Reported income

Discussion in 'Staff "War Stories"' started by Bea Kiddo, Aug 14, 2009.

View Users: View Users
  1. Bea Kiddo

    Bea Kiddo Crusader

    I just received the earnings record from the Social Security office. It lists everything reported from the begining. I hadn't really paid much mind to it before, but I was shocked.

    Check this out: I joined the Sea Org in May of 1989. I left in 2004 (May). I will list income since the begining until 03:

    83: $4.00
    84: 0
    85: $14
    86: 0
    87: 0
    88: 0
    89: 0
    90: 0
    91: 0
    92: 0
    93: 0
    94: 2,576
    95: 2,284
    96: 2,925
    97: 2,140
    98: 1,355
    99: 1,075
    00: 637
    01: 950
    02: 637
    03: 216

    Instead I got a ton of freedom? Who needs money, eh?

    How could anyone blow, even if they wanted to? One year of pay would barely pay for 2 nights in a roach motel!
  2. Alanzo

    Alanzo Banned

    If Tommy Davis were here, what would he ask?

    Weren't you just a part time cleaning lady?
  3. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    Mine was similar in the years 1986-1996. They changed something in 1994, i.e. it stopped being reported as 0. You still got paid something for the years prior, right?

  4. British Mom

    British Mom Patron with Honors

    :omg: This is criminal, all those hours for peanuts, you would have been better off with peanuts, as least you would have got some protein :yes:
  5. Happy Days

    Happy Days Silver Meritorious Patron

    That's so right British Mom... how could anyone afford to leave... it becomes "Mission Impossible" ... where's Tom when you need him :lol:
  6. Bea Kiddo

    Bea Kiddo Crusader

    Yes- 89 to 93 I was paid. However, it was RPF pay, which was 11.50 per week, from 89 to 91.

    Holy rolly pollies!!! I joined in May 88! Not May 89!!! I was RPFed in May 89. Duh.

    May 88 I was 15. Turned 16 in Oct.

    No school during those months, except Saturday morning class. I did some exam and passed and got HS diploma or whatever.
  7. HCObringOrder?

    HCObringOrder? Silver Meritorious Patron

    My statement looks similar, except for the time at Riverside Mission.
    I believe that Bent did taxes.
  8. AnonOrange

    AnonOrange Gold Meritorious Patron

    Paul is bringing up something very important here. Even if it was 11.50 per week it had to be reported.

    I don't believe the money you got was ever an "expense reimbursement" and can be paid in cash, without reporting. Had the CoS been smart, they would have made you fill out expense forms. Because they didn't do thta then the 11.50 is a SALARY and must be reported.

    If you have any proof that your got the money from 89-93, they've got a big problem on their hands. Also, did they match the employer part of the social security 7.65%?
  9. alex

    alex Gold Meritorious Patron

    The church claims the moneys given to SO is a stipend. And it is given to "religious workers" a class of person who is mostly a volunteer, such as a priest or nun, not there for the simple exchange of labor for compensation, but working for a cause.

    It is a different set of rules than the typical ones more common types of employees are subject too. In some cases "religious worker" compensation is not reported and taxed the same way wages are.

    It will be interesting if the Headly case gets any traction, as it will effect other religions such as catholics that have large numbers of people classed as "religious workers".

    The law on this is on the church's side.....

    (I'm not saying its fair or right, it would be fair or right if SO got decent food, housing, medical, auditing and training, and care in their later years)
  10. Div6

    Div6 Crusader

    Cue the OSA shill, trying to minimize the Church's overts of ignoring the laws of the land and justifying its enslaver mentality.

    The law is NOT on the Church's side. The CoS is an ongoing criminal enterprise that has been scheming to deny civil rights to people from its inception. And you support and defend that slavery and abuse, and even try to characterize it as 'freedom'.

    Good luck with that.
  11. AnonOrange

    AnonOrange Gold Meritorious Patron

    Maybe so, but read this from Wiki:
    "Stipends are usually lower than what would be expected as a permanent salary for similar work. This is because the stipend is complemented by other benefits such as accreditation, instruction, food and/ or accommodation."

    Then the church is totally shooting themselves in the foot with the freeloader debt invoices for people that blow. Those were supposed to be free and a benefit in compensation for the services. Also was the word "stipend" ever mentioned in the contract? I remember reading discussions about "employment" and "salary", but never "stipend".

    The simple fact that the amounts are on the W-2 implies a salary, not a stipend.

    Also, I like this line from the Wiki article:
    "However, it is considered immoral to demand payment for a sacrament, and stipends are seen as gifts."

    I guess that means the CoS price lists are immoral! Well, we knew that.
  12. alex

    alex Gold Meritorious Patron

    Perhaps you could quote the relevant law concerning religious workers, stipends and such to back up your assertion of criminality?

    Your personal characterizations of me are unwelcome.
  13. alex

    alex Gold Meritorious Patron

    I understand, but from my long familial association with lawyers, I know that what makes sense is seldom what is in the law books,

    And what makes lawyers is a glee for tweeking fine points into a position of power.

    Its the lawyers game now, not us sensible folks.

    If I were a gambler, I would always bet on the side with the most money when it comes to lawyers.

    And from reading Mr Sickles brief, it seems he plays the emotion card a bit heavy and the case law references a bit light.
  14. Nightingale

    Nightingale Patron with Honors


    Please remember that many who receive religious stipends, have taken a vow of poverty and that delineates how that stipend is used and how much it is. There is also a formal agreement between the church and the participant because of the acceptance of that vow; therefore, it really isn't the same as in CofS, or so it seems to me.
  15. alex

    alex Gold Meritorious Patron

    Yes. In the catholic situation there are two classes of persons who recieve stipends, the secular priests who lead parishes and conduct services for the public and the cloistered bothers, sisters, monks and nuns who's religious work is private more so.

    It is the latter generally that take poverty vows, the former, priests frequently own property, cars etc and although they live somewhat at the generousity of the church, are not impoverished.

    Generally the cloistered donate their stipend back to the order and live communally, whereas the priests tend to live independently.

    Nothing of course is ever the same with scientology.
  16. Div6

    Div6 Crusader

    The criminality of the ongoing enterprise known as scientology far exceeds the question of "stipends" for "religious workers", and you know it.

    Just google "Snow White, Operation FreakOut, Gabe Cazares, RPF" for starters.

    You continue to support this ongoing criminality and out-exchange by your own admissions and postings. I am simply saying that that reflects your character. If that is not true, then you are free to refute it, and DEMONSTRATE your true character.

    That you choose not to do so is yet another indicator of your "true colors".
  17. Ladybird

    Ladybird Silver Meritorious Patron

    Ask and ye shall receive Alex!

    Have your lawyer friends review the law on R-1 visas for a start:

    More here:
  18. alex

    alex Gold Meritorious Patron

    Your references actually support my position. (and I dont have any lawyer friends, just lawyer family, scientologist and ex both)

    They are not salaried but give token amounts for personal use, they are provided housing and food and engage in work that would really only be done based on personal commitment rather than an exchange of wage for labor.

    Also your reference contains a statement that no medical benefits are given, which is contrary to the statements of the OP of this thread who herself was in charge of such.

    Granted they are hardly what would be considered adequate by a middle class american such as you or I, but some benefit was there.

    I know you didnt sign up for the bene's nor for the wages, working conditions or lifestyle. No one does, and those things are in my opinion glaring flaws in the operation of the church.

    But legal in my opinion. Good items to create bad publicity for the church, less useful in the courts.
  19. bluewiggirl

    bluewiggirl Patron Meritorious

    There is legal precedent working against the church specifically on the matter of religious workers:
    page 4, line 24.
  20. Ladybird

    Ladybird Silver Meritorious Patron

    You are an obfuscator and thread polluter Alex. The R-1 law says what it says:


Share This Page