Diskeeper Accused of Scientology Indoctrination 779
touretzky writes "Two ex-employees have sued Diskeeper Corporation in Los Angeles Superior Court after being fired, alleging that the company makes Scientology training a mandatory condition of employment (complaint, PDF). Diskeeper founder and CEO Craig Jensen is a high-level, publicly avowed Scientologist who has given millions to his Church. Diskeeper's surprising response to the lawsuit (PDF) appears to be that religious instruction in a place of employment is protected by the First Amendment." The blogger at RealityBasedCommunity.net believes that the legal mechanism that Diskeeper is using to advance this argument ("motion to strike") is inappropriate and will be disallowed, but that the company will eventually be permitted to present its novel legal theory.
Well... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It doesn't work like that. (Score:5, Interesting)
Correct. There are several exceptions to the at-will doctrine in California. You can't be fired if you've been promised, even verbally, that you will not be. Further, you can't be fired for refusing to break a law, based on religion or various other types of discrimination, and a small handful of other reasons.
Re:Well... (Score:4, Interesting)
religious discrimination (Score:5, Interesting)
It is going to boil down to technicalities about whether Scientology practice (or "tech") is actually a religious experience, or just a workplace management strategy. Scientology has gotten very good at dancing across that line when it suits them.
When it's time to hand out tax exemptions, they're an association of faith. When they're incorporating Dianetics into secular practices, it's just a communications, planning, and skill development regiment.
Too bad... (Score:3, Interesting)
That as the law stands today, it is a flagrant violation of the civil rights act... 'At will' doesn't cover it legally.
Basically, Diskeeper would have to get this case before the Supreme Court to change the law. They have admitted point blank they are in violation of the law.
I'm surprised they ever agreed to work in such a crackpot place to begin with though. I would prefer to find a competitor and watch their sorry asses fail.
diskeeper the company of nutters (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:It doesn't work like that. (Score:5, Interesting)
Perhaps this is a semantic quibble, but the rule is really the flip side. They can fire for *any* reason so long as there is not a law (or common law court decision) that specifically makes the reason unlawful. Discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, national origin, marital status, and pregnancy are just a few of the proscribed reasons. Various state statutes add a lot more. At one point, Oregon had a statute that prohibited employers from taking adverse action against employees based on their non-workplace use of tobacco products (I don't know if this is still on the books). The point being, unless it is a specifically prohibited reason, the employer can use it as a basis for termination. In practice, things get much more complex and employers often use non-prohibited reasons as a pretext for firing someone for a prohibited reason.
Employers with a religious purpose (churches immediately come to mind) have limited leeway with respect to employing people who share the same religious belief (at least with respect to positions that are overtly religious in nature). For regular companies that offer non-religious services and products, the rules are much more restrictive and you would have to look at actual conduct rather than the naked fact of religious affiliation. A wiccan might not be able to hold a job as an ED nurse if she were required by her religion to display numerous dangling body piercings that could become entangled in tubing, patient body parts, etc. (not to single out witches but this is a matter I actually had to deal with). In this particular case, I canmpt imagine any defense that has been approved by any appellate court. Novel defense indeed.
Re:What the hell? (Score:5, Interesting)
Cult of $cientology's standard response to ANYTHING is "freedom of religion, nyah nyah nyah."
Caught evading taxes and breaking into the IRS [wikipedia.org]? No problem - "Freedom of Religion."
Caught Trying to drive someone to suicide and framing them for crimes they didn't commit? [wikipedia.org] No problem - "Freedom of Religion."
Making false medical claims? Drag a cross in the door, claim "Freedom of Religion."
Killed Someone? [wikipedia.org] after removing them from a hospital? No problem - it was "Freedom of Religion."
Take advantage of a poor man having a stroke and playing "Weekend at Bernie's" with him to badmouth your critics? [wikipedia.org] No problem - "Freedom of Religion."
Framing people? Lying about them under oath? [wikipedia.org] "Fair Game" is a "Freedom of Religion" practice.
Ordering someone killed? [wikipedia.org] Sorry, that's a practice of "Freedom of Religion."
Missing the Point (Score:5, Interesting)
Now whether the employer actually has a constitutional right to force his employees to take Scientology classes is up for debate, but you can't win that debate by citing any number of lower laws.
Re:Wow (Score:3, Interesting)
Good Call. I can say from experience that I prefer Racxo Perfect Disk. It does a better job!
Re:Well... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Well... (Score:4, Interesting)
Now, I have to hand it to the Germans; they really do deal with the CoS as they should: with complete distrust and disapproval.
BTW, I am fairly active in trying to gat religious education out of Croatian public schools, which probably won't happen due to some unconstitutional contracts with the Vatican. Thus I sympathize greatly with everyone forced to endure religious drivel in their school and/or workplace.
Scientology ad (Score:1, Interesting)
Why is there an ad link to an official Scientology site sitting under the text of the main post? Slashdot, you're not flirting with Scientology at the annual Christmas indoctrination, er, I mean party, are you?
Re:What the hell? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:No, they're in violation of the law (Score:2, Interesting)
The EEOC is not relevant here, as the Complaint cites California state causes of action only (which keeps the case in state court as opposed to federal court). California's FEHA statute is similar to the EEOC, with the exception that FEHA permits unlimited compensatory and punitive damages, whereas EEOC damages are capped.
Re:Missing the Point (Score:3, Interesting)
True... but the laws of the EEOC stem from the Constitutions intentions and other amendments. It's sister legislation to prevent discrimination in housing has already been well argued.
Notice the EEOC here doesn't restrict an employer from having a religious bias or even proselytizing to the employee. The line is whether or not the employee's work atmosphere and/or promotions are hindered by rejecting the proselytization or not being of the same religious type.
MANDATORY training like being done here is certainly outside the realm of the EEOC's rulings here and certainly against the intention of the Constitution.
To wit- I'm all for religious freedom even to the point of an employer having a strong religious philosophy. There's nothing wrong with that. If these guys were complaining because the guy talked about Scientology to them all day. I'd say, tough. But while they're a company of Scientologists, they're not a Scientology company... and so a religious test breaks every tenant of the EEOC AND the Constitution.
Otherwise, the EEOC is meaningless.
Re:What the hell? (Score:5, Interesting)
I ran into a similar predicament at my former employer. Unbeknownst to me at the time of my interview and hiring there was a significant religious component that developed within the management group.
Our Vice President of operations based many of his decisions on who went to "his" church. Of course, none of this was provable but it became increasingly apparent when he would lead us in prayer at the beginning of our managers meetings twice a week. There were two of us who were not "team players" in this regard, a highly respected director and myself (I managed three different departments and had the highest reviews of any of the managers in the operations group).
When it came time for lay-off's, guess who was let go, the director and myself. Eventually the director was re-hired as a consultant. I decided to burn that bridge and when packing my personal effects I threw a notepad at the vice president and told him in a long tirade to get fuxed. Also, I refused to provide any future assistance when they called me later to figure out how to proceed on some of the projects I was working on.
Since this was in a "right to work" state I had little recourse and would not go back, even if they had doubled my salary and given me a public apology. I went on to a different company and made it my personal crusade to steer every customer away from my earlier employer. Sometimes those types of layoffs come back in spades and bite you in the behind.
Religious fanaticism, discriminatory hiring practices and the glass ceiling are still a major problem in many American companies to this day. I guess that you could fight these practices in court but in the long run, do you really want to work for people like this?
Let the best talent go to where we are appreciated and our quirks (religious beliefs, the shoes you wear, your not so politically correct conversation or personal convictions) matter the least. They say that it is a different job marketplace today with companies able to pick and choose who they want. It is a fool who does not hire the most capable and talented individuals because of some personal bias caused by their own ignorance.
Re:California is a at will state (Score:2, Interesting)
In order for your example to make any sense, it presumes that able straight white people ROCK, and everyone else sucks or else why do they need legal protection? Oh right, because of all the racists...
The fact is you are projecting your own superior feelings if you really believe the world is so full of prejudice.
Re:What the hell? (Score:4, Interesting)
I think the obvious solution to this, should they actually have a legal basis, is to require that only NON-scientologists can be employed at a company.
After all, if the 1st amendment protects religious requirements for employment, isn't the inverse true as well?
Perhaps this isn't a road they should go down...
How ironic it would be (Score:5, Interesting)
How ironic it would be if the guy who attributes his success to Scientology, kills his company's sales through forcing it to be taught to his employees. ;p
Re:Another Reason to Avoid Windows (Score:4, Interesting)
While working at a place may have you end up with forced Scientology indoctrination, I really don't think a file system is going to make you kill your wife.
Of course if avoiding the taint of Hans Reiser is how you choose a file system, perhaps you've never left the basement ;)
Craig Jensen is head of W.I.S.E (Score:1, Interesting)
Evidently the owner, Craig Jensen is the head of W.I.S.E. (World Institute for Scientology Enterprises).
http://forums.whyweprotest.net/123-leaks-legal/former-cio-sues-diskeeper-claims-he-fired-not-participating-scientology-tr-34213/#post657781 [whyweprotest.net]
Later as a "public scientologist" I was in the founding "CEO's Circle" of WISE, the top membership level, and met with and worked closely with Jensen who runs Diskeeper (then "Executive Software"). One of our top purposes was to drive people into WISE and through WISE into organized scientology.
http://forums.whyweprotest.net/123-leaks-legal/former-cio-sues-diskeeper-claims-he-fired-not-participating-scientology-tr-34213/#post657846 [whyweprotest.net]
Been There, Forced To Do That (Score:5, Interesting)
About two years after high school, I started working for a local office supply business as a low-level manager. The owners, all of the upper staff, and most everyone else were Scientologists. They never SAID anything about the training manuals being Scientology, but that is exactly what they were, and, of course, we were forced to study them and pass the tests. They never actively tried to recruit me or make me go to one of their churches/meetings/whatever (though it was mentioned politely a couple times) and didn't discuss it too much, but the manuals were enough to make it clear: Scientology was the way to move up in the company. I played the game for a while and did well there while managing to not become brain-washed, but, eventually, I had to bail. I'm a patient, easy going guy, but I could only take so much of their pseudo-scientific, pseudo-psychological, pseudo-religious cult junk before blowing a fuse.
What I want to know is, if Scientology was the key to success, why then did the business fail? That company no longer exists. :)
Re:What the hell? (Score:1, Interesting)
So I'm a bigot.. big deal. Do you believe in an invisible man in the sky? Then you're a fucking retard. Are your beliefs supported by the scientific method? If not, you're a fucking idiot. Do you rely on Pascal's bet when cornered by a logical argument? If so, you're literally insane.
Religion is a virus of the mind for those weaklings who cannot accept that we're a biochemical process who one day will cease to function as a living organism.
Interesting case (Score:3, Interesting)
I have always felt that religion in the workplace should be forbidden as it creates a hostile work environment. I have always felt this, but I have never known this to be fact. It will be interesting to watch. Personally, I always feel uncomfortable when certain company meetings begin with prayer... if Scientology were required training, I'd be even more uncomfortable.
Re:What the hell? (Score:4, Interesting)
My mechanic works for the Bretherans'
He also smokes and owns a mobile phone and listens to the radio, all of which is denied by the Bretherans and is part of his working conditions as agreed on when he got the job.
He's happy not to smoke, use his mobile or listen to the radio when he's working, however as most of his job is a breakdown service for their trucks on the road etc, he freely smokes, calls and listens to the radio/ipod etc when travelling. They know what he does and he knows that they know, but due to tolerance, both he and his company are reasonably happy.
There are issues with the Bretherans, especially in Australia where they make large political donations to the right wing conservatives, but otherwise they are harmless*.
But with the COS? At what point do you say to yourself that the organization you work for (and thus support) is too evil to continue with?
Every dollar you earn for that organization is going towards their evil ends?
There are many other organizations that fall into that category where your ethics rub up hard against the corporate mantra. Vegans working for McDonalds?
So it's more of a philosophical, ethical and moral decision you need to make. It works both ways.
---
*harmless - I've met ex-Plymouth Bretherans who would deny that they're harmless.
Re:Wow (Score:2, Interesting)
My experience at Diskeeper job interview (Score:5, Interesting)
My own experience with Diskeeper.
This was one of the most frustrating experiences of my life. I showed up for an interview at the L.A offices in 2002 or 2003. At the time I knew almost nothing of the COS. I did know that my current boss was from a family of hard-core COS followers. This was one of my last interviews of my "junior years". I'm un-ease, eager to please, eager to get a new job, dare I say, very impressionable.
So here I am waiting in the lobby. Looking around I see a row of huge books (10-12 inches tall), from L. Ron Hubbard, known to me only as a sci-fi writer, and I love sci-fi. Each book had titles related to good management, personal growth and similar stuff. More books a bit further, too far to see the titles. A picture of LRH was hanging on a wall in the back. Something was strange.
I meet the RH person, after a few nice words; the conversation turns on to Dianetics, how incredibly great it is, how it would help me like it helped others, and how we all owe it to the great LRH, and how incredible he was. I nod my head and am somewhat curious.
After some small talk, I am asked to do a quick personality test. I heard before that many businesses do this, but it was the first time for me. The questions where a bit strange, not quite like the personality test from high-school. Once done I gave it back and the HR "corrects it" on the spot in front of me. I then receive strange comment about some strength, and others I will need to improve.
I then get a quick tour of the place, where I am told that every new employee gets a free (and mandatory) "3 day seminar" on the week-end before they start working. After that the employees must stay at the office several evenings for a few hours for at least a month (less often after that) to receive evaluations and more "training". They really want to keep people educated to the latest technology was my thought.
More small talk walking around. Back to the lobby, "We will call you soon for another meeting. Once home, curious about that test I hit Google with some of the questions I remembered from the test.
I was in shock! I studied COS the entire week-end and felt violated in my intellectual integrity. Looking back at it, this was clearly some attempt to enrol me into COS. The test is a sham, not recognize by any real professional in any science. Many claim it's purposely design for failure, you need help and guess who will help you.
Reading on I realized that almost every phrase I heard was to lure me into COS. The "free 3 day seminar" coukd only be the horrible COS spirit breaking seminar used to bring new sheep in. The following evenings of reviews were for COS audits.
I started to be angry. I read that like many cults they use these seminars to manipulate people in despair looking for help. I quickly understood that depressed by a boring job I was in the right state of mind to be a victim. Now I was just mad.
Worst part was, the more I read on scientology and "audits" treatment, the more I realized my current boss (from a family of COS) was using these tactics at work. Making you feel like crap, incompetent, never doing any good work, so when he asked anything we would all comply ASAP. At least it was a wake up call, I changed job, realized how good I really am, and hated the COS ever since ... and it's personal.
Re:Wow (Score:3, Interesting)
Huh? Since when does Windows defrag run on anything but MS Windows? How am I forced to use it?
Re:Wow (Score:5, Interesting)
I would also look for alternatives, since there are almost always an alternative. If none can be found, then I would have to determine how important this product is. I have not found a need for defragging except for in the case of making a partimage of the disk.
Re:Wow (Score:2, Interesting)
No, rather because a portion of the profits goes to support the Church of Nutjobs umm I mean Scientology.
Re:It doesn't work like that. (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:What the hell? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:My experience at Diskeeper job interview (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Slashdot runs ads for Scientology now? (Score:3, Interesting)
It's because Google Ads are driven by keywords on whatever page it's attached to, so that the ads are more "targeted" than just coming up at random. We're discussing Scientology, and Scientology has Google Ads, so the (ahem) "appropriate" *cough* ads show up.
Re:What the hell? (Score:1, Interesting)
Just like everyone I work with in California (I have many wine industry clients) knows within a few meetings that I'm Mormon.
Hope you enjoy Utah...it's a pretty state, even though I'm not a native and prefer the west coast.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Wow (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Another Reason to Avoid Windows (Score:3, Interesting)
Is there any evidence that they rewrote the defrag engine rather than just the UI? I vaguely recall hearing that Vista's defrag tool was just a new UI on the same core.
Re:Well... (Score:3, Interesting)
Early in my career I worked in a computer distributor for HP (mostly big corporate and government contracts) where all first and second tier managers were from an evangelic church and held a kind of a cult before work started.
I declared myself an atheist (actually, I joke I lack the faith required to be an atheist) and had no problem. They respected it.
That was in Brazil, early 90s.
Re:What the hell? (Score:1, Interesting)
It was never about meditative states in your mind.
The issue is the whole "throw your life away/give us everything" aspects, that are a big deal.
Honestly, if all it preached was just making yourself feel good, we'd shrug em off and move on. However, this verbal and sometimes physical violence against other groups done by scientology is why we can only hope that scientology gets destroyed as soon as possible.
Re:It doesn't work like that. (Score:5, Interesting)
One refers to if you think god is knowable (gnostic vs agnostic), one refers to personal belief (Is there a god). I'm for example am an Agnostic Atheist... normally I don't bother to mention agnostic because it's unnessisary. I also don't mention a thousand other clarifiying words to pinpoint it.
Agnostic means you don't think it's possible for humanity to know if there is a god or not, it has nothing to do with if you believe there is one or not.
Example; I'm agnostic to there being pink elephants in the core of the earth. I don't believe they are there, but I don't think we really have any way to find out.
Re:Good Luck (Score:3, Interesting)
This. I once worked for a small business owned and run by a fundamentalist nutcase. He had his employee lunchroom littered with his religious pamphlets and conversation with him about...well...anything...was peppered with Jesus talk. He was careful to keep it away from most of his clients, but the employees got it constantly. He would hold regular lunchtime prayer meetings in the lunch room. He seemed to believe that since it was his business, he was entitled to barrage anyone who worked for him with his religion. And he made no bones about favoring the employees who went along with it over those who tried to keep it at arm's length while they worked.
If this case ever gets into the Federal Courts, expect all the usual suspects from the religious right to side with the Scientologists. Expect then to claim that it's everyone else who are harassing the Christians (according to their version of Christianity). If their religious beliefs require them to only employ other Christians, or promote members of their own church over employees who aren't, then when you complain about that you are harassing them. They are not harassing you when they try to impose their religion on you, they're trying to save your soul. They're doing it out of love. If you complain you are being hateful.
The argument has always been that a secular society that values tolerance and religious pluralism is necessarily hostile toward them. If you teach science in the classroom you are attacking their beliefs. If pharmacists can't pick and choose which prescriptions they will fill, and for whom, based on their beliefs you are attacking their beliefs. If landlords can't rent to, if businesses can't employ and serve, only members of their own religion, you are attacking their beliefs. Laws that protect everyone, them included, from discrimination, attack their beliefs because those laws don't allow them discriminate against everyone else. But repealing all the anti-discrimination laws would also be an attack on their beliefs, since that would allow other people to discriminate against them. The only way for them to be free from discrimination, is for everyone to embrace their beliefs whether we want to or not. And it's for our own good anyway.
It would be a Pyrrhic victory for Scientology if Diskeeper's argument won the day. But it's a safe bet that if this thing gets any further the Scientologists will be more then happy to buddy up with the Christian religious right since they both have common enemies in secularism and pluralism.
Re:How ironic it would be (Score:2, Interesting)
The irony of Scientology is:
All scientologists are "audited". This involves confessing to another scientlologist ( higher order ) about stuff you wouldn't tell your mother - crimes and sexual stuff that you wouldn't want anyone to know. Everything that is said during the "audit" is written down ( and often recorded ). It is all stored in big archives.
It is this makes scientlogists so fanatically protective of their own little cult.
Eventually ( nerds understand this ), there will be leaks, and lots of sensitive information on scientologists will come out: "The Christmas of Anonomous"
This is what they fear. This is what drives them.
It has nothing to do with space-aliens.
Funny isn't it:-)
Re:Wow (Score:3, Interesting)
Let's give it a fair chance (Score:3, Interesting)
Full disclosure: I am anti-Scientology, and generally anti-religion. If your imaginary friend is easily offended, maybe you should scroll past my humble paragraphs.
I've noticed many of the Scientology defenders cite the religion as helping with some challenge in their life, most often drug addiction, adultery or gambling. I don't know the method by which this assistance is administered, but I would say it is a good thing. What's not so good is how they turn around and bash psychology for essentially doing the same thing for less money.
The big problem is that this "help" is the value-add in their business model. They put a band-aid on your pathetic self-control issues, then sell you a religion before the buzz wears off, and they seem to pitch it so well that their converts truly believe it to be the "One True Way", and that everyone else is wrong and stupid... you know, like every other religion.
What the Diskeeper guy could/should be doing, rather than illegally coercing everyone to join in his quackery, is condense the relevant "teachings" he considers essential to his business into formal documentation, be it a management book or 1-2-3 day training seminar. If he wants to be another Cruise/Travolta trainwreck, that's his choice to make, but to force others down the same path is vile and short-sighted.
Re:Reason? (Score:4, Interesting)
Is it any different than another religion that you cannot inspect the source?? Not that I'm showing preferential treatment to Scientology mind you.
Of course you are not showing preferential treatment; in fact, you are attempting to be even-handed to the point of political correctness.
The point is, I am aware of no other religion that makes (or at least made) the utter destruction of its opponents by any and all means necessary a part of its official policy. Mind you, Islamic terrorists (as a prototypical example) do not qualify: their actions are based on a selective reading of their holy book. In Scientology, there is no selective reading; the Fair Game doctrine was/is their official doctrine.
Besides, if those prototypical Islamic terrorists got hold of my data, there is not much they would do with it. They do not engage in smear campaigns and turning the authorities on me. OTOH, the CoS might, for instance, report me as a paedophile if they find something matching hentai*.jpg (I've seen way too often that hentai == paedo in people's minds, even if all the characters have tits bigger than their heads). It doesn't matter if I am later proven innocent; my name would be ruined.
Luckily for me, I eschew Windows in general, except for gaming purposes. And lately, even the games I play are legit.
Re:It doesn't work like that. (Score:3, Interesting)
How about you take a look? The church I attended was happy to let any one look at their finances - because indeed, they were doing the right thing. So the obvious answer to your challenge is: walk to the nearest church, and ask the pastor if you can look at his books. State that you've been told that churches do charitable work, and you don't believe it's as valuable as you've been told. Ask the pastor how many hours of counseling he does per week. Ask how many meetings are held per week. Ask how much money the church donates to outside organizations to send doctors and nurses to third world countries on childhood vaccination missions. Ask how much of the billable time (if it were a private sector business / public sector clinic) is actually billed.
It's obvious to me that the GP is right. It's also obvious to me from your attitude that you won't believe anything less than the truth as seen by your own eyes. I'm OK with that. March your eyes down to the closest church and check it out.
Of course, if the closest church to you is the Scientology Center, I'm screwed. ;-)
Re:Wow (Score:4, Interesting)
He's saying the church of Scientology does it, and the owner of the company funds them.
If you look into it you'll see a history of child abuse in the Church of Scientology, they claim that it hasn't happened in over 20 years (Not that it never happened) but there've been quiet a few (now ex-)members of the church testifying that it's happened more recently than that.
As for kitten killing I'm not as sure, just googled and found http://www.solitarytrees.net/pickets/sp992a.htm [solitarytrees.net], but no idea how many of those stories are true, and I don't really care enough to go and look into them, I've heard of the first story before a few times though and it seems likely that at least that one is true.
Re:Wow (Score:2, Interesting)
XFS has its own poisons. For example, although it's a journalling filesystem, XFS only journals metadata.
I'll choose filesystem integrity over stopping a little fragmentation any day.
This means you can wind up with corrupt data in files due to a sudden power loss.
As recently as RHEL 5 (the last time I ever considered XFS), I have had problems with NUL bytes showing up in files after such a system crash.
Ext3 journals actual filesystem data (not just metadata).
I have only seen ext FS corruption _once_ that was not due to a hard drive failure.
Whereas I have seen very silent XFS FS corruption show up, clearly for software reasons several times, when the hardware was just fine.
I would agree about using XFS or something else for mythtv data, but only because the recorded video isn't that important (it's a case of storage capacity is more important than data integrity, so XFS is an ok choice).
Re:Reason? (Score:2, Interesting)
Uhm....
Merry Christmas! [simpletoremember.com]