CoS applies for Fair Work Act exemption

[Commander Birdsong]

How about "brain-cleared?"

how about rasta man forget about them bloodclots and pass me some splif

[sallydannce]

Another Scientology spokeswoman said the church had made an official submission but it was confidential.

I want to know why!

Why is the official submission from the CofS confidential?

That doesn't make any sense.

I wanna see this submission!

One only has a confidential submission if one is either hiding something from people or needs protection on some level.

WTF happened to open transparent democratic process!

[Zhent]

Heeeeere's Oisin Grogan

I am a Scientologist and do a great deal of volunteer work with my fellow parishioners to help my community through Drug education programs, literacy campaigns, rubbish clean-ups and other good will activities which benefit Melbourne. This mission is shared alike with other churches and nonprofit groups who depend upon volunteers to provide social and civic assistance.

As regards my own volunteering, I do so as my contribution back to the society in which I am so lucky to live (Australia).

Never have I considered myself an employee and none of my fellow volunteers do either. What "pocket money" I receive helps one cover the cost of petrol and other incidentals.

(PDF)

Note carefully that Oisin has only mentioned her work in the front groups. This is a massive flaw in their argument as it leaves the door wide open for actual org staffers to be viewed as workers. I imagine Oisin was poorly briefed on the Fair Work Review project CoS is cooking up and went out all guns blazing without realising he/she was footbulleting. If you look at the other submissions they carefully do not explicitly make distinctions to Org staff and actual volunteering activities. (OK I haven't read them all but thats what I am seeing)

We must be vigilant to expose this flaw! It is critical to the FWO the distinction is made between Org staff / SO and actual front group volunteer activities. I imagine part of CoS's battle plan will be to try and gloss it over and lump it all together and put forward the front groups as a front so actual workers appear to be part of their 'volunteers'. Seriously we can't let Scientology get the only word in on this, we can't afford to lose this one, attack their weaknesses ruthlessly!!!

Edit: I know the FWO/FWA is not stupid and they are well aware of what constitutes 'volunteering', but do not underestimate Scientology putting one over them! They will be fighting for their existence on this one and will throw enormous resources at it to make it go away.

[degraded being]

definition of volunteer includes....

a. a person who does some act or enters into a transaction without being under any legal obligation to do so and without being promised any remuneration for his services.


NB no legal obligation, he can just walk out.

No contract including SO contract.

No pay, food and somewhere to sleep, nothing for phone calls or tampons no pay at all?????????

How would that work?

I must I admit I'm just scanning the thread to avoid throwing up too much with the cultie offerings, but anyway... I'd like to see arguments or actual rulings along the lines you have suggested LLLL. Complete acceptance of the culties "volunteer" position.....but only on the condition that they are not legally entitled to structure the volunteering under any sort of contract which does not give minimum wage, Fair enough. In fact no contract at all is necessary. The answer of course is that COS requires it to PREVENT people changing their minds about being willing to give devoted unpaid/lowpaid service -which they all claim is not work. Can't have it both ways! Staff not on contacts...how much more off policy can you get? Once that goes then gag orders are a goner too, I guess, because there is no real legal commitment.

So now I have to choose....do I want the cult to lose this....and have to pay wages?.....or do I want them to win but have no legally binding contact - an outcome which would erode their legal bludgeons?

[Free to shine]

This makes me sick:

That calling is of the spirit, and higher - God. It is not work.

Since when is "God" part of a scientologist's vocabularly?

[Free to shine]

I didn't know about this review process, if it was posted here I missed it. Except for comments on the submissions, there's not much that can be done now. http://www.deewr.gov.au/WorkplaceRel...ages/Home.aspx

Supplementary submission process open

On 18 January 2012, the Fair Work Act Review Panel released a background paper and announced the timing for the review’s submission process.

The background paper, which can be downloaded below, provides general information on the review and the Act, detail of the submission process, relevant evidence sources and questions stakeholders may wish to consider when developing their submissions. The questions are not intended to be exhaustive and stakeholders are free to address other issues raised by the review’s terms of reference.

Written submissions to the Review Panel were due by 17 February 2012. Supplementary submissions, including comments on the submissions of other participants, are due by 2 March 2012. They should be focussed in the main on comments on, and responses to, the initial submissions.

Submissions should be concise and it is essential that contentions and propositions in submissions are supported by evidence.

Unless individuals or organisations making a submission seek confidentiality, all submissions will be posted on the Submissions page of the review’s website.

[freethinker]

In my view no religious institution should be allowed to make their workers work for nothing. It is in direct violation of the reason for religion which is to bring about a better quality of life.

You look at any religion and they have their beautiful buildings and the upper echelon have their beatiful attire and the Vatican is filthy rich.

Having a higher calling is a personal thing, it is not a sacrifice, but religions seem to operate on the concept of sacrifice, all of them.

Religions and Governments exist for the benefit of the people but the people end up serving them to their own detriment.

Nothing wrong with believing in a higher sense of spirituality but more blood has been shed in the name of religion and kings than anything else.

[Div6]

In my view no religious institution should be allowed to make their workers work for nothing. It is in direct violation of the reason for religion which is to bring about a better quality of life.

You look at any religion and they have their beautiful buildings and the upper echelon have their beatiful attire and the Vatican is filthy rich.

Having a higher calling is a personal thing, it is not a sacrifice, but religions seem to operate on the concept of sacrifice, all of them.

Religions and Governments exist for the benefit of the people but the people end up serving them to their own detriment.

Nothing wrong with believing in a higher sense of spirituality but more blood has been shed in the name of religion and kings than anything else.

Organized religion is a control mechanism and a sham. A "hearts and minds" campaign to control populations with a promise of nothing for something. ?That is not to say that god, worship, fellowship and communion do not have their place or value, because they do. But the minute you introduce an "Authoritative Interpreter" it is game over for individual rights and understanding.

[cakemaker]

There are many Hubbard references where he states that staff should be well paid.
In fact, I believe that one of the requirements for an org to be 'St Hill' sized is that staff are getting decent pay and don't need to moonlight.

This effort to paint staff as 'volunteers' is bunk.
LRH ED 339R about the Make-Break point of an org spells it out.
LRH ED 254 INT STAFF PAY
HCO PL 6 OCT 70 II MOONLIGHTING
FLAG ORDER 785RA VOLUNTEERS
are other excellent references. These would be ideal to send to the Fair Work Ombudsman.