review of the common law in Australia and elsewhere leads to the conclusion that the status of office holder is still the accepted view. The employment relationship is a contractual relationship made between two parties, an employee and an employer. Therefore, there is examined the issue of who might be the employer of the clergy. The conclusion is that there is no person or body who has sufficient involvement, control or responsibility to be described correctly as an employer. Finally, there is a consideration of the source of the responsibilities and rights of clergy. The conclusion is that the traditional view of clergy as office holders has not been displaced and is still applicable to-day.