I was in the SO for 10 years. After I left I still wanted to contribute, and so I did volunteer work.

During the whole evolution to get the donations for my local org's "Ideal building" and get it moved, there were a lot of SO members in the org on various projects.  However, simply because I was ex-SO and still had a "freeloader debt", I was treated as a persona non-grata by many.

This wasn't the attitude of the org staff, nor even all of the SO members, but it seemed that most of the senior people felt this way. One even went so far as to yell at me one time as I was walking out the front door of the org as she was walking in. I don't think she expected me to hold my ground and not cave-in. I told her flat out that what she was doing was not per any policy.

It was quite a scene. I was told several times that I was not supposed to be/shouldn't be in the org. I was kicked out of an event. I was later told that I could attend events and *some* org functions, but would have to "leave immediately after the event and not mingle."

At one point, there were several people with "freeloader" status doing volunteer work and we were "found as a why" for the bugged donations for the "Ideal Org." None of us were anywhere near the income or donation lines! We were doing entirely backlines stuff. Apparently we somehow cursed the donations by our mere presence? In any case, it was used as an excuse to bar us from the org. Oh -- of course this didn't solve the "bugged donations line", either.

I couldn't get anywhere locally, so I wrote to ED Int. My first response from him was rather positive. He said "I understand your position as a freeloader and value your desire to contribute."

He then directed me to work out an amends project based on the lower condition I was in as a freeloader. I was totally fine with doing amends and got right on it. I did a lot of amends, hundreds of hours; even using my vacation time from work to be able to put in more time at the org.

Even so, it took some time before I was entrusted to do anything more than "cleaning" when I was at the new building. Rediculous as it sounds, we were being required to keep the finished spaces white-glove clean daily in case COB "or someone important" came to tour!  Everyone was already working overtime on an impossible deadline and yet this idiotic order was imposed. Keeping it white-glove was almost impossible because the building was in the middle of being renovated!

Probably the strangest incident happened at about 3am one morning, right before the grand opening. I was still at the org, helping to get things ready, and suddenly found myself getting a dressing-down by someone from RTC. I had never laid eyes on this person before and, without any preamble, she started telling me that I was "so out-ethics for having left the SO" and asked me how I could be such a "scumbag," etc. etc...

I don't think she even knew anything about me other than the fact that I was ex-SO. It was so surreal.

But, I knew that none of this was right. This wasn't actual Scientology, and so I fought it. I also knew that I wasn't technically even a "freeloader" by the very definition and all of the policies I'd read.

I was not protesting the debt at that time, but after 10 years in the SO, my case level was Scn DRD and my training level was HQS. I hadn't done a lot of services at org expense and then simply left the SO. In fact, I've never known a single ex-SO member who actually fit the bill as a "freeloader."

The policy was being misused in a brutal way!

Meanwhile, I was invited onto the OT Committee. I also sold books, helped at the VM tents and the like. I enjoyed being able to contribute again and felt plucky enough to write ED Int back, upping the ante this time by really addressing the situation of how ex-SO "freeloaders" were treated and the arbitraries on this line, such as not "being allowed" to volunteer at their local org.

The response this time was not so nice:

"Thank you very much for your letter explaining the attitude toward freeloaders. I get it. The bottom line is that a freeloader is in a condition of doubt with respect to other Scientologists, as you have read in HCO PL 2 December 1969R FREELOADERS. Staff attitude is indicated by LRH in HCO PL 12 February 1970 EC WW, PRIMARY DUTIES OF: 'Accurate freeloader lists should be made and kept and the offender considered dead so far as org staff is concerned as experience shows they are often wildly out-ethics otherwise.' "
The ED Int continued...

"My advice is to program out the exact steps of handling the conditions from Doubt on up through Liability. If you coordinate all of your actions in that direction, you'll make some progress back into good standing."

First of all, this particular reference he cites doesn't "indicate staff attitude". It says, "so far as org staff is concerned." Meaning, being elligible for staff. There is a vast difference between the word "is" and the word "are" in "so far as org staff is concerned." The singular subject "org staff" is much different than the plural of each staff member's individual attitude.

Most of this policy is actually about HIRING, it's not about how to deal with freeloaders. In the section referenced, LRH was talking about recruiting and sending staff for upper org training and not re-hiring freeloaders, (actual freeloaders, not people who dedicated decades of their life working for the Church).

Here is the quote in context:

"Training in upper orgs for staff members in lower orgs should be okayed by EC WW first and an undated note for the expense to the lower org should be made out and signed. Accurate freeloader lists should be made and kept and the offender considered dead so far as org staff is concerned as experience shows they are often wildly out-ethics otherwise."

This policy of not re-hiring aligns with HCO PL Freeloaders, where LRH states that freeloaders need IJC approval to re-join staff. If you have someone who joined staff and got trained up at org expense, leaving right after, should you let that person just re-join and get more free training with no exchange? No!

One can see that leading to an out-ethics situation indeed. Makes sense. But it's also something I've almost never seen happen! It may have been more of a situation when LRH originally wrote the reference, but now the pendulum has really swung the other direction.

LRH wasn't making some sweeping statement about how freeloaders should be treated like SP's, illogically, in the middle of talking about recruitment and sending staff to upper orgs for training.

To mean what ED Int was telling me it meant, it would have to say "so far as org staff are concerned" and it would be a generalization about the way staff "feel," which is not only out of place, it has no other basis in policy.

Treated as being "dead"? Where is this "status" in any policy? Like an SP? What? Yet this is how it was being interpreted by no less than ED Int! I was pretty shocked and also pretty deflated.

Well, some time later I was pulled off of the OT Committee, right in the middle of a meeting, no less. Around that time, I was asked by one of the org execs to come in and help with something. As I was walking up the stairs one of the SO members said, "What is she doing here?" And another told me flat out that I shouldn't be in the org.

Other things of this nature continued to happen and I could literally feel myself losing the will to fight. I'd been worn down.

On the flip side, my ex-husband, who had paid off his "freeloader debt" and had some money (so was able to donate -- ka-ching!), was treated very well indeed.

He hadn't yet completed his liability condition and had not done much in the way of amends, but he didn't receive any of the above mentioned treatment.

It chilled me to the bone, because I suddenly knew that if I had money, I would go from being a "bad guy" to VIP status, regardless of any lower condition. My ex-husband also noted this disparity.

That was when I started withdrawing from the church. I wondered how things had gone so awry. This wasn't Scientology!

Written by Moving Forward