Русская версия

Site search:
ENGLISH DOCS FOR THIS DATE- Auditor Assignment Policies - Cramming Assignment Policies (CRAM-20, CSS-107, QCAOTS-1) - B791221

RUSSIAN DOCS FOR THIS DATE- Инструкции по Назначению Одитора и Усиленного Обучения (Серия КС 107, УсОб 20, ДКсОТ 1) - Б791221
- Инструкции по Назначению Одиторов и Усиленного Обучения (Серия КС 107, УсОб 20, ДКсОТ 1) - Б791221 (2)
- Инструкции по Назначению Одиторов и Усиленного Обучения (Серия КС 107, УсОб 20, ДКсОТ 1) - Б791221
- Правила Назначения Одитинга, Креминга (отрывок) (Серия КС 107П, КРЕМИНГА 16) - Б791221R
CONTENTS Auditor Assignment Policies,
Cramming Assignment Policies

Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
Remimeo Case Supervisors Cramming Officers Ds of P Ds of T Dir Correction Tech/Qual CS Series 107
Cramming Series 20
Qual Corrective Actions on OTs Series 1

Auditor Assignment Policies,
Cramming Assignment Policies


We have long had the rule that auditor-pc assignments must be by comparable grade and class. Reasons for this are given in HCOB 23 Jul AD19, which also sets the policy: “Therefore it is policy not to assign an auditor whose grade and class is less than that of the pc.”

This policy becomes even more important when handling assignments on pre-OTs, because if the auditor were of lower case grade it would prevent the pre-OT from communicating to the auditor and the auditor not being aware of or trained on the materials of the level of case of the pre-OT, would not be able to audit that pre-OT and would risk disaster for the pre-OT as well as himself.

As Cramming Officers fly ruds in Cramming and as some of the Cramming and Qual corrective actions can get into a person’s case, this policy is extended to apply to Cramming Officers, as well as auditors.

Therefore the following policies apply:

1. It is policy not to assign an auditor whose grade and class is less than that of the pc. (HCOB 23 Jul AD19)

2. It is policy to assign only good proven auditors to good auditors. (HCOB 23 Jul AD19)

3. It is policy not to assign non-OT Cramming Officers to OTs and the Cramming Officer must not be of lower case level than the OT.

4. A person who has been audited on NED for OTs, may only be audited or crammed by a NED for OTs auditor.

The terms “auditor” and “Cramming Officer” in these policies above are intended to include anyone acting in the capacity of an auditor or Cramming Officer and the fact that one is not a trained or posted auditor or Cramming Officer does not permit one to do auditing or Qual corrective actions in violation of the policies above.

These policies apply to any auditing actions and to Qual corrective actions such as Why Finding, metered debug actions, False Data Stripping, Confessionals (whether done in Qual or HCO), Clay Table auditing and these policies are intended to apply to any new Qual corrective actions released in the future.

Subjective questions and metered actions which lead into a person’s case are not OK on OTs. Such actions are not advised on lower level cases either, unless these have been C/Sed for and are part of standard tech. Otherwise this type of action is only a covert way of auditing the person while not calling it auditing and is forbidden in C/S Series 29 Case Actions, Offline. Nonstandard actions or interviews done by untrained persons whose TRs and metering are out are especially forbidden, as detrimental to cases. Definition of “subjective”: “Consultation with the preclear’s own universe, with his mock ups, and with his own thoughts and considerations.” (COHA, page 167) “Recall, think, remember or return on the time track processes are subjective.” (HCOB 2 Nov 57RA)

There are actions which are OK to do in Cramming. These are not related to the person’s case. They relate to his post and performance. These are objective questions or actions. Definition of “objective”: “Of or having to do with a material object as distinguished from a mental concept, idea or belief.” (Dictionary) “Means here and now objects in PT as opposed to ‘subjective’.” (HCOB 2 Nov 57RA) Questions or actions by the Cramming Officer which are objective and pertain to the person’s post, the materials which cover his post or that he is studying, clearing words misunderstood, hatting actions and post or Product Debugs (provided subjective questions are not asked on OTs) are all OK. The most usual and successful cramming action is simply to take the materials or text that covers the subject of the cramming order and word clear and cram those materials. This is always safe and OK to do. (The only other caution is not to give verbal data, nor to evaluate or invalidate or throw the person’s ruds out while doing the cram!)

It is not that OTs are difficult to handle. To the contrary OTs are far easier and faster to handle than non-OTs. But OT cases must be handled as OT cases or the person doing the handling risks invalidation of case level of the OT and could get into aspects of the case that he/she knows nothing about and is thus incapable of handling or repairing. OTs when handled on the appropriate auditing and Qual corrective actions for their state of case by auditors, Cramming Officers and C/Ses who are qualified to do so, make very fast and spectacular gains.

As assisted by
Senior C/S Int