Providence Journal -- http://www.projo.com/

23 January 1999


Dentist mandated course


    A former dental assistant testifies that Dr. Roger N. Carlsten insisted she
take a course written by the founder of Scientology or risk losing her job.

By KAREN LEE ZINER
Journal Staff Writer

Another former employee of Roger N. Carlsten, an East Side dentist on trial for
employment discrimination on religious grounds, testified yesterday that
Carlsten pressured her to take a course in Hubbard Administrative Technology
that she objected to, or face losing her job.

Marion Moreid, who worked as a dental assistant to Carlsten from 1984 to 1991,
testified under subpoena as the final witness for plaintiff Susan E. Morgan.
The civil Superior Court action alleges violation of the Rhode Island Fair
Employment Practices Act.

Morgan alleges that Carlsten fired her in January 1992 because she refused to
take a Hubbard Administrative Technology course that Carlsten had described to
her as "statistics" for improved office management.

Morgan testified she believes the Hubbard course materials, written by the late
L. Ron Hubbard, embrace principles of Scientology, the religion Hubbard
founded. Morgan said she refused to take the course because she "did not wish
to be subjected" to Scientology in the workplace.

Another former employee, Susan Baldaia, testified Thursday that she, too,
refused to take the course because she believed it to be about Scientology.

Carlsten testified he fired Morgan for poor job performance, specifically for
failing to keep up with patient accounts, keeping inadequate patient histories
and failing to accept a new computer system he bought for the office.

Morgan's lawyer, Renee J. Bushey, asked Moreid to recall a meeting Carlsten
arranged for his staff with consultants from the Precision Management Company
in April 1991.

Precision Management was identified earlier this week as a consulting firm
Carlsten hired to teach the Hubbard courses and revamp office operations.

"What was said by Dr. Carlsten at that meeting?" Bushey asked.

"Dr. Carlsten required that we take these courses by Precision Management,"
Moreid said. "Well, it was compulsory to take the course, or else we couldn't
remain employed."

"Did (Carlsten) tell you that?"  Bushey asked.

"Yes," Moreid said.

"Did he tell you that on more than one occasion?"

"Yes," Moreid replied.

Moreid said she objected to the course and asked if she could take such a
course elsewhere.

"I requested, 'Could they be taken at another accredited college?' " Moreid
said. "I was told, 'no.' "

"Who told you that you had to take the Precision Management courses?" Bushey
asked.

"Dr. Carlsten," Moreid replied, as well as several people who identified
themselves at the 1991 meeting as Precision Management consultants.

Moreid said that when she stopped working for Carlsten in May or June 1991, "as
I recall, one of the reasons was because I chose not to take the courses by
Precision Management."

Asked if she ever witnessed Carlsten complaining about Morgan's job
performance, Moreid said she heard Carlsten make such complaints "on occasion."

"How many times?" Bushey asked.

"A couple of times," Moreid said. "Once in a while."

Asked her own observations about Morgan's work capabilities, Moreid said, "She
was conscientious. She did a good job. She was a good receptionist. I
personally had no complaints."

On cross-examination, Carlsten's lawyer, Sandra A. Lanni, asked Moreid if it
was fair to say that "before a determination was going to be made" as to who
would take which specific Hubbard course, Precision Management would first come
in and inspect office functions.

"Well, the courses were already suggested, and they were going to come in and
follow through," Moreid said.

"You weren't told which particular courses, were you?" asked Lanni.

"No," Moreid said.

Lanni also asked Moreid, "Isn't it true (Carlsten) tried to get you to stay if
certain conditions were met?"

"I had to take the courses. That was one thing," Moreid said.

Superior Court Judge Alice B. Gibney recessed trial until Monday morning.

At the trial's outset, Gibney ruled in favor of a motion by Lanni to restrict
testimony about Scientology itself, based on concerns Lanni raised that such
testimony might "inflame the jury into 'punishing' Carlsten for his religious
affiliations."

Gibney has also ruled out the potential for punitive damages; Morgan is seeking
approximately $11,000 in back pay and medical benefits.


               Copyright © 1999 The Providence Journal Company
                     Produced by www.projo.com