Mainz -- Professing the teachings of Scientology founder Ron Hubbard is not compatible with working as an employee agent. That was decided on Thursday by the first Senate of the Rheinland-Pfalz State Welfare Court in Mainz. The basis of the decision said that membership in Scientology alone was not enough to revoke a work permit. But the complainant, from whom the Federal Labor Department (BfA) had revoked the permit, did not have the dependability required for her work because of her deep involvement with Hubbard's teachings.
The BfA had revoked the work permit it had issued for the 45-year-old complainant after learning of her membership in Scientology from newspaper stories. The former masseuse and bath attendant had acted as agent for au-pair girls mainly from Estonia with German host families.
The presiding judge Ralf Bartz detailed in the basis of the decision that the case went against the complainant mainly because she delivered between six and ten percent of the girls to Scientologists without telling that to the girls. Because she was dealing with minors whose native language was not German, this lack of information was deemed particularly problematic.
The complainant, who bears the rank of Class V Auditor among her fellow Scientologists, is dedicated on the whole to the teachings of Hubbard and is deeply involved in them. In case of doubt she would persistently follow the word of Hubbard, as opposed to the applicable law. It was said this did not meet the requirements demanded of the complainant for acting as employment agent.
Bartz supported his decision basis on the extensive testimony of the complainant, who had to take a position on various quotes from Hubbard. The hearing was required after the Federal Welfare Court turned the case back to the State Welfare Court to be heard again. The highest welfare court had found that membership in Scientology alone was not enough to determine the non-dependability of the complainant, but that all her personal factors had to be taken into account.
The court will not permit appeal of the decision because the dispute has no general significance. However, the complainant can still file a complaint about this decision.