Tony Ortega had a fascinating document on his blog amongst the weekly “Sunday Funnies.”
It is indicative of how paranoid things have become inside the bunker. And how much effect the work of those who have spoken out about abuses within the church has been. And how mortally wounded Dear Leader really is and how desperate to end the “torture” of exposure he is.
They are actually trying to get new people to sign a bizarre document, something so astonishing it bears as much exposure as possible. This says everything about the state of the RCS.
The language of the document is remarkable for a number of reasons, which I shall mention below. What is most striking is that it exists at all. The admission that they are so fearful of people speaking out about what they witness when on staff is the most damning indictment of what the church has become. Why would anyone fear this? Surely those who join staff are the most dedicated members of the religion? And if it is such a problem about what they say after they leave, then its a bald admission of just how bad it must be.
Non-disparagement agreements are typically used as part of settling disputes and for some executives in the business world. Not for general employees, and certainly not for “volunteers” at a church. You will not find one of these in a normal church.
This is apparently another “breakthrough” implemented with GAG II — it seems nothing is too outrageous for the sheeple to accept without a murmur.
As for the agreement itself, I would guess it is an attempt to deal with the fact that virtually every “agreement” that has been signed by people when they are LEAVING staff are found unenforceable (when challenged — though this is not common and they DO serve the purpose of shutting people up because they THINK they are valid — see California Appeals Court decision in the Laura DiCrescenzo case) as they were signed under some measure of duress. People will sign anything put in front of them to finally get out of the prison they have found themselves in. But a document signed when you “join” cannot be asserted to have been done under duress or “I would have signed anything to get out.”
Nevertheless, I cannot imagine a court ever determining this agreement is enforceable.
It is entirely one sided. The church agrees to nothing — they can disparage any former staff (and often do) with no consequences.
There is no consideration — it is stated that the staff are given services, but that is typically not true. In any event they are in exchange for working 60 or 80 hours a week for nothing (and if you don’t complete your “volunteer contract”?? you are billed for any services).
There is no opportunity for the person to consult a lawyer (and if they did, any non-brain-dead lawyer would advise against signing it, at minimum requiring reciprocity). In fact, it is cleverly worded to avoid the usual language “I have had the opportunity to consult with legal counsel….”
It of course also does not make clear that one must tell the truth under oath or when required to do so by law enforcement even if they would consider the truth to be “disparagement.” (You will note that it makes no reference to truth at all, in fact, this is an effort to suppress truth)
And I also do not believe such an agreement “in perpetuity” would be looked upon kindly by any court.
So, as with all of these documents, the only real purpose is to scare people into THINKING they are valid.
I bet Miscavige does not like THIS showing up on the internet. It’s like waving a flag to the world “yes, we do all sorts of bad things, and we are doing everything we can to ensure nobody ever hears about them.”
Here is the document, kindly retyped by Tony O for ease of reading:
CHURCH of SCIENTOLOGY OF __________
Religious Covenant of Non-Disparagement
I, _________ (print name), have been offered a post on the staff of Church of Scientology of __________ (the “Church”). As a member of the Scientology religious community represented by the Church, I am committed to forwarding the religious goals and tenets of the Scientology religion and the Church itself. I made this religious commitment in order to help every being I can attain his or her full spiritual potential, the path to which was discovered by L. Ron Hubbard as set forth in the Scientology Scripture.
1. To be a staff member of the Church is an incomparable opportunity to serve my religion and carries with it the most serious and sacred obligations. The Church is the focal point of the Scientology religion and all Scientology activities in its community and the stable emanation point fort the spiritual growth for all Scientologists living in the area.
2. I recognize that with this opportunity to serve the Scientology religion as a member of the Church’s staff comes an equally important responsibility to do all I can to ensure that the Church remains effective and accomplishes its religious mission. I understand that this is the most solemn of all the responsibilities that I will shoulder while on staff and is one responsibility I must continue to observe even if I leave the Church’s service. Scientology parishioners, Field Auditors, Field Ministries, City Offices and Missions in the surrounding community look to the Church to disseminate the Scientology religion in their area, hold counseling standards high and to further their quest for spiritual freedom. The inviolate strength and integrity of the Church and its staff therefore are critical to the spiritual life of Scientologists in the area. If the credibility or effectiveness of the Church or its senior staff, or executives of higher ecclesiastical Churches such as Religious Technology Center (“RTC”) and Church of Scientology International (“CSI”) is diminished or harmed in any way, Scientologists throughout the area will suffer incalculable spiritual harm.
3. I therefore agree that in exchange for the opportunity to serve on the Church’s staff and to receive the benefits available to all staff members, including the right to receive Scientology religious auditing and training to forward my own spiritual growth, I swear to forever use the full extent of my ability to uphold my obligations under this Religious Covenant of Non-Disparagement (“Non-Disparagement Covenant”). I will never do less. Accordingly, I PROMISE AND SWEAR NEVER TO SAY OR ENCOURAGE OR INDUCE OTHERS TO SAY OR WRITE ANYTHING NEGATIVE OR DISPARAGING ABOUT L. RON HUBBARD (“LRH”), THE CHURCH, CSI, RTC OR ANY OTHER CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY OR THEIR STAFF, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS OR TRUSTEES, IN WHATEVER CAPACITY, OR ABOUT THE RELIGIOUS PRACTICES, MATERIALS, TECHNOLOGY AND SERVICES OF THE SCIENTOLOGY RELIGION. I UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THIS NON-DISPARAGEMENT COVENANT APPLIES NOT JUST WHILE I AM SERVING ON THE CHURCH’S STAFF BUT ALSO IN PERPETUITY, SHOULD I EVER LEAVE STAFF.
4. The term DISPARAGE means:
A. Comments and statements (oral or written) that could or do negatively affect or cast the Church, LRH, CSI, RTC or any Church of Scientology, their staff, officers, directors, or trustees or the religious practices, materials, technology and services of the Scientology religion (“Staff and Religious Practices”) in a negative light.
B. Comments and statements (oral or written) that could or do harm the reputation of the Church, LRH or any Church of Scientology, CSI, RTC and Scientology Staff and Religious Practices including, but not limited to, negative or derogatory comments and statements about financial status, operations, and the character of any Church of Scientology or its senior staff ecclesiastical leadership.
C. Comments and statements (oral or written) that could or do harm the Church, CSI and/or RTC’s relationship with any Scientology parishioner(s) including, but not limited to, comments that could or do harm any Scientology parishioner’s confidence in or hinder their spiritual growth in the Scientology religion or progress up The Bridge.
5. I understand the gravity of the action I am taking in signing this Non-Disparagement Covenant, I know that I am accepting responsibility for some of the most sacred and important obligations that exist in my religion. I further understand that the spiritual well-being of my fellow Scientologists depends on my ability to keep the promises I make herein. I also know that I am giving up forever some very important personal rights under the United States Constitution. But I also understand that I would not be permitted to serve as a member of the Church staff unless I agreed in advance to the terms of this Non-Disparagement Covenant. I take this action because I believe my personal spiritual commitment to Scientology and the betterment of humankind take precedence over any rights of free speech I may have as to these specific matters.
6. I understand and agree that the promises I have made in this Non-Disparagement Covenant relate to special, unique and extraordinary matters and that a violation of any of my promises will cause irreparable injury not just to the Church but also to the Scientology religion as a whole and that there are no legal remedies available that could correct this injury. I further understand and agree that such harm is likely to be very substantial and that it will vary with the nature of the disparaging comment or statement, making it extremely difficult and impractical, if not impossible, to measure the full extent of the actual damages caused by a violation of this Non-Disparagement Covenant. For these reasons I therefore agree that if I breach or threaten to breach any of my promises in this Non-Disparagement Covenant that, among other things:
A. The Church may seek a court order to stop me from breaching or threatening to breach my promises. Because a public hearing to enforce any provision of this Non-Disparagement Covenant might cause disclosure of information deemed confidential information, I agree that if there is litigation concerning this Non-Disparagement Covenant, I shall cooperate with the Church to seek an appropriate order from the county court, or any other court of competent jurisdiction, to seal the file and issue a protective order prohibiting disclosure of confidential information and/or limiting the disclosure of any other information obtained through discovery, to the maximum extent allowed under law.
B. In addition to anything else a court may require me to do for violating this Non-Disparagement Covenant, that I shall pay the Church $25,000 as liquidated damages (and not as a penalty) for each individual violation of this Non-Disparagement Covenant and/or for each individual instance of causing, participating in, cooperating with or encouraging the publication or broadcast of information that results in a violation of this Non-Disparagement Covenant. I understand that it is difficult to ascertain the exact extent of damage and harm a violation would cause the Church, but I acknowledge that $25,000 is fair and reasonable.
7. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth herein, I understand and agree that the provisions of this Non-Disparagement Covenant shall not apply to the disclosure of information as compelled by law or pursuant to subpoena or order of any judicial, legislative, executive, regulatory or administrative body, provided such law, subpoena or order is valid and constitutional.
8. The promises and agreements I have made in this Non-Disparagement Covenant shall be interpreted and enforced in accordance with the laws of the state without reference to the laws of any other state or country. I agree that if legal action is necessary to enforce the promises I have made, that it may be brought in the court of the county in which the Church is located or any other court of competent jurisdiction, and I agree in advance to be subject to the personal jurisdiction of that court. This Non-Disparagement Covenant shall inure to the benefit of, and be binding upon the persons or organizations that received or are assigned the rights and duties of this Non-Disparagement Covenant (i.e. successors and assigns).
9. I understand that all the promises and other obligations I have made in this Non-Disparagement Covenant will be legally binding on me forever. However, if a court happens to rule that one or more of the promises I have made or obligations I have agreed to are not enforceable, then I agree that the rest of the promises and obligations I made shall remain in full force and effect and legally enforceable against me for all time.
10. I HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK AND RESOLVE ALL QUESTIONS I HAVE HAD ABOUT THIS NON-DISPARAGEMENT COVENANT. I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS NON-DISPARAGEMENT COVENANT CONSTITUTES THE ENTIRE UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CHURCH AND ME CONCERNING THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS NON-DISPARAGEMENT COVENANT. NO MODIFICATION OR TERMINATION OF THIS NON-DISPARAGEMENT COVENANT SHALL BE VALID UNLESS IN WRITING SIGNED MY BOTH THE CHURCH AND ME. I REPRESENT THAT I NOW HAVE NO QUESTIONS OR RESERVATIONS CONCERNING THIS NON-DISPARAGEMENT COVENANT WHATSOEVER. BY SIGNING THIS NON-DISPARAGEMENT COVENANT I CAN UNEQUIVOCALLY STATE THAT I FULLY UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANVE TO MY RELIGION OF THE OBLIGATIONS TO WHICH I AM AGREEING AND THAT I HAVE SIGNED THIS NON-DISPARAGEMENT COVENANT WILLINGLY AND WITHOUT ANY PRESSURE OF ANY KIND.
Executed this ___ day of _______, 20__.
______________________________
(SIGNATURE)
______________________________
(Printed Full Name)
______________________________
(Home Address)
______________________________
(SIGNATURE OF WITNESS)
______________________________
(Printed Full Name)CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY OF __________
By its: ______________________________
(Title)
______________________________
(Signature)
Well that means writing a KR on any Scientologist would be an act of disparagement.
Also, since the RCS obviously is still counting all of us in its Scn 12 million head count, that means we are beyond disparagement as well. 😀
And declaring someone an SP is also pretty darn disparaging.
Sounds like a Schroedinger’s Cat Agreement to me.
This is sad
It must be frustrating for Lil’ Davey to not be able to get out of this pickle.
Lemme give you a clue, Dave (from Factor 14). “But the most valued point is admiration, and admiration is so strong its absence alone permits persistence.” –LRH
You can’t even get someone to admire what a colossal asshole you are! Pitiful.
Okay, so I guess I would owe about “one hundred beeelion dollars” by now…
Is Davey going to end up with only a few hundred diehard kool aide drinkers living in the desert somewhere plotting and scheming? I refuse to believe this man will not be brought to justice. At the same time it is very difficult to believe he will be brought to justice. In the meantime Scientology as an organization is falling apart. Eventually most people will leave but not all. I wonder what will happen then.
All I can say is Monica Dingaling probably hit the jackpot on billable hours for this.
Sheeesh
From what little I know about Non-Disparagement Clauses or contracts or whatever is that they are unenforceable if what the person says is true.
But anyhoo…
The fact that the Church of Paranoia as it should be called is having anyone sign this document is proof that that they are now completely paranoid.
Someone wrote earlier that the out of being signed under duress may not be unavailable which may be true for new staff but I suspect in typical foot bullet fashion that the Church will have current staff signing this thing and it will probably more than likely be under duress such as the thousands of hours of useless and nonproductive sec checking they received used to extort them to sign it which will in my opinion cause another exodus of staff.
I mean IMHO the main upset with the Church these days is that they break their original agreement with the public and staff.
For instance all us auditors agreed to apply Standard Tech according to the Auditors Code and then all of sudden we’re all forced to apply some shoddy substitute called the “Golden Age of Tech” which is basically an ARCX.
So all they are going to do here is ARCX many of the staff who are currently still working in the Orgs and thus create more enemies.
That’s all I gotta say.
Amen!
It’s a joke, yes?
Hey Dave, remember Clean Hands Make a Happy Life? You must be one of the most miserable people on the planet, short of outright murderers and child rapists and the like. How’s it feel to make so many people suffer for long periods of time?
It makes complete sense. It’s simply another way that the psychopath Miscavage is destroying the “church” by getting current staff to blow and fewer people to join. Seems right on program for his insanity. Another extreme effort to exert even greater control over how people think and act within the “church” and protect himself. Why don’t we stop calling it the RCS and call it what it is: THE CULT.
These new documents are only making plainly visible how it has always been as a staff member. Staff has always been a one sided affair where you are “obligated” to work your guts out while the CofS states clearly they have no intent to pay you or provide for your old age or your health or your family. Anyone being given these new contracts should really look at that closely because these are what describe how you will actually be treated.
Don’t listen to any hype or lies about “how they are going to win the birthday game and pay will be good” or how the “ideal org” is the first step in making viable orgs that pay staff. These documents are the truth – there has never been any intent whatsoever to run the orgs in such a way that the staff are paid or their needs taken care of. The actual intent and activity of the group know as CofS is to watch you work you work your life away for them committing sacrifice after sacrifice, then shrug and say “you signed a contract”.
And when you die, your senior may just complain that after 20 years of free service to your group, your memorial service is “Dev T” that is pulling people of post when they could be producing, as I am told happened with my old friend Janet Hill after she died from cancer.
But OTOH if you do something Miscavige doesn’t like, the CofS DOES promise to destroy you utterly no matter how many years of your life you devote to making Miscavige rich with no accountability I mean the great glorious cause of “total freedom”. This really is the deal you are getting when you join staff, think long and hard on that.
BTW, I really do think the purpose of CofS was to bring Total Freedom. Unfortunately, if Hubbard was going to be totally free, that meant that the rest of us had to be his total slaves.
The best time to flout the terms of the agreement is when you have no money. If the church sues a staff or SO member how are they going to get US$25 K from them? Blood from a stone! This is a weapon in terrorem not really designed to be “held up in court”. Firstly, the church will not get anything from a person with no money, secondly, they will be running up a legal bill, and thirdly it would be a PR disaster for a judge or jury to see this document, even if they have to hold it lawful.
In addition to this, there is of course the merits of what a person may say which is disparaging. No contract is valid if it is contra bones mores – and so if the person complains that he was assaulted, or defrauded, or that other people were assaulted or defrauded, or minors were treated badly, (for instance) then I cannot see a court (certainly not where I come from – South Africa) saying that it is legal to stifle the reporting of criminal behaviour. In some instances it is even illegal to fail to report criminal behaviour especially where minors are concerned.
Deep Six is probably right. This is primarily a ruse to smoke out dissidents. It stinks of desperation.
Excellent comment Wendy. Agreed 100%.
I think you hit the jackpot with an attempt to smoking out dissidents, especially those that feed materials to the Indie world. Breath the ‘wrath of God, ehm, Davie’ down their neck.
Greta
I never signed a staff or SO contract because I knew deep within that I would never activate it. My lifestyle did not conform to being a staff member when I joined Scn.
That being said, if I was free to join staff or the SO (and did seriously contemplate this without talking to anyone about it), I would have gladly signed such a document too. Why not, if being a staff member is your purpose? Why let some “legal jargon” get in the way of helping others? All current staff and new recruits will sign off on this without a problem. They do not forsee another way of life of not being connected to the church in some way or having change of heart towards Scientology and its management. They will also want to demonstrate that they are ethical and do not harbor ill thoughts towards Captain Miscavige.
I also agree with Deep Six. I’m sure new agreements will be drawn up for public as well, at the start of OT levels for sure. I think this is a new culling process to seek out the disaffected, put control measures in place for those in and further reinforce the implant that the church is all (and to be feared) and the individual is nothing.
Civil liberties do not exist within the RCS, indeed. Look at the wording of the agreement and its concept – suppression of free speech and any speech against the church equals disparagement, even when it’s true and valid.
I’m forwarding this to every media contact I have. We’ll see who runs with it. I advise every blogger here with similar connections to do the same.
On a separate note, MARY KAHN, are you the Mary who’s married to David? If so, please provide your e-mail address. I’d love to get in touch with you!
Hello War Horse,
Can you tell me who you are or give me an email address and I’ll respond?
As a general matter, non-disparagement clauses typically are enforceable, even in perpetuity. But three notable points: (1) The lack of reference to consultation with counsel, which you mention, and which is glaringly absent, (2) The lack of real “consideration” would make this agreement largely unenforceable as there is no quid-pro-quo, and (3) The qualification that speaking out is permitted if required by a court (unless such requirement is not constitutional)… COS always falls back on a theory that any legal requirement imposed on it violates the constitution. This contract is sad.
Its bolting the stable door after a herd has bolted. And a foot 16″ shell:-
” Surely those who join staff are the most dedicated members of the religion? And if it is such a problem about what they say after they leave, then its a bald admission of just how bad it must be. “
This all reduces to an equation: O + W = DM.
Assignment to DM: watch this video.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrXHcQyixTE&feature=youtube_gdata_player
When I attempt to communicate with my fav still-ins, I just want to let them know what’s going on out here: the lawsuits, the Youtubes, the blogs, the news reports. I know they won’t listen to me or believe anything I say. I just want it to register that something is going on out here, and it’s big.
I hope that when they run into something like this contract, or wonder why no one can even schedule an event anymore, when all they get is pressured for donations, when they wonder where everyone is, when they notice the bridge is now a merry-go-round, maybe they’ll remember there’s information just a google away.
Two thoughts.
1) Staff don’t hesitate to sign these documents because they don’t view their relationship with the Church as a “me vs. them” proposition. Staff believe these documents have been created to protect the Church from the big bad SP’s on the outside. Staff do not see it as an issue that could ever impact them personally. They think they will be in Scientology forever so they don’t care how bad the consequences of violating these agreements are. They don’t want anyone to be able to attack the Church, so they don’t object to these agreements. They could NEVER imagine that they themselves might one day be labeled as a Big Bad SP or ever have something negative happen that they feel should be shared with the broad public.
2) Unfortunately for DM, he now has a large chunk of staff who are under the radar and leaking info and he knows it. No one who is under the radar would willingly sign this document.
THESE NEW AGREEMENTS ARE AN EFFORT TO SMOKE THOSE PEOPLE OUT.
In the C of S, “Civil Liberties” is a concept that does not exist. The idea that someone would object to such an agreement based on principle alone is completely foreign to anyone living in the bubble. Scientologists “KNOW” that the only reason someone would balk at signing the agreement is because they have undisclosed overt acts against the Church. PERIOD. There is no “right to representation” in SCN.
If one were to say “The law says you need to give me some consideration in exchange for signing this agreement” the C of S would say “So you’re trying to extort money from your own church? What are your crimes?” This person would be programmed for a security check, would be assigned the lower condition of Doubt, and probably be taken off of post until the condition was completed, since this person is clearly a security risk.
Even if there are some SCNs who believe that Civil Liberties have a place in society, even those folks do not believe those liberties apply WITHIN Scientology. The Church is all. The individual is nothing.
I agree that these new documents are not enforceable in a court of law. But no one in SCN walks around is thinking about that. Anyone who IS THINKING about that already has one foot out the door.
I have to imagine that a similar agreement will be put in place for public who wish to avail themselves of the privilege which is any SCN service.
This HAS to be next. After all, the Church does not really CARE about getting in new public. They only care about cleaning the ranks of all the dissidents.
This is a very well considered and spot on comment. Thank you Deep Six.
Dissidents, the disaffected, the declared, the apostates, the bitter, the under-the-radar and the squirrels- Almost everyone falls under one of these pejoratives, who is left to participate in this church?
The chosen ones, the elite. The upper 10 thou- hundred.
Excellent summary, Deep Six! Scientologists are continuously “grilled” with an idea of the “enemies” out there somewhere when the true enemy is the one who is telling them about the “enemies.” It’s a classic tactic – to continuously antagonize against some “forces of evil” which make the antagonizer appear to be on the side of good and which motivate those around to comply with the antagonizer so as not to be (wrongfully) grouped with the “forces of evil.” In fact, I recently concluded for myself that this is at the core of the PTS/SP “phenomena” and explains why the “PTS” gets and stays “connected” in the first place. I also thought that Ron’s “anti-social characteristics” did not clearly highlight it so I came up with two of my own following a more careful observation of someone I knew in my personal life. These two also helped me to see more clearly where this is a problem in other areas like in Scientology.
1) An SP often speaks of you or others in a (overtly or covertly) hostile manner but almost never genuinely about oneself or one’s own experiences. An SP may pretend “admiration” of you or others which is in fact a “cloak” to hide destructive intent.
2) An SP often approves of propitiation, flattery, and (unconditional) compliance.
Let’s see, if there were 10,000 independents storming Dave’s castle in Hemet, I don’t think he has enough security to stop it. Just a happy thought for the day. BYOD (bring your own dynamite)
MJ, unfortunately, I have seen some of the prominent “independents” using similar “no communication” agreements on PC’s in the independent field. Also, a great number of “independents” I have encountered advocate not getting involved into trying to do something about the Church and in fact will shut you down if you try to initiate the sort of discussions that take place on Marty’s or Mike’s blogs. There will be no 10,000 independents storming Dave’s castle any time soon…
Not yet!
I like the end of this senseless babble: “Executed this ___ day of ____, 20__.”
Boy, that´s some execution!
One has got to be pretty stupid, gullible and naive to sign an agreement, where not a single promise is in YOUR favour. – But then again, that´s exactly the type of person the church is interested in. And the only type that would ever sign such a piece of trickery.
This contract would never appeal to someone, who is able to think for himself!
This contract would never appeal to someone, who is able to think for himself!
Exactly. And as someone so astutely pointed out, this is a way of weeding out “dissidents.”
It is pretty ironic how morally outraged Miscavige and His Minions get over contracts in Germany that make you ineligible for employment if you are a member of the church. So outraged that it resulted in full page ads in the New York Times and USA Today. The horrors of such a contract being required for employment. Smacks of the Nazis and Joe McCarthy….
Yet, how is this really any different?
I kind of like this contract. In any court case, this would become exhibit #1, and would DA any testimony from the CofS (It would show that they would not be capable of telling the truth).
(Also, under Common Law, one cannot give up their basic rights. They have them because they need them. If they choose to give them up, then they would be insane to do so, and if they are insane, they would not be qualified to give it up.)
I like that they are finally differentiating between the philosophy of Scientology and church policy / actions. This speaks volumes by itself.
And davie is the only one capable of making decisions in the church……..”Oh, the web we weave”…………….. It sucks to be davie.
BTW, I guess that the church lawyers don’t have to sign this. Otherwise, in Monique’s court case, it would be a problem to throw CSI under the bus to protect RTC and davie. Actually, per this contract, even though the church can do no wrong, this contract would prevent anyone in the church from attacking anyone else in the church (since they both work in the church, they both represent the church).
What a confusion.
Also, under Common Law, one cannot give up their basic rights. They have them because they need them. If they choose to give them up, then they would be insane to do so, and if they are insane, they would not be qualified to give it up.
People give up their rights by contract all the time. Anyone who agrees to a confidential settlement is giving up their rights. You CAN contract to give up rights. The question is whether there was adequate compensation for doing so, otherwise it is a one-sided contract. This is why there must be “consideration” in a contract. There has to be a balancing of equities between the sides signing a contract.
Yup it;’s a Slave contract
Somebody who is good at art, please create the cartoon that is worth a thousand words.
There’s Davey placing the mouse trap on the floor. Inside the mouse trap is the non-disparagement contract. On Davey’s face is a big 1.1 smile……In the background lurk some HCO enforcers… etc.
I’m not well versed on laws in the USA, but one would think that any group, church, job. etc.. asking and requiring that you give up your constitutional rights to be a volunteer…member, wouldn’t that be somehow like “treason”? (for lack of a better LAW word)
I can’t imagine that any person upon reflection would voluntarily sign away any one of his Constitutional rights. Especially if they were to consider how many centuries of sacrifice and evolution it took their ancestors to obtain those rights in the first place. Wars were fought and people were hung to obtain those rights that some zealot is now asking you to sign away.
The sad fact, as others here have noted, is, there will be no time given for reflection. This document will be thrust upon a staff member or potential staff member in a deliberately orchestrated time-crunch situation. They will be brow-beaten to sign and ridiculed for the slightest hesitation.
To me it makes less sense to sign something like this than earlier ludicrous actions like being asked to give money to somebody else’s war chest (IAS).
My advise to anyone who is still in the COS who may be asked to sign this document,
STOP for just one moment. Ask to word clear the document. If you can buy time by word clearing this document it will give you time to reflect and possibly realize that you have other options. You ALWAYS have other options. Don’t let anyone tell you that you don’t. Did you join up to help free yourself and others, or did you join up to experience not only helping create your own cage but helping others into another trap?
Don’t be the mouse. Take a good look at the trap. Now run the other way.
Better yet request time to word clear with your lawyer giving any legal
definitions of words and phrases.
Desperate Dave, digging his grave.
Thank you for calling attention to this MIke – it needs to be published far and wide, beyond you, beyond Tony O – it needs to be in the mainstream media, New York Times. It is an OUTRAGE. And a dead giveaway of criminal activity – nothing SCREAMS “Yes, we do very very BAD things in this organization” than a contract that includes blanket, open-ended non-disparagement on the threat of bankruptcy and (practically) exile. What’s terrifying is these staff people still in are surely being bullied and pressured to sign it. They have no choice (in their own minds at least) – sign, or relinquish everything they’ve worked for.
I hope they’re reading here, in secret. YOU DON’T HAVE TO SIGN. You can all march down en masse to a lawyer’s office and stand up for your rights. You’re not being disloyal by doing so. You’re being SANE. Only a person without fulll mental sanity, or whose capacities are being diminished by mind control, or who are being put under extreme duress, would sign such a thing. IT IS TANTAMOUNT TO GETTING YOU TO AGREE TO SLAVERY.
Don’t do it. Oh – and by the way – NO contract you make with an employer frees you from either your rights under the Constitution, or your moral responsibility as a citizen to report a crime that you witness. If you are subpoenaed into court to give evidence of a crime you’ve either been party to or seen committed, an NDA won’t protect you, or the person who forced you to sign it.
Well excuse me your magnificence, for my simple minded expectations of having any rights.
But please, by all means, do trample all over me.
5. I understand the gravity of the action I am taking in signing this Non-Disparagement Covenant, I know that I am accepting responsibility for some of the most sacred and important obligations that exist in my religion. I further understand that the spiritual well-being of my fellow Scientologists depends on my ability to keep the promises I make herein. I also know that I am giving up forever some very important personal rights under the United States Constitution.
What is next? Public pillorying, flogging, burning heretics?
Thank you COB!
What is next? Public pillorying, flogging, burning heretics?
That is already happening. But it is the modern day version.
Have you seen any of the websites or Freedom mags they put out about anyone who dares speak with less than acceptable reverence about Miscavige or his organization?
Mike,
No I haven’t seen the Freedom Mags lately, can you post them or point them out?
I know about http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/
Steve Hall sent them a warning letter, via his attorney, a while back, but I haven’t heard anything, and I don’t know what the legal remedy is for public defamation in California.
I would love to see something worked out for people to start going after these fanatics legally.
Thanks
Conan — that site is a pretty good start.
You can check them out here: http://wwwdotfreedommagdotorg/special-reports/sources/posse-of-lunatics.html and continue your reading from there….
As for those going after these fanatics legally, see Monique Rathbun case, Luis and Rocio Garcia case and Laura Dieckman case.
This is a DEBBIE COOK CONTRACT
So, If you are beaten bloody senseless and leave
it’s all your fault before you even sign on as staff.
It’s pure Miscavige!!!!!!.
And regarding scaring staff into thinking it is a binding contract that can be upheld in a court of law when it isn’t, I am reminded of LRH’s story of the fish in the shallow waters that are caught just by putting string or lattice above the water so that the sun shines on it making a shadow of the strings in the water and sand on bottom, forming the appearance of a cage. No cage exists and it is only the shadow, but the fish believe it and they mov with the cage into the shore because they think they are trapped. Staff members, don’t sign it!
Shocking indeed. While reading your observations and the contract itself, something about it reminded me of Expanded Dianetics Series 24 – Psychosis, More About.
“The progress of psychosis then begins with the belief that something is evil. This is followed with an effort to stop it. The stop becomes general. A basic purpose is formed which contains an evil intent”
“”Famous psychotics had a destructive basic purpose. Every psychotic has one”
And as you noted, the contract reflects the state of Black Heart. This phrase within the contract caught my attention:
” If the credibility or effectiveness of the Church or its senior staff, or executives of higher ecclesiastical Churches such as Religious Technology Center (“RTC”) and Church of Scientology International (“CSI”) is diminished or harmed in any way, Scientologists throughout the area will suffer incalculable spiritual harm”.
It is not sane, something about it (amongst other points) is prepotent, arrogant, destructive, only self-interest involved and, in a nutshell, insane, really insane.
“Incalculable spiritual harm” is what Black Heart has spread in all areas where, if he were not there, Scientology could have been sanely used for the benefit of the many. Typical of the criminal mind, accuses others of what he himself is doing.
Again, I as a never in, but with family in for 43 years I have to ask: These cult followers believe that someone can take away their spiritual enlightment at someone elses will or whim? I am just so stunned that people in the Slavation World of Scamalogy that supposedly have a brain eat this pie!
Yep, that is inculcated from Day One. As it is in every fundamentalist church in the world. If you don’t think like we think and do as we tell you, you will burn in hell, lose your eternity or whatever other “too gruesome” they have to offer.
The insanity just ramped up some. BTW, Mike, on scientology.org there’s no longer a link to contact them (unless I’m having another ‘senior moment’). I guess they were getting way too much entheta!
I would love to be a fly on the wall when the psychotic dwarf sees his non-disparagement contract on this site. Wouldn’t want to be one of the slaves at Int when that happens…
I was shocked reading this document. Shocked that he would actually put that stuff in writing and expect people to sign it. While it might put off new recruits, the people I feel sorry for are the existing staff members who will have to sign this “mid contract” to be “brought up to date with the new contract” or some other BS.
And although it probably won’t hold water in court, you’re spot on that the purpose is to scare staff into thinking that they can’t talk. Look how many staff were scared into paying off their huge SO debts when they left when that too is not a real and binding agreement in a court of law. If any existing staff refused to sign this, I”m sure it would be Lower Conditions, and Sec Checks all around, or even worse.
Even the Catholics with all the proof of priests’ pedophilia, the church doesn’t make new priest recruits sign that they won’t whistle blow on their bretheren or speak of it once they leave the clergy.
Only DM, in his terrified state of “being found out” makes a document like this and insists on all staff signing it before joining. It is more proof that all of our speaking out, coming out, whistle blowing is having a huge effect on him and his state of mental deteriorisation. Maybe he washes his hands constantly and yells, “Out! Out, damn spot!”
Notice that after a brief mention of LRH it’s all about not disparaging the church leadership and finances. Shit to hide????
and the bait and switch to the “in” will be. ” we have had so many people try and infiltrate us. this is really to get them but everyone has to sign it.” formality etc etc. It will be interesting to see how many have signed this document. How long have they been using it? from the time of GATII release?
Apparently it was part of the GAG II “package” along with Miscavige’s long toiled over “50 implementation programs.”
Can’t wait to see one of those appear on the internet….
Prediction: 99.9% plus will sign it quickly. You won’t see one in a thousand refuse. CoS members are way below self determinism. The have given away their right to even create their own ARC with other beings. They no longer have their own lives. The live their lives at the command of others. They think the thoughts they are ordered to think. Their very wins and “abilities gained ” are counterfeit as is their pretense of friendship and loyalty. They have become stupid and mean spirited. They will all sign whatever they have to to forestall the consequences they live in fear of.
Spot on Joe.
JP I think it’s sad but you are absolutely right.
Joe P, so true. I’m copying this to read to myself when I feel bad about the “friends” I lost in CoS. Friends? I didn’t lose any friends. What you wrote -THIS is what I lost. And good riddance.
Joe I agree that a HUGE number of people will sign right away to prove how gung ho they are and all that. But A lot of those people will be handed a pen at 1:59pm on Thursday, mostly current staff, that will be told to quickly do this admin exercise and keep their contracts in PT for legal and not be given the opportunity to even read it. Because it is Command Intention and anyone who doesn’t sign before two will do Confusion on up 3 times through and scrub all the toilets with their own toothbrush.
A few of them will read it and get the hell out of there. Some will read it after they signed it and I can only hope they break in to HCO and burn them all in a gigantic bon fire!
And yes they are mindless zombies who want nothing more than to please their master like Pavlov’s dog. And to those people who are gone forever in that fog that is Scientology and the church I don’t pity them, I no longer mourn them or miss them. I hope one day they regain their strength of will and can build themselves back into actual people before it is too late.
“…please their master like Pavlov’s dog.” LMAO! This is funny!
Salivation is one of our basic human rights.
can you say desperate!!!! who would sign this thing? this is nuts..but then I would expect nothing less!!
You sign this “contract” and you not only give up your 1st Amendment Right to free speech (though not really) but you also openly admit to your fellow staff members that you have lost your senses.
You don’t sign this and you’re either a mole, potential mole or you have a convenient and easy route off of staff and on with your new life. I would suggest taking the third option but no doubt an SP declare will also be issued to you at the door by a 18 year old MAA as a final insult for the work and years you gave.
Dave is just digging in deeper and deeper.
Utter insanity.
I would never sign any “contract” that purports to testify to my beliefs. Contracts govern actions, not beliefs. This document is a blatant tool of thought control.
Anyone who actually reads and considers the implications of this non-disparagement agreement would not sign it. Unfortunately, most people will not read and consider it properly, but will be pumped up by their recruiters and rushed through the signing of this “routine” document. And what is the next step? Making a version of this agreement part of the paperwork for public signing up for services?
The Titanic is sinking for Christ´s sake. DM is desperately trying to mend all the leaking holes and put the broken pieces back together again. To no avail! The boat is going DOWN! And the best advice for anyone aboard is to get their butt into a lifeboat NOW and get as far away from the disaster as possible.
+ 1000
Here’s a tip for Davey: Treat people in a decent way and you don’t need to spend tens of millions (or more) a year to silence them. Oh ya, you can also walk the streets without armed guards and a bullet/bomb proof vehicle. Just saying…..
Somewhere on Tony’s blog was a report that “a couple of” staff members somewhere had refused to sign this document (and were being “handled” accordingly).
I can’t imagine many people will have this level of courage, in the face of what must be overwhelming pressure to sign — but even this small show of resistance is heartening, as it probably indicates a deeper and more pervasive current of discontent among rank-and-file staffers.
This could turn out to be a critical factor in determining RCS’s fate. Dave might be able to find some workarounds for the plummeting income from events, book sales, and services — there probably are still potential whales to harpoon — but he can’t manufacture human bodies.
Already there are signs that the effort to recruit new staff and Sea Org are becoming frantic: stories of first-time visitors to orgs being hit up to sign contracts on the spot, for example, completely bypassing the usual routine of selling courses and books and whatnot. And so many fliers now feature pics of longtime FSMs and OTs now being pulled from the field to fill empty desks in the local org. (A telling move, as it means these people will no longer have income to plunder for IAS coffers. In rural US lingo, we call this “eating the seed corn”.)
Dave places no value on people as individuals, as we know. And now that lack of humanity may help spell his doom.
I am speechless I’ve done a staff contract and probably would have signed something like this when I was young and gullible. Can you imagine this being part of any workplace agreement here in Australia? I was being recruited for OSA a few years ago snd refused to fill in huge chunks of my life history form and they didn’t try to bully me to sign it as I would have told them to go root their boots.
Flabergasted in ANZO
Question for legal experts: In addition to the possibility that this contract would never hold up in court as it is:
I see a possible legal loophole for the person who leaves staff and then has chosen to speak out against the church’s abuses:
It’s where it says, “…in exchange for the opportunity to serve on the Church’s staff and to receive the benefits available to all staff members, including the right to receive Scientology religious auditing and training to forward my own spiritual growth, I swear to forever use the full extent of my ability to uphold my obligations under this Religious Covenant of Non-Disparagement (“Non-Disparagement Covenant”).”
What if the person who has signed this contract and then later has spoken out can show that he or she did not receive the so-called “benefits available to all staff members”, would that be a way to nullify the rest of the contract?
The document says “the opportunity to serve on the Church’s staff and to receive the benefits” . So you don’t actually have to have received the benefits, just to have had the opportunity because you served on staff.
In addition to the already obvious thoughts here on this, what about the staff that are already on post and signed their contracts a year or 2 ago? I would bet $$ that the DSAs are having to get them to sign this now, months/years AFTER the fact of signing their contracts. And yet, if they pause for thought about it, they will be the ones to be targeted as out ethics for not signing.
they would absolutely demand the new contract. And at that point, if you did not comply you would be routed off with a big old free loaders debt. So, you end up “having to sign.” Insanity
Common Sense by Thomas Paine should be required reading for all future staff members.
Perhaps all future Scientologists….
How about just everyone? It should be required reading for all students in Junior High.
Right you are, and while you’re at it, add The Age of Reason and The Rights of Man.
Sad to say: I would have signed this at the times when I signed my staff contracts. I wish I could say that I wouldn’t have, but I would have.
My thoughts would have been that I would have no reason to disparage the church publicly, for the rest of my life, so I might as well sign it, so that the church gets what legal rudiments they need.
I admit it, and I’m not proud of it.
You’re not the only one.
I would have signed it too at the time because, “I trust the church… they would never harm me.”
Cindy — you and Dave and a number of others have commented that at the time you would have signed this.
I absolutely agree, and it is one of the unfortunate things about the spell the church casts over those who are sucked in to its orbit.
You do not believe they would ever do anything that is not in your best interest. It is impossible to contemplate that the “most ethical group on earth” would do something wrong.
All existing staff WILL be made to sign this. Less than 1% will even query it.
I suspect NO public have balked at the “Enrollment Agreement” but that too is a crazy document.
As I have said before, the value of these documents is in the effect they have on the uninformed. If you sign them, even if you don’t read it, or feel you have no choice, most GOOD people believe they should honor their commitments. And thus it is easy to convince them they are bound by the things they signed. And that is what Miscavige and Co bank on. Any lawyer would tell you that this agreement is very likely unenforceable. But from the church’s perspective, so what? The vast majority of people will never challenge them and will simply comply. And if there is one who dares to do so (like Laura D) then they will fight it forever with high priced lawyers.
It’s no different than any unethical big business or organized crime. Morality doesn’t enter into the equation. It is merely a cost/benefit analysis. And in this case, there is virtually no cost (may lose some possible recruits, but they are the sort of people Miscavige doesnt want anyway) and possibly someone might challenge the enforceability sometimes in the future. And the upsides are HUGE. Potentially turning off the faucet of sewage that spews out of the orgs as staff (and SO) finally reach the end of their tolerance for abuse and discover the internet.
So, all in all, if you are an organization that doesnt care about right and wrong, and is only interested in protecting your image and grip over your customers, this is a smart move.
In every other sense and from any other perspective, this is just another disgraceful and disgusting chapter in the book of manipulation and control that is being written in real time by Miscavige and his sycophants.
Hi Dave Fagen. Perhaps I’ve missed it but I’m
not finding the part that limits the disparagement to PUBLIC disparagement. “Disparagement” will also be in the eyes of the beholder and with the paranoia generated.within the church….Baarf! (Ahem.)
The wording throughout this contract speaks to me of yet another scheme to hogtie the signers so they are rendered harmless and/or profitable. Some “Church”!
PREDICTION; This Non-Disparagement Agreement will be incorporated into the general enrolment agreement for training and processing.
Yes, staff are the most dedicated and “third dynamic oriented” of Scientologists who devote their lives to Scientology and to work for them for free.
I was one of them.
So when one of these Scientologists find out about the abuses, and the lies, and the outright criminal activity inside Scientology, they are not going to become less dedicated to helping others, or less “third dynamic oriented”. They joined staff and made the personal sacrifices they made because they wanted to help others more than they felt they needed to help themselves.
So what are people like that going to do?
They are going to stand up and they are going to speak out. Because OTHER PEOPLE MATTER to them, or else they would have never joined staff in the first place.
David Miscavige is taking the best of people and he is destroying them and trying to make them powerless – even trying to get them to sign away their civil rights, and those rights supposedly recognized in the Creed of the Church of Scientology itself.
Yes. This is another agreement that violates the Creed of the Church of the Scientology.
This document is proof of Miscavige’s criminal intent, even going against Scientology itself. It is proof that he intends to exploit the best of people, and their highest and most selfless motivations, for his own gain.
This guy must be stopped.
Alanzo
A pathetic attempt at damage control in advance. I wonder how much his team of high priced lawyers charged him for this piece of legaleze B.S.?
What an audacious move by the church:
“I also know that I am giving up forever some very important personal rights under the United States Constitution.”
Meaning, being a “volunteer” at the church one is less free than the man on the street. But, isn’t this the place were people go free? I’m confused…and so should everyone else.
When I left the church I was perfectly willing to ride off in the sunset and let them play their silly games. However, as I decompress, RCS is looking more and more sinister.
Make no mistake, RCS no longer even pretends to follow it’s own creed:
“That all men have inalienable rights to think freely, to talk freely, to write freely their own opinions and to counter or utter or write upon the opinions of others.”
After apply this latest “filter” to its membership, all that will be left will be non-thinking, non-questioning, “religious” zealots.
I’m curious of the legal ramifications for existing staff members. I don’t think the church can legally introduce new contractual stipulations for existing contracted staff members, without rendering existing agreements null and void. In which case, it would not be the staff member who breaks the covenant, but the church.
Aquamarine, I love that you are a little more pan determined on this whole thing than I was being. I laughed at the line, “….so let him throw a few potatoes…” I know that reference and it is a good point made and yes, I will let the midget throw a few potatoes. I’m just magnanimous that way! Please, hold your applause.
🙂 Cindy, love your ack, but it easier for me. If truth be told, if my kids were trapped in this vicious cult and disconnected from me because of it, my pan determinism would fly out the window and I would probably be a raging, incoherent lunatic. People like Mike, you and others coming out and sharing here who confront this reality every day while maintaining your equilibrium, your powers of observation, willingness to communicate, and sense of fairness – you are the strong, truly pan-determined people. That’s not false modesty on my part. That’s just a fact.
Wow, such high praise. Thank you! And thank you, Mike for doing the blog every day! (But I still like your sense of humor, Aqua)
Thank you for posting this. I was equally as astonished when I read this yesterday on Tony’s blog and even inquired as to the legality of it. So, I was happy to read your take on that here.
Can you imagine being beaten up and not having the legal right to speak about it. Insane. I’d like to hear the church’s lawyers in a court of law on that one.
“They can disparage any former staff (and often do) without consequence.” I found it interesting when OSA was in my face about Marty Rathbun and how it was all him, his orchestration of events and others to malign David Miscavige. OSA had the gall to then tell me that I WAS NATTERING. Then, of course, I was maligned to my own son and husband (in a nice way, of course) how I had overts and I just needed to go in and get another sec check – for my own good. Very sad state the church is in.
The church does hatchet jobs on staff and public alike, all the time! And the worst part is they malign you to your kids so that the kids turn from you, or it could be your wife or husband or best friend. The church engages wholesale in this practice. And now they want recruits to sign that they won’t do this? It is the pot calling the kettle black. They have to protect themselves because this is what they do and so of course they think everyone else will do the same overts they do. It is how an SP thinks and is the reason an SP will not let people get big or powerful and has to stop them and crush them — because if they were big, they would destroy the SP, or so he thinks– because that is what he would do if he were big.
DM is twisting and turning in the wind and this is his last ditch effort to try to control the tsunami of bad pr and bad press against himself. Davie is terrified.
Well stated, Cindy.
Let me add that in my opinion, this disparagement stipulation is just another “wrong thing to do is nothing” finger- in- the- dike-type action for David Miscavige and won’t do much overall good.
You know that reference in the RTI tape “Decision”, wherein LRH recounts an example of it being conducive to one’s mental to be able to return a motion even if it doesn’t really handle the enormity of the attack? That it is beneficial to do SOMETHING. He talks about sailors on a tugboat in Pearl Harbor who threw potatoes at the “Zeros” (the Japanese) during the.attack which started WWII. They were being bombed and yet they were returning a motion in the only way they were able at the time. All they could do was throw potatoes but it made them feel better, was LRH’s point.
David’s Miscavology is being attacked from all sides. His bad deeds are coming home to roost. He’s overwhelmed and just desperate to do SOMETHING. No-one’s joining staff, his Div 6 is in the toilet, the Church’s PR has never been worse, and, forget LRH, now plenty of people also know who HE is and consider him at best a figure of fun as TC’s BFF,or, at worst, an evil, malicious bastard who should be in jail. The media are (or should be) licking their chops to safe-point themselves before going after him for disappearing his wife.. Any law firms following Mosey’s case have to be salivating to have a go at this amazing “Church” which sends people with cameras on their heads to stalk its heretics. Our dear little Pope of Scientology has a restraining order on him to leave a never-in, born in the USA American lady alone, his Ideal Morgues are empty, the Warehouse VIIIs are not selling as they should, GATII is not selling as it should…and whatever else I’ve missed here. Its all bad news. There is no good news for this creep.
So let him “return a motion”. Let him throw some potatoes, you know?
Edit: “…conducive to one’s mental health…” in paragraph 3, sentence one.
I am pretty darned sure that there is only one reason for this document. If someone does speak up about the multitudinous abuses occuring inside Scientology organizations, this document gives Scientology legal grounds to slap the whistle-blower with a restraining order. It is the incumbent on the whistleblower to find legal counsel and spend ten of thousands of dollars getting the restraining order lifted. It is back to the old strategy- Scientology does not fight legal cases to win, but rather to use the legal system as a grindstone to wear the opponent into the ground.
So while this document is legally laughable, the cost involved in proving this is a court of law are not.
Thank you Mike and Tony for showing this document to the world so that people can see why so few people have the courage to speak out about what they witness inside the walls of Scientology organizations.
When Russia was a closed society it was called the “iron curtain”. China’s closed society was called the Bamboo curtain. I think Scientology should be refered to as behind the curtain of fear.
That’s a good one – “curtain of fear.”
“I also know that I am giving up forever some very important personal rights under the United States Constitution”… among them, Life, Liberty, and then pursuit of happiness.
Oops, someone has damned us all to hell for leaking this contract. Ah well, there might be time to make a quick cuppa…
David Miscavige never ceases to amaze.
This is so beyond sick and twisted.
And, as an added note, enough people will spot the inconsistencies that “new” staff will also shrink, causing the outer orgs, in particular, to become ever more desperate. And could it be that The Misk will also “require” current staff to sign it, too? He’s panicky enough to be that stupid.
That anyone would even consider signing such a document also speaks to their cupidity. It is truly “signing your life away”, far worse even than the billion year contract.
So its all about the money again. Join staff to see how much abuse you can take, once you are completely fed up with it you can leave. Every time you tell your story to someone the church will charge you $25k. So if you write a book about it you would have to charge at least 26k a copy. Amazing.
Mike Eldredge
Oops… that is 25k per violation. The church lawyers would tear the book apart and every single disparaging comment, whether quoted or not, and put it on the tally.
You would be sued for millions.
Eric
Oh, I forgot… If you happened to publish, say 10,000 copies, then you have to multiply it by 10k.
So what is that bill now? 10 BILLION dollars minimum…
Hey… I should phone my friend in Liberia…
Eric S
LMAO! After spending years working in the legal HR arena I can say you nailed this Mike. No real quid pro quo. Therefore not enforceable. In California a judge would pull the wood chipper out from behind the bench and feed the CoS atty into it feet first if they tried to show this in court.
“1. To be a staff member of the Church is an incomparable opportunity to serve my religion and carries with it the most serious and sacred obligations. ” Gag me.
This is just about too much Mike. When I don’t think the little freak can stoop any lower then there he goes.
I really can’t imagine a Catholic minister signing an agreement that he will never disparage the Church. Or some business having all the employees sign something like this. It just screams corruption and withholds.
I do take some pleasure knowing that the little man must be living in his own self created Hell. Burn fucker, burn.
For the people who are still trapped in the bubble and the friends who I had to leave behind …
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtQ7n_wG_pE
Wow! Thanks for this! Very moving. I wish for all those still in, that they break free one day…
I would love for someone to take this to court or be taken to court by the church in order to test it and see how the court would rule on speaking the truth and whether that constitutes disparagement. At any rate, the church would get more bad publicity and it might bring it down faster, which at this point, should be done… it is a festering, rotten tooth that needs to be yanked out, the sooner the better.
One question that would arise in a court is this: could a resonable person who signed this envsion the future abuses the would suffer or see others go through? Another is, is it disparagement if it is true?
Exactly, RP. Is it disparagement if it’s true? And is it natter if it’s true? I ran into KA drinkers who upon the mention of Debbie Cook’s name, would start spouting horrible denigrations and vile things about her, and “natter” was always amongst the charges. I asked the KA drinker if he/she had read the Debbie Cook letter? To which he/she would draw themselves up proudly and puff out the chest and say, “No, of course not!” Then I said, “Then how do you know it was natter?”
Cindy — the answer to your question, astonishingly is YES. It can be disparagement if it is true.
This is what is so bizarre. This is not an effort to suppress those who might libel and slander. It is an effort to suppress ANY statement that is “disparaging” whether it is true or not.
In a world where lies can be confidential, truth can be disparagement.
Well put.
Can these contracts be posted on FaceBook, as a “buyer beware?”
Sure, go right ahead. I put it on Facebook as a link to my blog post.
This is outrageous. It’s as if the staff member is in effect relinquishing his rights and renouncing his responsibilities as a member of his country and the human race. Truth and the common good are thus to be sacrificed for the benefit of this group. Only an organization like the mafia or the nazis could seriously expect a staff member to sign a document such as this.
This is not the Scientology I joined.
I’m sure the Mafia and Nazis would look at this contract and say, “Now why didn’t I think of this first!” and admire it.
Hitler had all his soldiers, from private to Field Marshall, take a personal oath of loyalty to him. His grasp of the Germanic psychology and the respect for the written word, the concepts of loyalty, honor, and duty were probably why WWII lasted as long as it did in Europe.
Sieg Heil!
To Oiram who stated ” This is not the Scientology I joined” Huh? Shake your head budz. It is one and the same.
I guess they could use it to scare you into silence, or they could use it to sue you.
I can’t imagine they would win, but you would have to defend yourself.
Unbelievable!!! The more the precautions, the more they have to hide. I remember a speech by Pitt at the House of Lords on the abolition of slavery. I see now that slavery is back, with the help of the US State Department, the Clear Water Police and idiots like Tom Cruise. And as you said Mile, this is totally one sided. Staff have to be ethical and responsible, the organisation is totally irresponsible!!! .
SLAVE CONTRACT – would be the correct name for the “Religious Covenant of Non-Disparagement”.
“… this Non-Disparagement Covenant will be legally binding on me forever.
… I swear to forever use …
… I will never do less.
… I PROMISE AND SWEAR NEVER TO SAY OR ENCOURAGE OR INDUCE OTHERS TO SAY OR WRITE ANYTHING NEGATIVE OR DISPARAGING ABOUT …”
FOREVER, NEVER … . What?? A contract for eternity, selling one’s soul and rights, so that “Dear Leader” does not to have to confront being questioned or his doings examined?
So, to get on the pretended “Road to Freedom” and to “freeing mankind” – you first have to sign up for SLAVE in the cult? Yeah right, that makes sense!
Wow.
“I also know that I am giving up forever some very important personal rights under the United States Constitution.”
Good luck with that
What will it take to paralyse David Miscavige by fear? The contract is both shocking and delicious, by the way. To anyone who knows somebody being pressured to join staff, recommend that they ask for a copy of the two contracts (staff and non-disparagement) before signing and that they be granted 1-2 days time to think about it in peace and quiet. If, by some miracle, the staff/recruitment mission/org actually lets this happen, they should read it very closely, perhaps together with you. If the staff/recruitment mission/org won’t let this happen (they showed up at an acquaintance’s house four staff to one prospect and stayed for 6 unrelenting hours), you know something is fishy. If the person is in anyway hesitant to join, gently help them understand why. The pressure these people are put under when an idle morgue is in the works is incredible and makes even IAS crush regging pale by comparison.
That’s right, Dollar Morgue! And I lived through a week or more of nonstop recruiting to join SO and at no time did they ever leave me alone to myself to think about it and never never let me read fine print anywhere. They were on me every waking minute and even went with me to the bathroom and picked me up at the hotel so I couldn’t even walk by myself to the org. The coersion was almost unbearable.
Sounds familiar and terrible. I take it they failed?
“What will it take to paralyse David Miscavige by fear?”
Oh, fer chrsits sake. You wanna know what it would take to destroy Miscavige? The word “No”
The man is freakin’ 5’3″ and for all reports, fights like an untrained girl.
Has, uh, anybody tried that? Just tell him “No”.
He never confronts anyone without an entourage of “protectors” present. He doesnt even appear anywhere where there is a remote possibility of anyone confronting him without Dear Org security and hired gun-toting security guards.
Mission Impossible V
Oh yes, having been at the int base for so long I’ve heard a few stories of people trying that. Trouble is that there are so many others who are robots to the cause that if he said anything to any of them about so-and-so mouthing off to him there would be 20-30 rabid people running around to find the offender and drag him (if necessary) to Ethics to help him arrive at the Hole quickly. They might then get a tiny nod of acknowledgement from Misc,or not.
It’s all about the ass-kissing to this guy and his immediate enforcers rather than what’s really right or wrong. If you disagree too much you have to have the sense to plan your escape carefully and silently and not tell a soul or they’ll report you anyway, and once in the Hole or under guard it will be impossible to get out unless you were out in public for an event or some other very short reason and could get away from the people with you who are supposed to keep you from running away while out and about.
Those of us who would have liked to flip the bird on occasion (daily…? LOL…)can now do it here while enjoying the freedom of being on the other side of the fence, not having to ask permission to do anything other than work.
“If the credibility or effectiveness of the Church or its senior staff, or executives of higher ecclesiastical Churches such as Religious Technology Center (“RTC”) and Church of Scientology International (“CSI”) is diminished or harmed in any way, Scientologists throughout the area will suffer incalculable spiritual harm.”
Come on Davey – call a spade a spade – you mean if YOUR ‘credibility’ or ‘effectiveness’ is ‘diminished’ or ‘harmed’
Desperate. Oh so very desperate (snort, snuffle, giggle).
Hi Sam
I am just hoping that existing staff will refuse to sign and end their existing staff contracts.
It will be curious how many new staff the church will recruit with all this as the first thing they have to agree with. The new person would already have to be willing to turn over his eternity and human rights before he even gets in the door.
I am imagining that a similar non disparagement agreement has also been introduced before anyone gets any services at all.
Hopefully no new people would be able to get in the door for all the ones scrambling to get out.
Oops, sorry… there are already no new people trying to get in…
Eric S
“It will be curious how many new staff the church will recruit with all this as the first thing they have to agree with”.
Here’s who the Class V orgs will get to sign this: 1) The teenage children of Still-Ins brought up from day one in the RCS and all on fire to quit school at 16 and save the world, 2) Foreigners on religious visas as a path to citizenship via several years of virtual indentured servitude to the Church, and 3) on a re-sign basis, those already on staff renewing their contracts – the guys who stay year after year – they’ll sign anything, they’re so beaten down..
I’d say that pretty much covers it, and its pretty much the only people who join Class V org staff nowadays.anyway.
Amazing of you to get hold of this, Mike, and yes, I agree, it communicates Miscavige’s fear, terror and paranoia very clearly.
Right on, Aquamarine!
Hell yes. Sign me up now. A chance to work 80 hours a week for maybe $50 a week and get sued for $25,000 by the employer. Such a deal. What’s not to like?
My jaw is hanging so low over my keyboard at this moment, that it’s almost impossible to type. My favorite passage:
“If the credibility or effectiveness of the Church or its senior staff, or executives of higher ecclesiastical Churches such as Religious Technology Center (“RTC”) and Church of Scientology International (“CSI”) is diminished or harmed in any way, Scientologists throughout the area will suffer incalculable spiritual harm.”
They are feeding on every Scientologist’s fear — stopping others from going free. I had this fear too until I realized no one in my family was actually making it up the Bridge: two of them are dead (OT 7 & OT 8), one has a chronic degenerative disease (OT 8), another (OT 7) wants nothing to do with Scientology, and all the progress that I and my siblings had ever made in Scientology has apparently been nullified as we are now supposed to redo our whole lower Bridge.
The independent movement must be a terrifying reality for DM and his henchmen. Because guess what, suckas?! Scientologists are experiencing incalculable spiritual wins outside your f#@%ed up church!
I find this truly disturbing to say the least. I recall in the early years having to sign an agreement before doing the next action on the Bridge and not thinking anything of it because we were a team at that time. Being a Scientologist was a fun thing to do and yes, it was for the greatest good for the greatest number. The purpose in my day was to be as able in life to be able to help others. I signed each document that was put in front of me without reading it because I had no reason to believe I would be deceived. Well, here we are. Because I did not read what I was signing now haunts me because I seem to be having difficulty getting my unused monies that I have on account returned to me. And it’s all because I did not read the fine print. 30 years I spent in that so called church. Yes, I got screwed, too.
SLR
I was sort of lucky. Before I was allowed on services at AOLA in 1982, I was presented with a document to sign that pretty much gave over all my rights and allowed the church to have a free hand to do with me as they saw fit. (within the policies and technologies of the church, however misunderstood or misapplied they be). I said I wouldn’t sign, and curiously they let me onto the service anyway. They got me later though, by sec checking me into the ground.
Regarding getting your money back… reading the fine print wouldn’t have helped. The church is not following the majority of the policies that Ron wrote regarding “refunds and repayments”. It has been made very simple these days… If you ask for your money back you obviously have disagreements with the church and the act of asking for your money back is an attack, therefor you are suppressive, therefor “fair game” applies and they don’t have to follow any of the rules or policies. Cute huh? Catch 22 anyone?
Eric S
I heard Carisa Marion gave a video talk on how to get your money back and has helped a few get their money back and she got a refund of her money too. It is hard but she said it can be done in some cases.
A few years ago that may have been true. There was much more to Carisa’s cycle than just a return of funds. Today, I don’t know anyone getting any refunds or repayments.
It was found not to be “Command Intention” and there were a lot of transcription errors in all the earlier policy letters on the subject.
OMG. Why in the world would anyone ever sign this when offering to donate their time to a church for free? I certainly hope this causes new people to think twice or thrice about their decision to work for the CoS. thank you for publishing this. I wonder if all the old staff are being required to sign it too.
Of course the old staff are being made to sign it. That is the sad part.
They probably have a choice. Sign it or receive 120 hrs. of sec checking to find out why! Love the way self determinism is promoted in the RCS.
How about the third option ……”I’m outta here!” Oh wait, is that really an option?
Yeah Coop. Sort of like “Disconnection is a personal choice that is not enforced. Either you disconnect or we will declare you for remaining connected to an SP and then everyone will disconnect from you. That’s your choice.”
Here it is “Sign this. If you don’t do so we will sec check you to find out why not (at your expense) and then kick you off staff (or out of the SO) with a bill for services owing and likely an SP declare for good measure. It’s your choice.”
I think a generic term for Scientologists these days would appropriately be “Sophies” — their “choices” are always between one level of coercion/enforced think/unhappiness and an equally horrible alternative. “Give up your family or your job” “Forgo your integrity or your eternity” etc etc etc
To anyone not knowing what a Sophie is, check out the movie Sophie’s Choice.
Worked for me!
Cindy, most likely. My original SO Contract had an added clause I had SHI put in before I signed. It was that I would be able to have kids and stay in SO. A few years later when F.O. came out about no kids I routed out with no FL debt as the Church unilaterally broke the contract. 😉
Old School, at last a break for someone even if it came only as an overlooked mistake on the church’s side. I’m sure they patched over that leak in the dam in subsequent contracts. Glad you got out!
“It is entirely one sided … they are in exchange for working 60 or 80 hours a week for nothing (and if you don’t complete your “volunteer contract”?? you are billed for any services).”
I agree entirely! It is more than just one sided, it is also forever:
“9… will be legally binding on ME forever. However, if a COURT … I have agreed to are not enforceable … legally enforceable against me for all time.”
But there will be many people signing this, because they are blind – they would not be there otherwise. You could even put in R2-45 and they would still sign it. Only newcomers might be able to have doubts about the paperwork. For sure they will not get a copy of the contract. They will have no time to read it, they will sign under pressure.
I remember that I got material from OSA (sorry, I cannot tell the details in order to stay incognito). The MAA told me to not copy or keep anything. I was wondering why this information was secret. If it was the truth, why did they not publish it on the internet to correct the so called “false data”? Why were they scared I could show or tell this information someone else?
Let me compare the staff contract with a prenuptial agreement. When you marry you don’t want to show your partner that you don’t believe in the promise “till death us do part”. It is bad timing. I am sure that many people would prefer having a prenuptial agreement, but they keep their mouth shut.
It is very similar, isn’t it?
Back to the cult staff contract.
If you would asked someone without any indirect coercion: “Would you like to amend any phrase before signing this contract?”
What would be the “honest” answer?
One thing that may be significant to not is that this is not actually even called a “contract” and may therefor not fall under Contract Law.
When I was on staff I brought up the issue that there was no exchange written into the “contract” and was quickly informed that it was not a “contract”… etc.
In this “covenant” , it states: “3. I therefore agree that in exchange for the opportunity to serve on the Church’s staff and to receive the benefits available to all staff members, including the right to receive Scientology religious auditing and training to forward my own spiritual growth,…”
Notice that it uses the wording “right to receive..” It does not actually state that you WILL receive these services.
In the “Staff Covenant” it includes this…
“I also know that as part of my post responsibilities and pursuant to Church policy, I am expected to study a minimum of 12.5 hours a week to better carry out my religious duties and to advance myself up the Bridge to Total Freedom—both in religious training and auditing, to the benefit of all Dynamics…”
When I read that, even though one is told that this is part of their “exchange” for being a staff member, I notice that it is not freely given but is part of ones post responsibilities. This puts the onus on the staff member to get these services, not that it is the Churches responsibility make sure that the staff member gets these services.
Because of the way this is written, should a staff member ever dare to challenge that they were not getting their 12 1/2 hours of services, the person that they report this to could write up a report on them for failing to satisfy their staff covenant agreements. They could potentially be sent to “ethics” and assigned a “treason” condition.
It is also noteworthy that it doesn’t say that these services are to be done during “staff time”, and in my experience at a lower Org, this meant that you studied outside your staff time. This is another incursion into your life as you are now required to spend another 12 1/2 hours, in addition to your “staff time”. (Notice also that it doesn’t delineate the exact hours, or number of hours of “staff time” but only refers to them in very general terms.)
I could go on.. but enough already..
I am sorry… but my feeling is that anyone who is crazy enough to sign either of these documents pretty much deserves what they get.
Eric S
Eric, what you say is sort of true in that this is all written in a fashion to try and avoid the obvious arguments that will be raised as to its invalidity. But you don’t have to title something a “contract” in order for the law of contracts to apply. You can have a verbal contract — and that has no title at all.
But there is no doubt all the sleazy language in here about “the right” to receive services and such is just another indicator of what a steaming pile of horse puckey this really is.
What other time is there in addition to staff time?
Thanks Mike
It was an argument handed to me when I challenged the contract aspect of my staff “covenant”, but, yes, I certainly see your point.
I fell for it!
I sincerely hope it is challenged well and often.
Eric
MJ
Exactly.
Eric
Wow, this is absolute insanity. I thank my lucky stars I got out before I ever had to refuse to sign this document. I would have gladly taken the SP Declare right then and there.
mr. rinder, the 2 main factors in judging enforcement, as i understand it, are scope and duration. in this case, you have laid out (1) how the scope is completely open-ended and one sided, a complete contract of adhesion with no spectrum of what is considered permissible and what is not and (2) how the time limit is open-ended as well. no expiration date is a red flag that will grab the attention of any judge. absent some really darn good idea for the lack of an expiration date, like say national security, the agreement will not be enforceable. the kicker is you only need to fail on one of those grounds to have the agreement rendered unenforceable. please remember, i am only human and thus, very fallible. i may be wrong. please correct me as necessary. cheers!
Welcome to the Golden Age of Robotism. This can only be robo-signed.
Anyone who would sign this has to already be so mentally and morally compromised that they are not capable of independent thought or action–not in any tough spot, anyway. That just leaves robots in the swarm.
Has anyone ever considered printing a bunch of copies of the Hubbard article on Personal Integrity, and handing it out to staff and public at orgs around the world?
The Golden Age Of The Silence.
Well it’s been said, “Silence is golden…”
Seems legit. Where do I sign?
Sing me up too because I want to try machocism for a change.
They should change the fine to $100,000 to show they’re really serious.
thanks! another greatly needed chuckle!
Meet me at the recruiter’s office tonight and we can sort it out. 😉