Gloriavale ‘Overseeing Shepherd’ is the employer of workers – Employment Court ruling
The Employment Court has formally recognised that the “Overseeing Shepherd” of Gloriavale was the boss of six women who worked at the secretive Christian commune.
And the person in that role is “liable to account for any alleged breaches” against the women.
Earlier this year the Employment Court ruled that Serenity Pilgrim, Anna Courage, Rose Standtrue, Crystal Loyal, Pearl Valor and Virginia Courage – who were all born and raised at Gloriavale but left as adults – were employees and not volunteers during their time there.
The court heard the women were “taught from birth that they were to submit to male leadership in all aspects of their life, including their work” and any suggestion of “choice” was largely illusory, said a long-awaited court ruling released today.
All six described how they were effectively born into and kept in “servitude” – which is illegal in New Zealand – and had no power to choose their own path while living at Gloriavale.
During their high-profile case, Employment Court Chief Judge Christina Inglis heard claims from the women that they had to work “extremely long” hours serving the 600-strong population, mainly in “deliberately-gendered” jobs including “teams” that focused on “cooking, cleaning and washing clothes”.
“They were born into the community and imbued from birth with well-accepted norms as to their place in the community and the work they would be expected to do as they grew up,” said the judge in her ruling.
“In this regard, the [women] knew from an early age that they would work on the teams, and their early life as girls was primed to that end.
“I have reached the conclusion, based on the evidence before the court, that the plaintiffs did their work – which admittedly benefited the community – because that is what they were told to do; what each of them had been trained to accept from birth; and the consequences of not doing what was expected were dire and well known – exclusion from the community, from all that was familiar, from family and friends, and into a world they know little about, were ill-equipped to navigate and had been taught to fear.”
Chief Judge Inglis ruled that the women, though housed and fed by the community while living there, were not volunteers as Gloriavale claimed.
“The [women] worked under the strict direction and control of the Overseeing Shepherd and were subordinate to him. They worked strictly as required, for long hours and for years on end,” she said.
“The nature of the work was akin to working in a large-scale hostel, which would otherwise be paid for.
“The work was essential to the community’s operations. The [women] were rewarded for the work, namely by being able to remain in the community, and this was understood by all parties.
“They were not volunteers when working on the teams. They expected to be rewarded for the work they undertook and they were rewarded for their work. They are accordingly not excluded from the gateway to minimum entitlements and protections on this basis.”
Since she released her decision further court action has been progressed to determine who at Gloriavale was the specific employer of the women.
Today Chief Judge Inglis released her decision on that matter making a number of declarations to confirm who that employer was for the women – and is going forward.
“The individual that holds the role of Overseeing Shepherd is liable to account for any alleged breaches against the plaintiff employees,” she said.
She made it clear that the role of employer relates to the role – not a specific individual who held that role at any particular time.
She said the original role was held by Gloriavale founder Hopeful Christian – a convicted sex offender whose legal name was Neville Cooper.
When he died Chief Judge Inglis said “there was a transfer by novation from Hopeful Christian to Howard Temple”.
Temple, 83, is currently facing a raft of child sex abuse charges in the Greymouth District Court
Court documents allege the man is accused of 24 charges of indecent assault involving 10 female complainants who were aged between 9 and 20 at the time of the alleged offending.
Chief Judge Inglis -who visited Gloriavale during the Employment Court case – said it was “wholly consistent with equity and good conscience that the Overseeing Shepherd be accountable for actions/inactions as employer.“
“And that the rights and obligations of the employment relationship roll over to the new Overseeing Shepherd on death,” she said.
“I am satisfied, based on the evidence before the Court, that the Overseeing Shepherd was the employer during the periods that each of the plaintiffs worked on the Teams.
“From the inception of the Gloriavale Community until his death on 15 May 2018, the Overseeing Shepherd was Hopeful Christian and, from that date, Howard Temple.”
Chief Judge Inglis formally declared that all six women were “employed by the Overseeing Shepherd” from the time they started working fulltime on Gloriavale’s teams until they left the teams or the community.
The decision does not mark the end of the court action against Gloriavale.
A claim against the Labour Inspectorate for breach of statutory duty in both the women’s and men’s cases is ongoing.
“The declaration of employment status in these proceedings is the first step for the six named plaintiffs” said the judge.
“If they wish to pursue a claim for compensation, lost wages, penalties and the like, fresh proceedings will need to be filed.”
The women’s case followed one by a group of men who were born and raised at Gloriavale but later left the community.
Hosea Courage, Daniel Pilgrim and Levi Courage sought a declaration from the Employment Court around their status after they left school and worked at the commune and in Gloriavale-owned businesses during their teenage years.
Chief Judge Inglis ruled the men were all employees at Gloriavale – from when they were just 6 years old.
Further, the members undertook “strenuous, difficult, and sometimes dangerous” work when they were still legally required to be at school.
“The fact that the work was undertaken within a religious community, and according to a particular set of beliefs and values, did not mean that it could escape close scrutiny by external agencies or avoid minimum employment standards if they applied,” the judge said in the men’s decision.
“The plaintiffs worked regularly and for long hours, primarily for the benefit of Gloriavale’s commercial operations.
“The work was done for the reward of the necessities of life and the ability to remain in the community. It was subject to strict control.
“The work undertaken by the plaintiffs as children between the ages of 6 and 14 could not be described as ‘chores’, including because of the commercial nature of the activities, because they were performed over an extended period of time and because they were strenuous, difficult, and sometimes dangerous.”
Barrister Brian Henry leads the legal team representing the former Gloriavale members.
He said today’s ruling was “critical” as Gloriavale had argued that that when an Overseeing Shepherd dies, any claim related to the time that person was in charge could not be pursued.
“Chief Judge Inglis is very clear in her decision that it is the role of the Overseeing Shepherd not the individual which carried the ultimate responsibility within the community,” he said.
“We are pleased to now have the clarity needed to move forward.
“The decision by Chief Judge Inglis paves the way for us to continue the fight for justice for our clients which includes filing in the courts against the Labour Inspectorate and seeking financial redress for loss of wages and compensation for the terrible breaches of law and appalling treatment these women have had to endure.
“Gloriavale is a large, well-oiled machine worth around $65m and in possession of significant assets.
“There are 65 million reasons to keep fighting this to achieve the justice these and many other former Gloriavale victims, are entitled to.”