A split Illinois appeals panel has ruled a swami, who claimed her Hindu temple in Chicago did not pay her overtime for marketing work, was not entitled to such pay, because she was an exempt religious worker.
The Sept. 3 opinion was penned by Justice Robert Gordon, with concurrence from Justice Jesse Reyes, of the Illinois First District Appellate Court in Chicago. The ruling favored Temple of Kriya Yoga in a 2014 action filed by Mary Samano in Cook County Circuit Court. Justice Mathias Delort agreed Samano did not qualify for overtime, but rather because she volunteered the time in question.
Samano started working for pay in 1999 at the temple as a yoga teacher, eventually becoming a swami, or priest. The head of the temple, whom Samano called the "guru," was Melvin Higgins, also known as Goswami Kriyananda. Besides yoga classes, the temple conducted lectures, meditation sessions and teacher training. The temple also ran a bookstore and website, selling items related to spirituality, according to court papers.
In 2006, Higgins had Samano start doing marketing and website management for the temple. According to Samano, she worked an average of 60 hours per week on the marketing and website, but was only paid for two-and-a-half-days at straight time. In December 2012, Samano complained she should receive overtime pay, but instead, Higgins fired her, Samano said.
Samano sued Higgins and the temple, claiming they owed her overtime wages and had retaliated against her for demanding the wages. Samano cited the Illinois Minimum Wage Law and the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act. Higgins, who lived in France, died in 2015. The case went to a bench trial in 2017.
The temple argued Samano was not eligible for overtime pay because she was engaged in religious activity, and such activity is exempt from wage laws. However, Judge James E. Snyder determined Samano's marketing and website work was "technical in nature and was separate from her spiritual work."
Snyder awarded Samano $75,000 damages and $35,000 in attorney fees. The temple appealed.
Presiding Justice Gordon sent the temple some good karma.
"The reason for plaintiff’s work cannot be removed from the work itself. We thus cannot agree with the trial court’s characterization of plaintiff’s work as entirely secular. Such a characterization strips plaintiff’s work of any context as to its relationship with defendant’s charitable mission as a whole. Instead, plaintiff’s function was to disseminate the spiritual messaging of defendant temple in various forms to the public at large, in addition to her obviously religious functions as a swami and disciple," Gordon said.
Gordon added, "Plaintiff’s work, while administrative or technical in nature, nevertheless had a religious component, as plaintiff disseminated communications about defendant and its mission, maintained a website for the sale of religious memorabilia and sermons, and facilitated a streaming service by which Higgins’ religious messages would be spread more widely to the populace."
Gordon also noted there was no evidence the temple agreed to pay Samano for more than two-and-a-half-days per week or required she work more than that amount.
Justice Delort concluded Samano did not deserve overtime, but not because her work was religious oriented. Rather, he said he believed she had volunteered the extra hours.
"Although Samano was an ordained swami and had engaged in some ministerial acts, there was ample evidence that she was primarily — if not overwhelmingly — engaged in activities that were widely performed by laypersons in nonreligious environments, such as television production, handling e-mails, marketing, and information technology work," Delort said.
Delort continued, "Samano worked extra hours as a volunteer for many years without complaint or expectation of pay, and that her agreement with the defendant limited her paid hours to two-and-a-half-days per week."
Delort noted people often volunteer to work, without wages, at houses of worship by ushering, passing collection plates or cleaning.
The case was returned to circuit court for further action.
Samano was represented by Goggin & Associates, of suburban Oak Brook.
The temple was represented by Johnson & Bell, of Chicago.