By
Jim Weyrauch, President AFGE Local 644
I don’t usually ascribe to conspiracy theories but can’t help but wonder, in this age of heightened security and paranoia, why the government doesn’t look more closely at the tainted food, unsafe toys and other dangerous cargos crossing our borders. The Department of Homelands Security and all of the federal /state and local agencies charged with the protection of our country seem to be obsessed with searching for alleged terrorist from under every bush no matter how they trample on civil liberties but don’t seem to be concerned with cargo that comes through our ports and across our borders everyday.
It is been reported that Customs only inspects 5% of cargo that comes through our ports and usually permits cargo addressed to large companies such as Wal-Mart to go through without inspection. Most of that cargo comes from suspect nations, such as China and other countries on Bush’s Axis of Evil It is the same with food and drugs, very little inspection by both Customs and the Federal Drug Agency or the Consumer Product Safety Commission or Food Inspections. With this lax inspection protocol one could put forth the premise that terrorists are already in the country could have WMDS shipped here with little or no expectation of detection.
If the definition of Terrorism is causing harm to American citizens and destroying our infrastructure doesn’t the import of tainted and unsafe food and drugs, toys and other products containing high levels of lead meet the same criteria?
Millions of toys containing lead and other toxic materials pass through our ports uninspected, unchecked and even protected by those whose responsibility it is to stop tainted materials. This is not the hard working inspectors, customs agents or enforcement agents at the ports and borders who daily stand on the wall, willing to give their all to protect our country. Those decisions and protocols are made by the political appointees and agencies heads that salute and don’t challenge the bypass of the laws their agency is mandated to enforce. These decisions are to see that an undue burden is not placed on commerce rather than safeguarding our health and welfare.
Millions of pounds of tainted and unsafe food are passed through our borders unchecked every year. Every so often, at a higher rate than usual in 2007, either citizens or pets become ill or die. When there is a public outcry, the government agency charged with the responsibility mandates a recall, warning the public to be vigilant and moves on. The Corporation that imported the product has a Press Conference, recalls the product and assures us that stiffer inspection measures will be enforced but never addresses why the stiff and vigilant measures already in place didn’t work. Neither the company that imported the product nor the company abroad that provided the product and violated the “stiff inspection measures” already in place are held responsible. The Agency head and the Corporation CEO look glum, vowing stronger inspections and that it will not occur again and on to business as usual.
Back in Washington, Congress debates the issues, arguing over who is tougher on enforcement , and promising to enact stricter laws and bigger budgets for inspection and then funds the building of higher fences on the Mexican border with more electronic surveillance to catch the Illegal Aliens and potential Terrorists. A joint Press conference is held by the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Directors of the other agencies standing at the podium promising much more security while cajoling people to ever vigilant and report any strange behavior of their neighbors, especially if they speak with an accent or wear odd clothing.
If it is the duty of the federal, state and local governments to protect the public, then they should do it thoroughly. All of the cargo should be inspected, no matter how long it takes. If tainted food or drugs or unsafe toys or other products are found, confiscate and charge the companies with whatever sanctions are in the law. The American companies who do not provide the due diligence required should be punished. These corporations deserve no breaks to pawn off unsafe products to the public, just because it only happens infrequently. We need to realize that there are laws other than the Patriotic Act, phone and internet snooping that protect us from harm.
Maybe instead of looking through the dumpsters and garbage cans for evidence, we could start looking through the cargo bays of ships for the hazardous products crossing our borders and coming through our ports.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Thursday, November 08, 2007
President's Column - Insecurity At The Department of Homeland Security
The employees of the Department of Homeland Security were dealt yet another deadly blow by the Bush Administration. The Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) in concert with the management of DHS has issued less forgiving rules for adjudicating employees appeals of actions taken against them by the sprawling department’s management. This speaks to MSPB not being the independent agency it has been since 1978 and as well as other agencies become a tool of the Administration.
MSPB has jurisdiction to decide many disputes between employees and their employers, including overruling management’s findings and reducing punishments, which include reprimands, suspension and removals. Somehow in the process of these new rules MSPB has agreed to lose its present power to lessen management imposed-punishment, even if the Board found a penalty unreasonable. It has also agreed to dramatically reduce the time permitted for affected employees to file an appeal from the 30 days that other federal employees have to a 20 day period. And in another change, employees would not be guaranteed a hearing if there were no dispute on the factual basis for the case and would grant the agency a summary judgment. This coupled with the fight over whether most of the agency has the right to collective bargaining provides scant if any protection for federal employees in DHS.
The Department of Homeland Security is a behemoth federal Department with over 180,000 employees from many diverse law enforcement agencies, such as the Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Border Patrol; Immigration and Naturalization, etc. It was created, after turf battles with Congress in the wake of 9-11 to deal with the apparent lack of a cohesive response and apparent inability to forecast the terrorist attack on the U.S. Senator Joe Lieberman, then a Democrat, had suggested an overarching agency to coordinate the response and coordinate the sharing of information, it was initially rejected by the Bush Administration.
Then apparently, the Administration that it was an opportunity to re-organize the agencies; provide for a Czar in a Cabinet position to report directly to the President and provide many opportunities alter how the government did business. It has provided an onslaught of contracting out to security consulting firms and corporations that provide security products. Now, the Senate is looking at the DHS dependence on contractors as a problem.
The biggest opportunity in the reorganization was the opportunity to either eliminate labor unions or greatly decrease their effectiveness. The Administration proposed the same broad reorganization for the Department of Defense and working on a dual track attempted to implement new personnel rules. Federal unions have resisted and have taken the Administration in both Departments through the Administrative Process and to the Courts. It has resulted in a shaky stalemate with each side winning points and not much organization
There is no evidence that federal employees working under a Labor Agreement have not fulfilled their mission, in a timely and professional manner. Federal law enforcement officers have been under labor agreements for over 40 years and no evidence can be provided that a union contract or provision has hampered the mission in the Border Patrol, Customs or any other law enforcement agency.
Evidence by the score has shown just the opposite, the dedicated employees in these agencies have always responded quickly and professionally to any emergency anywhere or anytime it has occurred. No government official testifying in Congressional hearings has been able to illustrate that point. The arguments to the contrary are usually anti union Congressional members in passing or that it could happen.
The response to 9-11 at the World Trade Center demonstrated how dedicated union folks are to their mission. Most of these first responders who died at that hallowed place were unionized firemen, police, transit workers, and Emergency Medical teams. And doesn’t remember those unionized construction workers who rushed by the hundreds to Ground Zero and risked life and limb to rescue and recover. Those who didn’t die that on that fateful day suffer long-term health effects.
The bargaining unit employees of DHS are dedicated, committed professional employees who deserve to be treated with respect for the work they accomplish on behalf of this country. They should have the right to collective bargaining and a means to redress any disputes that may arise. They are concerned about their working conditions and their ability to be able to function without the fear that they have no redress for conditions created by overzealous management actions.
Those federal workers deserve the right to be able to do their job like any other federal employee, a with same protections of collective bargaining and an independent third party to settle any disputes they may arise. To do less threatens their security.
MSPB has jurisdiction to decide many disputes between employees and their employers, including overruling management’s findings and reducing punishments, which include reprimands, suspension and removals. Somehow in the process of these new rules MSPB has agreed to lose its present power to lessen management imposed-punishment, even if the Board found a penalty unreasonable. It has also agreed to dramatically reduce the time permitted for affected employees to file an appeal from the 30 days that other federal employees have to a 20 day period. And in another change, employees would not be guaranteed a hearing if there were no dispute on the factual basis for the case and would grant the agency a summary judgment. This coupled with the fight over whether most of the agency has the right to collective bargaining provides scant if any protection for federal employees in DHS.
The Department of Homeland Security is a behemoth federal Department with over 180,000 employees from many diverse law enforcement agencies, such as the Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Border Patrol; Immigration and Naturalization, etc. It was created, after turf battles with Congress in the wake of 9-11 to deal with the apparent lack of a cohesive response and apparent inability to forecast the terrorist attack on the U.S. Senator Joe Lieberman, then a Democrat, had suggested an overarching agency to coordinate the response and coordinate the sharing of information, it was initially rejected by the Bush Administration.
Then apparently, the Administration that it was an opportunity to re-organize the agencies; provide for a Czar in a Cabinet position to report directly to the President and provide many opportunities alter how the government did business. It has provided an onslaught of contracting out to security consulting firms and corporations that provide security products. Now, the Senate is looking at the DHS dependence on contractors as a problem.
The biggest opportunity in the reorganization was the opportunity to either eliminate labor unions or greatly decrease their effectiveness. The Administration proposed the same broad reorganization for the Department of Defense and working on a dual track attempted to implement new personnel rules. Federal unions have resisted and have taken the Administration in both Departments through the Administrative Process and to the Courts. It has resulted in a shaky stalemate with each side winning points and not much organization
There is no evidence that federal employees working under a Labor Agreement have not fulfilled their mission, in a timely and professional manner. Federal law enforcement officers have been under labor agreements for over 40 years and no evidence can be provided that a union contract or provision has hampered the mission in the Border Patrol, Customs or any other law enforcement agency.
Evidence by the score has shown just the opposite, the dedicated employees in these agencies have always responded quickly and professionally to any emergency anywhere or anytime it has occurred. No government official testifying in Congressional hearings has been able to illustrate that point. The arguments to the contrary are usually anti union Congressional members in passing or that it could happen.
The response to 9-11 at the World Trade Center demonstrated how dedicated union folks are to their mission. Most of these first responders who died at that hallowed place were unionized firemen, police, transit workers, and Emergency Medical teams. And doesn’t remember those unionized construction workers who rushed by the hundreds to Ground Zero and risked life and limb to rescue and recover. Those who didn’t die that on that fateful day suffer long-term health effects.
The bargaining unit employees of DHS are dedicated, committed professional employees who deserve to be treated with respect for the work they accomplish on behalf of this country. They should have the right to collective bargaining and a means to redress any disputes that may arise. They are concerned about their working conditions and their ability to be able to function without the fear that they have no redress for conditions created by overzealous management actions.
Those federal workers deserve the right to be able to do their job like any other federal employee, a with same protections of collective bargaining and an independent third party to settle any disputes they may arise. To do less threatens their security.
Friday, August 24, 2007
Remembrance of Gary Jensen by Jim Weyrauch
HE ANSWERED THE CALL
The mountain rumbled and 1800 feet underground coal bumped filling the cavity and the rescuers became the trapped. Franticly the rest of the team dug into the rumble sometimes barehanded. This was the third incident that resulted in collapse and bumping in this dangerous mine. When they were freed, three were fatally injured and six others severely injured. This incident happened while these brave men were attempting to free six miners trapped in the Crandell Canyon Coal Mine. One of the dead heroes was Gary Jensen, an employee of the Mine Safety and Health Administration and a member of AFGE Local 3416. Gary was one of the MSHA personnel who were summoned to aid in the rescue. When the summons came, Gary donned his gear, gathered his equipment, and went to that dangerous place. He answered the call!
Gary Jensen worked in the mining industry for over 30 years primarily as a safety officer with special emphasis on mine rescue. He brought this expertise to MSHA when he was hired a year ago. He joined the union AFGE Local 3416 immediately, even though there was no legal obligation to do so. His union membership was never in conflict with his duty as a federal employee who worked in a dangerous industry. When the word came that six miners were trapped in that mine. He answered the call!
Gary like the hundreds of other dedicated MSHA personnel did his job efficiently and effectively every day within the framework of MSHA regulations and under the DOL/NCFLL Collective Bargaining Agreement. Most of those MSHA employees are members, but all are covered and there is no is no conflict with the mission of MSHA, providing for the safety and welfare of the American miner. Gary knew his job, knew that he was needed and when the alarm was sounded he answered the call!
In that same accident, another mine inspector, Frank Marosek, also a member of AFGE Local 3416 was critically injured. Frank sustained two breaks in one of his legs; a broken tailbone; three broken ribs and a severely damaged eye socket. Frank got the same word, miners are trapped buried 1800 feet underground in mine that engages in the most dangerous mining process known to man, retreat mining. A process not permitted in most other coal states because of the inherent hazard of removing all of the coal, leaving no supports and retreating out of the mine. This is considered high risk even without any seismic activity. Everyone knew the extreme risks of going in that mine. Miners were buried, but Gary, Frank and the other MSHA personnel got the word and they answered the call.
Since 1911 when inspection of coal mines became a federal responsibility 16 federal employees have been killed in the line of duty. Eleven of these fatally injured inspectors were killed during mine operations or rescue missions. To a man they gave their all for their fellow man. Miners were trapped, the federal personnel had the expertise, knew the risks, understood what was necessary and they answered the call!
And tomorrow, even as we mourn the loss of our fallen union brother we knew that the brave and dedicated men and women in MSHA are prepared to do what is necessary. If another alarm is sounded, they will answer the call!
Like the 311 unionized rescue workers at the World Trade Center, the firefighters, police, EMTs and others who gave their all at the World Trade Center on 9-11 our MSHA personnel will rush to the aid of those in need. Union membership is about solidarity and helping others in a time of need. Union membership fosters dedication and being there with your expertise and going to the danger, no matter what the odds, no matter what the problem, if the alarm is sounded, they will answer the call!
So to those members of Congress who railed against unions and how a union contract would keep federal employees from doing the job necessary in time of danger and then voted to deny the employees of TSA the right to a union, think of Gary Jensen, Frank Marosek, all of the MSHA personnel over the years who ran to the mine disaster. Think of those 311 unionized worker who die in a valiant effort to save lives at the World Trade Center on 9-11. Think about the hundreds of construction workers who ran to the towers and despite the dangers began the process of trying to rescue the trapped under “The Pile”. They answered the call!
There has never been one reported incident where a federal police officer, Border Patrol or Customs agent , firefighter, EMT that ran away from danger, unionized or not. In all cases, when the danger arose they answered the call!
If Congress and the government want to honor the memory of Gary who gave his all and Frank who will suffer for many years for their devotion to duty, think again about how union membership was no bar or determent for them to do their job. Honor them by permitting federal employees the right to freely join the union. Gary and Frank belonged to the union and had the commitment to help those in a very dangerous situation. They knew what was needed and answered the call!
The mountain rumbled and 1800 feet underground coal bumped filling the cavity and the rescuers became the trapped. Franticly the rest of the team dug into the rumble sometimes barehanded. This was the third incident that resulted in collapse and bumping in this dangerous mine. When they were freed, three were fatally injured and six others severely injured. This incident happened while these brave men were attempting to free six miners trapped in the Crandell Canyon Coal Mine. One of the dead heroes was Gary Jensen, an employee of the Mine Safety and Health Administration and a member of AFGE Local 3416. Gary was one of the MSHA personnel who were summoned to aid in the rescue. When the summons came, Gary donned his gear, gathered his equipment, and went to that dangerous place. He answered the call!
Gary Jensen worked in the mining industry for over 30 years primarily as a safety officer with special emphasis on mine rescue. He brought this expertise to MSHA when he was hired a year ago. He joined the union AFGE Local 3416 immediately, even though there was no legal obligation to do so. His union membership was never in conflict with his duty as a federal employee who worked in a dangerous industry. When the word came that six miners were trapped in that mine. He answered the call!
Gary like the hundreds of other dedicated MSHA personnel did his job efficiently and effectively every day within the framework of MSHA regulations and under the DOL/NCFLL Collective Bargaining Agreement. Most of those MSHA employees are members, but all are covered and there is no is no conflict with the mission of MSHA, providing for the safety and welfare of the American miner. Gary knew his job, knew that he was needed and when the alarm was sounded he answered the call!
In that same accident, another mine inspector, Frank Marosek, also a member of AFGE Local 3416 was critically injured. Frank sustained two breaks in one of his legs; a broken tailbone; three broken ribs and a severely damaged eye socket. Frank got the same word, miners are trapped buried 1800 feet underground in mine that engages in the most dangerous mining process known to man, retreat mining. A process not permitted in most other coal states because of the inherent hazard of removing all of the coal, leaving no supports and retreating out of the mine. This is considered high risk even without any seismic activity. Everyone knew the extreme risks of going in that mine. Miners were buried, but Gary, Frank and the other MSHA personnel got the word and they answered the call.
Since 1911 when inspection of coal mines became a federal responsibility 16 federal employees have been killed in the line of duty. Eleven of these fatally injured inspectors were killed during mine operations or rescue missions. To a man they gave their all for their fellow man. Miners were trapped, the federal personnel had the expertise, knew the risks, understood what was necessary and they answered the call!
And tomorrow, even as we mourn the loss of our fallen union brother we knew that the brave and dedicated men and women in MSHA are prepared to do what is necessary. If another alarm is sounded, they will answer the call!
Like the 311 unionized rescue workers at the World Trade Center, the firefighters, police, EMTs and others who gave their all at the World Trade Center on 9-11 our MSHA personnel will rush to the aid of those in need. Union membership is about solidarity and helping others in a time of need. Union membership fosters dedication and being there with your expertise and going to the danger, no matter what the odds, no matter what the problem, if the alarm is sounded, they will answer the call!
So to those members of Congress who railed against unions and how a union contract would keep federal employees from doing the job necessary in time of danger and then voted to deny the employees of TSA the right to a union, think of Gary Jensen, Frank Marosek, all of the MSHA personnel over the years who ran to the mine disaster. Think of those 311 unionized worker who die in a valiant effort to save lives at the World Trade Center on 9-11. Think about the hundreds of construction workers who ran to the towers and despite the dangers began the process of trying to rescue the trapped under “The Pile”. They answered the call!
There has never been one reported incident where a federal police officer, Border Patrol or Customs agent , firefighter, EMT that ran away from danger, unionized or not. In all cases, when the danger arose they answered the call!
If Congress and the government want to honor the memory of Gary who gave his all and Frank who will suffer for many years for their devotion to duty, think again about how union membership was no bar or determent for them to do their job. Honor them by permitting federal employees the right to freely join the union. Gary and Frank belonged to the union and had the commitment to help those in a very dangerous situation. They knew what was needed and answered the call!
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
President's Column - Unions, The Last Democracy?
I have been a member in good standing in the labor movement for over 56 years and I can state with moral certainty that unions are democratic. That is not to say that there has not been corrupt labor leaders, but the guiding principles of unionism are democratic. Manipulative men with the mute acquiescence of the membership can corrupt any organization.
Labor unions are a collective, a group of workers sharing a community of interests. Those interests are good wages and benefits in a safe working environment and a method of redress for problems that might arise in those interests. Unions are formed and created by the most democratic process in existence an election of the workers in that facility. An International union is a conglomeration of many local unions with the same community of interest. This could be a master contract with one large employer or many employers in the same industry or just a group of local unions, which come under a generic umbrella of an international union. One size does not fit all anymore due to the many mergers of unions, even with diverse industries but for the strength it musters.
Officers of unions are elected not appointed, there is more direct democracy at the local level, because the membership of that local votes directly. In the case of international officers that is accomplished in two ways, some unions have direct mail balloting or the officers are elected at a convention by the delegates elected by local unions. These delegates would vote
the will of the membership of the Local union because they are elected at that level and subject to losing in the next Local election.. One can only believe Local union delegates vote the will of their membership. But at all levels it is by election that the leadership are selected for offices.
In most cases, the bargaining agreement that governs the working conditions and rules of the road for a local union is bargained by Local leadership and the issues of the agreement are discussed with the membership at Local union meetings and voted on at various stages of the process. The marching orders for the bargaining team are dictated by the rank and file, guidance is provided by the Local Executive Board with the concurrence of the membership. Good bargaining is governed by the membership being in agreement with the bargaining team, companies are more willing to bargain in good faith if it is known the rank and file are behind what proposals are put on the table and the union team has the full authority of the membership. If management knows the union has the authority to walk out, they are more prone to stay at the table and come up with a fair agreement.
After the agreement is signed in principle, with the knowledge that the union must get the approval of the rank and file to approve, the tentative agreement is presented to the membership and discussed fully. This is accomplished either at a union meeting or by mail after the explanation and voted up or down. The outcome is what is the majority rule of those who vote, which in most cases is not the majority of members. In many instances very few vote for the contract or even attend meetings.
Union leadership cannot call a strike without the approval of the rank and file. The membership must vote to strike and it is again an election of the majority of those who take the time to attend the meeting, listen to the issues and vote up or down to authorize the walkout. And sadly, many members will not take the time to find out the issues and vote. And these are the same ones who complain about the leadership and the authorization for the strike.
Once the strike is on, it can only be called off by the vote of the membership after the settlement of the issues that triggered the walkout. Union leaders must provide the guidance to the rank and file so they may make informed decisions. But it is the rank and file who ultimately run the union, leaders only guide the operations of how it is accomplished, and serve at the will of the membership at all times.
Unions are democratic and that presents unique situations, apathy is problematic in the labor movement. Any union that can get 10% of members attending monthly meetings and get out a vote of 50% in an election is considered doing well. In my local union elections, held by mail ballot sent to the members home usually achieves less than a 40 percent return.
Anti union advocates try and sell the idea that the Employee Free Choice Act, the legislation that would provide workers with the opportunity to vote for union membership in a more expedited manner , would take away the secret ballot. Nothing can be further from the truth, the existing law provides that a majority of workers must sign a card requesting a vote on union membership, the union must attain 51% of the workers for such an election. Then there is after a long period, an election monitored by the National Labor Relations Board. The bar then is for a majority of the workers to vote yes . In the intervening time workers are harassed, lobbied and bombarded by literature against the union membership. Union friendly workers may be fired for “other reasons”. It is a long drawn out and painful process. The Free Choice Act would shorten the process by having an election by the signing of the cards, if the majority of the workes votes yes, then they have a right to form the union. It is fairer to both sides of the issue, because it places the onus of the union to get a majority of all the workers to sign up
The opponents to unions can’t deal with a level playing field and are rightfully concerned that the workers will vote yes in a democratic and expedited process.
We should allow democracy to work where it has always worked in the American Labor Movement.
Labor unions are a collective, a group of workers sharing a community of interests. Those interests are good wages and benefits in a safe working environment and a method of redress for problems that might arise in those interests. Unions are formed and created by the most democratic process in existence an election of the workers in that facility. An International union is a conglomeration of many local unions with the same community of interest. This could be a master contract with one large employer or many employers in the same industry or just a group of local unions, which come under a generic umbrella of an international union. One size does not fit all anymore due to the many mergers of unions, even with diverse industries but for the strength it musters.
Officers of unions are elected not appointed, there is more direct democracy at the local level, because the membership of that local votes directly. In the case of international officers that is accomplished in two ways, some unions have direct mail balloting or the officers are elected at a convention by the delegates elected by local unions. These delegates would vote
the will of the membership of the Local union because they are elected at that level and subject to losing in the next Local election.. One can only believe Local union delegates vote the will of their membership. But at all levels it is by election that the leadership are selected for offices.
In most cases, the bargaining agreement that governs the working conditions and rules of the road for a local union is bargained by Local leadership and the issues of the agreement are discussed with the membership at Local union meetings and voted on at various stages of the process. The marching orders for the bargaining team are dictated by the rank and file, guidance is provided by the Local Executive Board with the concurrence of the membership. Good bargaining is governed by the membership being in agreement with the bargaining team, companies are more willing to bargain in good faith if it is known the rank and file are behind what proposals are put on the table and the union team has the full authority of the membership. If management knows the union has the authority to walk out, they are more prone to stay at the table and come up with a fair agreement.
After the agreement is signed in principle, with the knowledge that the union must get the approval of the rank and file to approve, the tentative agreement is presented to the membership and discussed fully. This is accomplished either at a union meeting or by mail after the explanation and voted up or down. The outcome is what is the majority rule of those who vote, which in most cases is not the majority of members. In many instances very few vote for the contract or even attend meetings.
Union leadership cannot call a strike without the approval of the rank and file. The membership must vote to strike and it is again an election of the majority of those who take the time to attend the meeting, listen to the issues and vote up or down to authorize the walkout. And sadly, many members will not take the time to find out the issues and vote. And these are the same ones who complain about the leadership and the authorization for the strike.
Once the strike is on, it can only be called off by the vote of the membership after the settlement of the issues that triggered the walkout. Union leaders must provide the guidance to the rank and file so they may make informed decisions. But it is the rank and file who ultimately run the union, leaders only guide the operations of how it is accomplished, and serve at the will of the membership at all times.
Unions are democratic and that presents unique situations, apathy is problematic in the labor movement. Any union that can get 10% of members attending monthly meetings and get out a vote of 50% in an election is considered doing well. In my local union elections, held by mail ballot sent to the members home usually achieves less than a 40 percent return.
Anti union advocates try and sell the idea that the Employee Free Choice Act, the legislation that would provide workers with the opportunity to vote for union membership in a more expedited manner , would take away the secret ballot. Nothing can be further from the truth, the existing law provides that a majority of workers must sign a card requesting a vote on union membership, the union must attain 51% of the workers for such an election. Then there is after a long period, an election monitored by the National Labor Relations Board. The bar then is for a majority of the workers to vote yes . In the intervening time workers are harassed, lobbied and bombarded by literature against the union membership. Union friendly workers may be fired for “other reasons”. It is a long drawn out and painful process. The Free Choice Act would shorten the process by having an election by the signing of the cards, if the majority of the workes votes yes, then they have a right to form the union. It is fairer to both sides of the issue, because it places the onus of the union to get a majority of all the workers to sign up
The opponents to unions can’t deal with a level playing field and are rightfully concerned that the workers will vote yes in a democratic and expedited process.
We should allow democracy to work where it has always worked in the American Labor Movement.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Speech at Secretary’s 2007 Awards Ceremony - Philadelphia
It is an honor to speak again at the annual Secretary’s Awards Ceremony. My orders as usual were to usual to make “favorable remarks for no more than three minutes. I usually speak longer and this year it will be very hard to have favorable remarks about the Department of Labor.
I congratulate those winning the awards, and celebrate the opportunity to be with people I really like and admire. But my heart is heavy with the impending loss of some of our co-workers, losing their jobs to the philosophy of government for sale to the highest bidder and no matter the cost in shoddy service and impacted lives. But we did achieve Green!
As we enter into the 7th year of this Administration’s Reign of Error, where the new catch phrase is “oops”, contracting out and outsourcing has turned the work of DOL into what the French call “Merde! DOL employees spend most of their time trying to get travel vouchers processed, bills paid and basic services accomplished by unseen contractors utilizing electronic systems that don’t work and wasting millions of dollars in tax monies. Time better spent in servicing the American worker. But we did achieve Green!
The loss of close to 400 DOL employees in the latest round of A-76 competitions is just the latest string of administrative errors and lack of due diligence. Amid outcries of shoddy handling of the how the data of work was handled through the awarding of the contracts, DOL forged ahead without due diligence permitting the same contractor to perform both the Performance Work Study and the Most Efficient Organization study. Onto awarding the competition without verifying whether the winning contractor was in compliance with federal laws, even those that DOL is charged in enforcing as well as those articles in the NCFLL bargaining agreement. But we did achieve Green!
Management explained to those who are impacted that it was not the jobs that were bid on just the functions of those jobs. This provides little solace to people whose names appeared on a list doing the same functions as others who names weren’t on the list and who are facing a Reduction in Force, the government nice word for being laid off. Of course, the function got very easy to bid on when on the technical functions were taken out of the work-study. Those functions that remained became merely clerical and were not inherently governmental. So DOL lost the competition and almost 400 of our co-workers from across the country and the national office will leave us. But we achieve Green!
I would say more but I don’t want to dampen the celebration of the achievements of those who are being awarded today. Congratulations to the winners, you deserve the award. To the rest of you, those not receiving an award and especially those who may be impacted by the loss of function, all I can offer you is the undying gratitude of a beat old union representative who thanks you for your years of dedicated service to the American worker. I have always been honored that you permitted me to speak on your behalf at the bargaining table, in the House of Labor and in the Halls of Congress.
My work was easy, all I had to do was remind people that I represented Department of Labor employees; your work always spoke for itself. I got to stand in the spotlight while you provided beacon. I thank you, on behalf of organized labor and the millions of other workers who make America work. Your hard work provided the security of their pensions, the guarantees of their wages and benefits and a safe and healthful workplace. Your hard work provided training and opportunity for the young and minorities and retraining for those who lost their jobs to “downsizing” or outsourcing. Your impact on what makes America work is profound. Those of you who are leaving, you made a difference, for those of us who remain we will attempt to carry on in the best traditions of the example you set for us.
As I said to anyone I ever had the opportunity to meet, I was proud to use the NCFLL slogan “WHERE AMERICA WORKS WE’RE WORKING FOR YOU. You have my solemn promise I will never let anyone forget your service and dedication. I will continue singing your praises and letting everyone know of your dedication to duty. I will continue to fight to retain every job and every function in the Department of Labor as long as I have the strength and the breath, Never again will we achieve Green on the backs of DOL employees.
Thank you and God Bless!.
I congratulate those winning the awards, and celebrate the opportunity to be with people I really like and admire. But my heart is heavy with the impending loss of some of our co-workers, losing their jobs to the philosophy of government for sale to the highest bidder and no matter the cost in shoddy service and impacted lives. But we did achieve Green!
As we enter into the 7th year of this Administration’s Reign of Error, where the new catch phrase is “oops”, contracting out and outsourcing has turned the work of DOL into what the French call “Merde! DOL employees spend most of their time trying to get travel vouchers processed, bills paid and basic services accomplished by unseen contractors utilizing electronic systems that don’t work and wasting millions of dollars in tax monies. Time better spent in servicing the American worker. But we did achieve Green!
The loss of close to 400 DOL employees in the latest round of A-76 competitions is just the latest string of administrative errors and lack of due diligence. Amid outcries of shoddy handling of the how the data of work was handled through the awarding of the contracts, DOL forged ahead without due diligence permitting the same contractor to perform both the Performance Work Study and the Most Efficient Organization study. Onto awarding the competition without verifying whether the winning contractor was in compliance with federal laws, even those that DOL is charged in enforcing as well as those articles in the NCFLL bargaining agreement. But we did achieve Green!
Management explained to those who are impacted that it was not the jobs that were bid on just the functions of those jobs. This provides little solace to people whose names appeared on a list doing the same functions as others who names weren’t on the list and who are facing a Reduction in Force, the government nice word for being laid off. Of course, the function got very easy to bid on when on the technical functions were taken out of the work-study. Those functions that remained became merely clerical and were not inherently governmental. So DOL lost the competition and almost 400 of our co-workers from across the country and the national office will leave us. But we achieve Green!
I would say more but I don’t want to dampen the celebration of the achievements of those who are being awarded today. Congratulations to the winners, you deserve the award. To the rest of you, those not receiving an award and especially those who may be impacted by the loss of function, all I can offer you is the undying gratitude of a beat old union representative who thanks you for your years of dedicated service to the American worker. I have always been honored that you permitted me to speak on your behalf at the bargaining table, in the House of Labor and in the Halls of Congress.
My work was easy, all I had to do was remind people that I represented Department of Labor employees; your work always spoke for itself. I got to stand in the spotlight while you provided beacon. I thank you, on behalf of organized labor and the millions of other workers who make America work. Your hard work provided the security of their pensions, the guarantees of their wages and benefits and a safe and healthful workplace. Your hard work provided training and opportunity for the young and minorities and retraining for those who lost their jobs to “downsizing” or outsourcing. Your impact on what makes America work is profound. Those of you who are leaving, you made a difference, for those of us who remain we will attempt to carry on in the best traditions of the example you set for us.
As I said to anyone I ever had the opportunity to meet, I was proud to use the NCFLL slogan “WHERE AMERICA WORKS WE’RE WORKING FOR YOU. You have my solemn promise I will never let anyone forget your service and dedication. I will continue singing your praises and letting everyone know of your dedication to duty. I will continue to fight to retain every job and every function in the Department of Labor as long as I have the strength and the breath, Never again will we achieve Green on the backs of DOL employees.
Thank you and God Bless!.
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
President's Column - Shadow Government: The Real Cost Of Doing Business
Consevatatives complain about the size of government, how it has become bloated and intrusive. They pontificate, moralize and rant about how many government bureaucrats spend countless billions of dollars on useless government programs that impose needless burdens on the American public. Of course the American public of which they are referring is business, usually big business. These same defenders of freedom have no problem with government interfering in people’s personal lives such as not banning abortion or same sex marriage.
The government programs they don’t like are the Social programs, such as Medicare, Social Security, and any benefits for the poor or middle class citizens. Tax breaks for the rich and corporations is good, benefits for the lower classes is bad and budget busting. These smaller government gurus would have you believe that having federal employees doing the work is a tax burden but having private industry, despite the exorbitant costs, doing the work stimulates growth and bolsters the economy. But the myth of cost saving by contracting out is a subject for another time; this commentary is about the real size of the federal “government “and why they don’t want you to know it.
The gurus of smaller government and less intrusion in the workplace have attained Mecca in this Administration; contractors have taken over the work of the federal government in epic proportions. Contractors are running the majority of programs in the Defense Industry; this is in addition to those who make the equipment and armament for the military. I previously reported that 48,000 private soldiers working for 181 military firms are deployed in Iraq alone. Plus thousands of civilians provide the food and laundry and other services for our fighting troops in those skirmishes in the Middle East.
But that just barely scrapes the top of the scab, there are presently 1,872,000 federal civil servants (that’s your everyday government bureaucrat) and there are 7,634,000 contract jobs and additional 2,892,000 grant jobs. That totals 10,526,000 non-federal employees as opposed to 1,872,000 feds. The fact is that there are five contractor employees for every one federal employee. This is an increase of 2,498,000of non- federal employee jobs since 2002. Then the numbers were 5,168000 contract positions and 2,860, 000 grant positions.
The statistics and information is derived from the research conducted by Paul Light, a New York University professor and principal investigator of the Organization Performance Initiative, who defines "shadow government" as “"private industry contractors working on behalf of the federal government." He projects that the number of contractors in the shadow government will climb to 10 to 12 million within 10 years. He states that his calculations are only rough estimates of government size because “contractor and grantees do not keep count of their employees.”
It is virtually impossible to obtain an accurate number from the federal government, even though one would think they are necessary for budget purposes each year. This Administration hides the true figures because; as in previous administrations they want to project a leaner more efficient government. But those in smaller government camp do know and are silent because they want to retain the right to rail against “big government” and government intrusion.
We simple civil servants will have to endure these slings and arrows because not many are on our side. It has been that way since the first bureaucrat was issued a quill pen and black ink, the red ink can later, But take heart, fellow feds , you can be like the Winking Parrott and say with pride, “YOU KNOW!”
The government programs they don’t like are the Social programs, such as Medicare, Social Security, and any benefits for the poor or middle class citizens. Tax breaks for the rich and corporations is good, benefits for the lower classes is bad and budget busting. These smaller government gurus would have you believe that having federal employees doing the work is a tax burden but having private industry, despite the exorbitant costs, doing the work stimulates growth and bolsters the economy. But the myth of cost saving by contracting out is a subject for another time; this commentary is about the real size of the federal “government “and why they don’t want you to know it.
The gurus of smaller government and less intrusion in the workplace have attained Mecca in this Administration; contractors have taken over the work of the federal government in epic proportions. Contractors are running the majority of programs in the Defense Industry; this is in addition to those who make the equipment and armament for the military. I previously reported that 48,000 private soldiers working for 181 military firms are deployed in Iraq alone. Plus thousands of civilians provide the food and laundry and other services for our fighting troops in those skirmishes in the Middle East.
But that just barely scrapes the top of the scab, there are presently 1,872,000 federal civil servants (that’s your everyday government bureaucrat) and there are 7,634,000 contract jobs and additional 2,892,000 grant jobs. That totals 10,526,000 non-federal employees as opposed to 1,872,000 feds. The fact is that there are five contractor employees for every one federal employee. This is an increase of 2,498,000of non- federal employee jobs since 2002. Then the numbers were 5,168000 contract positions and 2,860, 000 grant positions.
The statistics and information is derived from the research conducted by Paul Light, a New York University professor and principal investigator of the Organization Performance Initiative, who defines "shadow government" as “"private industry contractors working on behalf of the federal government." He projects that the number of contractors in the shadow government will climb to 10 to 12 million within 10 years. He states that his calculations are only rough estimates of government size because “contractor and grantees do not keep count of their employees.”
It is virtually impossible to obtain an accurate number from the federal government, even though one would think they are necessary for budget purposes each year. This Administration hides the true figures because; as in previous administrations they want to project a leaner more efficient government. But those in smaller government camp do know and are silent because they want to retain the right to rail against “big government” and government intrusion.
We simple civil servants will have to endure these slings and arrows because not many are on our side. It has been that way since the first bureaucrat was issued a quill pen and black ink, the red ink can later, But take heart, fellow feds , you can be like the Winking Parrott and say with pride, “YOU KNOW!”
Monday, October 30, 2006
President's Column - Wal-Mart Always a Bad Deal, Always!
Wal-Mart may be the world’s largest employers; certainly it’s the largest in the United States. Wal-Mart reports there are 1.8 million workers worldwide with 1.3 million in the United States at 6,500 stores in 15 countries. Its tentacles of influence are felt at every level of government in the U. S. and all of the 14 countries. Wal-Mart negotiates at all levels of government; contributes to all political parties and engages in public service campaigns to elicit support in obtaining zoning waivers and tax breaks for its operations.
Any discussion about Wal-Mart business practices and employment record engenders strong emotions and hard feelings. Any announcement of a new Wal-Mart or a Sam’s Club brings out the protesters. These protesters range from unions, small business owners and public-spirited citizens. Emotions are strong and heartfelt; the unions protesting the poor wages and lack of benefits; the small businesses owners fear they will be driven out of existence by the low prices; and the citizens because Wal-Mart and similar stores create urban sprawl and harm small towns. This has occurred everywhere Wal-Mart has opened a store. Local businesses that became suppliers of Wal-Mart have also not fared well either, many have gone bankrupt because of Wal-Mart’s increasing demand for lower and lower costs.
Wal-Mart is neither a good employer nor a good citizen. The poor wages with little or no benefits force the employees seek public assistance and this becomes a drain on the taxpayers of that city or state. During the new employee orientation they are given instructions on how to file for partial unemployment checks and other public assistance due to the lack of benefits or healthcare. In some states a large percentage of Wal-Mart employees are collecting partial unemployment and are on Public Assistance or medical assistance in the local hospitals. Wal-Mart’ website claims that the average salary for its employees is $10.15 and some limited benefits. But this is usually the aggregate salaries of all employees and then averaged out.
In virtually every town that Wal-Mart has established a store, Super Store or Sam’s Club small business are driven out by the competition and even those businesses who do get to sell to WAL MART suffered because of the hard nose buying techniques and the continuous driving down the price of product that will be paid. It amounts to price fixing and a Monopoly, business is conducted on Wal-Mart’s terms, simply take it or leave it. Barry C. Lynn wrote in a recent article in HARPERS that four of Wal-Mart’s top 10 suppliers have been forced into bankruptcy because of these practices.
So the saga of Wal-Mart has become a contrast of good and evil and poses the question, “Can we afford the downside of dealing with Wal-Mart?” The only good being the low prices that helps the low income customers, fight inflation, and have caused Wal-Mart to grow and provided over one million jobs. The bad being the low wages with lousy benefits, forcing out the mom and pop stores and destroying the downtown areas. Not to mention that this company and its policies have a negative impact on overseas suppliers, who are paying slave wages with poor working conditions, no benefits and the possible utilization of child labor.
Wal-Mart is rapidly becoming one of the most sued corporations. Recently, Wal-Mart was found guilty in the Pennsylvania courts for forcing employees to work through rest breaks and off the clock. This lawsuit will cost Wal-Mart $62 million in damages to 187,000 hourly current and former employees. Lead plaintiff Dolores Hummel, who worked at a Sam’s Club in Reading PA from 1992-2002 charged in her lawsuit that she had to work through her breaks and quitting time to meet work demands in the bakery. She said she worked eight to 12 hours of unpaid hours a month.
Wal-Mart is facing a slew of similar suites around the country. The company settled a Colorado case for $50 million and is appealing a $172 million award handed down last year by a California jury.
“One of Wal-Mart’s undisclosed secrets for its profitability is its creation and implementation of a system that encourages off-the- clock work for its hourly employees”, Hummel said in her suit which was filed in 2002.
So in my humble opinion, it is all works out as more bad than good. And the slogan should be “WAL-MAT Always a Bad Deal, Always.”
Any discussion about Wal-Mart business practices and employment record engenders strong emotions and hard feelings. Any announcement of a new Wal-Mart or a Sam’s Club brings out the protesters. These protesters range from unions, small business owners and public-spirited citizens. Emotions are strong and heartfelt; the unions protesting the poor wages and lack of benefits; the small businesses owners fear they will be driven out of existence by the low prices; and the citizens because Wal-Mart and similar stores create urban sprawl and harm small towns. This has occurred everywhere Wal-Mart has opened a store. Local businesses that became suppliers of Wal-Mart have also not fared well either, many have gone bankrupt because of Wal-Mart’s increasing demand for lower and lower costs.
Wal-Mart is neither a good employer nor a good citizen. The poor wages with little or no benefits force the employees seek public assistance and this becomes a drain on the taxpayers of that city or state. During the new employee orientation they are given instructions on how to file for partial unemployment checks and other public assistance due to the lack of benefits or healthcare. In some states a large percentage of Wal-Mart employees are collecting partial unemployment and are on Public Assistance or medical assistance in the local hospitals. Wal-Mart’ website claims that the average salary for its employees is $10.15 and some limited benefits. But this is usually the aggregate salaries of all employees and then averaged out.
In virtually every town that Wal-Mart has established a store, Super Store or Sam’s Club small business are driven out by the competition and even those businesses who do get to sell to WAL MART suffered because of the hard nose buying techniques and the continuous driving down the price of product that will be paid. It amounts to price fixing and a Monopoly, business is conducted on Wal-Mart’s terms, simply take it or leave it. Barry C. Lynn wrote in a recent article in HARPERS that four of Wal-Mart’s top 10 suppliers have been forced into bankruptcy because of these practices.
So the saga of Wal-Mart has become a contrast of good and evil and poses the question, “Can we afford the downside of dealing with Wal-Mart?” The only good being the low prices that helps the low income customers, fight inflation, and have caused Wal-Mart to grow and provided over one million jobs. The bad being the low wages with lousy benefits, forcing out the mom and pop stores and destroying the downtown areas. Not to mention that this company and its policies have a negative impact on overseas suppliers, who are paying slave wages with poor working conditions, no benefits and the possible utilization of child labor.
Wal-Mart is rapidly becoming one of the most sued corporations. Recently, Wal-Mart was found guilty in the Pennsylvania courts for forcing employees to work through rest breaks and off the clock. This lawsuit will cost Wal-Mart $62 million in damages to 187,000 hourly current and former employees. Lead plaintiff Dolores Hummel, who worked at a Sam’s Club in Reading PA from 1992-2002 charged in her lawsuit that she had to work through her breaks and quitting time to meet work demands in the bakery. She said she worked eight to 12 hours of unpaid hours a month.
Wal-Mart is facing a slew of similar suites around the country. The company settled a Colorado case for $50 million and is appealing a $172 million award handed down last year by a California jury.
“One of Wal-Mart’s undisclosed secrets for its profitability is its creation and implementation of a system that encourages off-the- clock work for its hourly employees”, Hummel said in her suit which was filed in 2002.
So in my humble opinion, it is all works out as more bad than good. And the slogan should be “WAL-MAT Always a Bad Deal, Always.”
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
President's Column - MCBUSHISM 2006
Americans haven’t this afraid to speak out since the 1950s when the “Red Scare” was in vogue and McCarthyism ran amok. For those of you not around in those dark days, Senator Joe McCarthy from Wisconsin and others of his ilk, saw communists and fellow travelers behind every bush and around every corner. Politicians, intellectuals, movie stars, members of the military and a lot of federal employees were under constant scrutiny for their activities and private conversations. Any who dared question either the motive or method became an immediate suspect. It was an era of looking over your shoulder, whispering in small groups and being careful with whom you were seen. Friends, neighbors and co-workers were encouraged to report any suspicious conversations or actions. Those who were questioned named others and just being questioned was equivalent to being guilty. The infamous Black List was created and woe to anyone who made that list. Careers and lives were ruined without evidence or trial .
And in the words of the Immortal Bard, Yogi Berra, “It’s déjà vu over again.” There is that same atmosphere of name calling and questioning of loyalty and patriotism in the post September 11 times. The Bush Administration tends to operate in secrecy and is quick to harangue or challenge anyone who questions either their motives or policies. To question is to be critical, to be critical is to be disloyal and being disloyal is tantamount to being unpatriotic. A good American, patriotic and true to flag and country must just buy off on how the war of terrorism is conducted, no matter how it destroys the freedoms that we are trying to protect.; must agree that the “black market operations” that cause high profits and excessive waste are good for the country; and must agree that to criticize provides “aid and comfort” to the terrorists.
This atmosphere of silence and blind obedience is seeping into the federal government. Agencies are warning employees not to be critical of how the agency is conducting business and to maintain the image of the federal government. There is a fear among federal employees that any criticism, which might just be the normal “water cooler bitching,” could result in the loss of the job and depending on the type of criticism even a worse fate. The Supreme Court has recently ruled that Whistle Blowers have no First Amendment Rights.
Federal employees complaining about their job is the American way, time tested and true. I am sure that the first employees in the George Washington Administration complained about not having enough quill pens and ink and too much work. Feds have always groused about the working conditions, bad bosses and the political appointees who came in with an agenda but little knowledge of how the work should be accomplished. It seems silly and counterproductive to be worrying about how the agency is perceived instead of what is accomplished, but these
days , the Bush appointees seem to be more interested in maintaining discipline than accomplishing the mission.
I keep expecting to see the old Second World War Posters, “LOOSE LIPS SINK SHIPS” etc. and I wonder when we will be asked to sign the “Loyalty Test“ forms swearing that we are good Americans and loyal federal workers. Maybe an award system will be developed for reporting disloyal co-workers, which could be more lucrative than the awards system in place now for doing the work. The American public has been asked to turn in any one they suspect of being a Terrorist or fellow traveler and what’s good for Middle American is good for all of us.
Maybe this type of Americanism comes around every 50 years or so, just to make us appreciate the freedoms we enjoy and to be sorely tested to fight for them. Now seems the time to speak out and up, to say that we want to keep our freedoms. American citizens, federal employees included need to live free under a strong viable strong constitution. To give up liberties for a little safety renders us undeserving of both. As Edward Abbey once said, “A PATRIOT MUST BE READY TO PROTECT HIS COUNTRY AGAINST HIS GOVERNMENT”
And in the words of the Immortal Bard, Yogi Berra, “It’s déjà vu over again.” There is that same atmosphere of name calling and questioning of loyalty and patriotism in the post September 11 times. The Bush Administration tends to operate in secrecy and is quick to harangue or challenge anyone who questions either their motives or policies. To question is to be critical, to be critical is to be disloyal and being disloyal is tantamount to being unpatriotic. A good American, patriotic and true to flag and country must just buy off on how the war of terrorism is conducted, no matter how it destroys the freedoms that we are trying to protect.; must agree that the “black market operations” that cause high profits and excessive waste are good for the country; and must agree that to criticize provides “aid and comfort” to the terrorists.
This atmosphere of silence and blind obedience is seeping into the federal government. Agencies are warning employees not to be critical of how the agency is conducting business and to maintain the image of the federal government. There is a fear among federal employees that any criticism, which might just be the normal “water cooler bitching,” could result in the loss of the job and depending on the type of criticism even a worse fate. The Supreme Court has recently ruled that Whistle Blowers have no First Amendment Rights.
Federal employees complaining about their job is the American way, time tested and true. I am sure that the first employees in the George Washington Administration complained about not having enough quill pens and ink and too much work. Feds have always groused about the working conditions, bad bosses and the political appointees who came in with an agenda but little knowledge of how the work should be accomplished. It seems silly and counterproductive to be worrying about how the agency is perceived instead of what is accomplished, but these
days , the Bush appointees seem to be more interested in maintaining discipline than accomplishing the mission.
I keep expecting to see the old Second World War Posters, “LOOSE LIPS SINK SHIPS” etc. and I wonder when we will be asked to sign the “Loyalty Test“ forms swearing that we are good Americans and loyal federal workers. Maybe an award system will be developed for reporting disloyal co-workers, which could be more lucrative than the awards system in place now for doing the work. The American public has been asked to turn in any one they suspect of being a Terrorist or fellow traveler and what’s good for Middle American is good for all of us.
Maybe this type of Americanism comes around every 50 years or so, just to make us appreciate the freedoms we enjoy and to be sorely tested to fight for them. Now seems the time to speak out and up, to say that we want to keep our freedoms. American citizens, federal employees included need to live free under a strong viable strong constitution. To give up liberties for a little safety renders us undeserving of both. As Edward Abbey once said, “A PATRIOT MUST BE READY TO PROTECT HIS COUNTRY AGAINST HIS GOVERNMENT”
Monday, June 19, 2006
Tribute to Marty Berger, Labor Leader
June 19, 2006
On Sunday, June 16, 2006, a light went out in the House of Labor. At 76, Martin “Marty” Berger lost his valiant fight against cancer. He fought a good fight against bad odds, but Marty was a fighter all his life and always battled the odds. He worked as an organizer for the International Ladies Garment Workers (ILGWU) and the United Needle International Trade Employees (UNITE/HERE) for most of his life and then after his “retirement” on behalf of his beloved Pennsylvania Association of Retired Persons (PARA).
Marty was a kind, gentle man who fought fiercely for the union. He may have been slight of build, but was one of the toughest men I ever met. Marty would aggressively argue for the rights of workers and retirees. He didn’t loose many arguments and never gave up. There is a Sicilian proverb that best describes him, “Forte e Gentile,” which means “strong and gentle.”
His life is the history of the Labor Movement, and his work a testimony to courage and devotion to the cause. Marty had many causes, but they all encompassed his belief in the dignity of man and his love of the union. Whether he was organizing in the South in the early days or fighting for an issue for Retired Americans the last few years, he never gave up or gave in.
Marty organized thousands of workers in his long career and because of him they achieved better living standards, higher pay, and dignity and respect on the job. He spent the last few years working for the rights of retired union members and all seniors to live out their golden years with dignity and security. Through his leadership, PARA represented 250,000 senior activist and union retirees in Pennsylvania. Through his leadership, PARA has grown to include 145 affiliated organizations. PARA is the state affiliate of the Alliance for Retired Americans, a national grassroots organization representing 3 million retirees. Marty will always be the heart of PARA.
We will miss him dearly and think fondly of him for the rest of our days. There may never be a monument built for him or building named after him, but we celebrate his life every time we walk one more picket line, sign up one more union member; lobby in the State House or the halls of Congress for workers and seniors rights, or work at the polls to elect labor-friendly candidates. We will continue the work he did all of his life, organizing workers and demanding dignity for all retirees.
We are all better for knowing this bright light of the labor movement. We all became taller by standing on his shoulders. He made us just a little bit better by being our friend and our mentor. His light will shine in our hearts.
As Winston Churchill put it, “We make a living by what we get, but we make a life by what we give.” Marty Berger made a life!
He is survived by his wife Helen, a son and 3 stepchildren. Donations can be sent in memory of Marty to his favorite charity: Jewish Family and Children Services, 133 Coulter Avenue, Ardmore, PA 19003.
On Sunday, June 16, 2006, a light went out in the House of Labor. At 76, Martin “Marty” Berger lost his valiant fight against cancer. He fought a good fight against bad odds, but Marty was a fighter all his life and always battled the odds. He worked as an organizer for the International Ladies Garment Workers (ILGWU) and the United Needle International Trade Employees (UNITE/HERE) for most of his life and then after his “retirement” on behalf of his beloved Pennsylvania Association of Retired Persons (PARA).
Marty was a kind, gentle man who fought fiercely for the union. He may have been slight of build, but was one of the toughest men I ever met. Marty would aggressively argue for the rights of workers and retirees. He didn’t loose many arguments and never gave up. There is a Sicilian proverb that best describes him, “Forte e Gentile,” which means “strong and gentle.”
His life is the history of the Labor Movement, and his work a testimony to courage and devotion to the cause. Marty had many causes, but they all encompassed his belief in the dignity of man and his love of the union. Whether he was organizing in the South in the early days or fighting for an issue for Retired Americans the last few years, he never gave up or gave in.
Marty organized thousands of workers in his long career and because of him they achieved better living standards, higher pay, and dignity and respect on the job. He spent the last few years working for the rights of retired union members and all seniors to live out their golden years with dignity and security. Through his leadership, PARA represented 250,000 senior activist and union retirees in Pennsylvania. Through his leadership, PARA has grown to include 145 affiliated organizations. PARA is the state affiliate of the Alliance for Retired Americans, a national grassroots organization representing 3 million retirees. Marty will always be the heart of PARA.
We will miss him dearly and think fondly of him for the rest of our days. There may never be a monument built for him or building named after him, but we celebrate his life every time we walk one more picket line, sign up one more union member; lobby in the State House or the halls of Congress for workers and seniors rights, or work at the polls to elect labor-friendly candidates. We will continue the work he did all of his life, organizing workers and demanding dignity for all retirees.
We are all better for knowing this bright light of the labor movement. We all became taller by standing on his shoulders. He made us just a little bit better by being our friend and our mentor. His light will shine in our hearts.
As Winston Churchill put it, “We make a living by what we get, but we make a life by what we give.” Marty Berger made a life!
He is survived by his wife Helen, a son and 3 stepchildren. Donations can be sent in memory of Marty to his favorite charity: Jewish Family and Children Services, 133 Coulter Avenue, Ardmore, PA 19003.
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Speech at Secretary’s 2006 Awards Ceremony - Philadelphia
Honorable Deputy Secretary Law, Honored guests, Awards Honorees and my fellow Department of Labor employees. It is our annual gathering to honor those of us who have achieved above and beyond, and it is my annual duty to honor them and all of you who do the Department’s business. You, who work hard to accomplish the Department’s mission with devotion, diligence and dedication. It has always been difficult to accomplish that mission but these days it’s nearly impossible due to a shortage of boots on the ground. But yet the impossible is what you do everyday. You get the job done! You get the job done!
It is my honor to let you know that your service does not go unnoticed or unappreciated. While the powers to be might not acknowledge you, the working men and women of America know what you do and appreciate it. While they don’t know you name they are well aware of how they benefit by what you do. You are the dedicated federal workers who enforce the 80 plus Department of Labor laws and training programs each and everyday.
It is my honor to let you know that your service does not go unnoticed or unappreciated. While the powers to be might not acknowledge you, the working men and women of America know what you do and appreciate it. While they don’t know you name they are well aware of how they benefit by what you do. You are the dedicated federal workers who enforce the 80 plus Department of Labor laws and training programs each and everyday.
You protect their pensions and wages; enforce the safety laws that protects the workers in the factories and mines; provide the equal opportunity and fairness in the workplace; train the new employees and retrain the older ones; try the cases in courts; assure that all the programs operate fairly as Congress mandated them to be accomplished and make sure that there are free and fair union elections, and many of you provide the administrative and support services that makes it all work. The American workers know what you do and appreciate it. You get the job done! You get the job done!
I have often pondered on the why you think it’s important to accomplish the mission of the Department until a member of mine who, as she was retiring, sent me this story, which I have adopted it as the Mantra for Local 644. I relate this to you as the rationale of why you strive so hard to do such a great in spite of the almost overwhelming odds and the apparent lack of appreciation.
I have often pondered on the why you think it’s important to accomplish the mission of the Department until a member of mine who, as she was retiring, sent me this story, which I have adopted it as the Mantra for Local 644. I relate this to you as the rationale of why you strive so hard to do such a great in spite of the almost overwhelming odds and the apparent lack of appreciation.
A man was walking along the beach at the South Jersey Shore one day, and he spied another man walking towards him, who stopped every few steps, bent down picked up an object and threw it into the ocean.
When he got closer, the second man inquired.
"What are you doing?"
"As you can see, it's low tide and the star fish that washed ashore are stranded and will die, I'm just throwing them back to the sea."
"Surely you can see that there are hundreds of starfish on this beach, and hundreds of beaches on this shore, so there are literally thousands of starfish you will not be able to save. It’s a daunting task and you are not making any difference at all."
The first man smiled, bent down and picked up a starfish and threw and said quietly, "Made a difference to that one!"
That’s what you do everyday, make a difference if only for one of America’s workers. You know your mission, you do it well and they appreciate it. You get the job done! You get the job done!
I wish that I could tell you that we will be hiring more people, finally having the number of people we really need to do the work, but you know better. We’ve had to do more with less for many years now and I ‘m afraid it’s going to get much worse. We are besieged with competitive outsourcing. You know what competitive outsourcing is, that’s the wonderful program where we replace a federal employee with a contract employee, who is paid little more than minimum wage with no benefits that does not create a job but merely changes the name on the unemployment check.
I wish that I could tell you that we will be hiring more people, finally having the number of people we really need to do the work, but you know better. We’ve had to do more with less for many years now and I ‘m afraid it’s going to get much worse. We are besieged with competitive outsourcing. You know what competitive outsourcing is, that’s the wonderful program where we replace a federal employee with a contract employee, who is paid little more than minimum wage with no benefits that does not create a job but merely changes the name on the unemployment check.
This program does little for the local economy; the contractor, usually from out of town, is the only one who makes good money and it winds up costing the government more money. But the good news is that given a fair level field we will win most competitions. Because you are here do the efficient and excellent work that you it will demonstrate you can do it better and accomplish the Department’s business, that work will remain in house. You get the job done! You get the job done!
In the past two years, we have won 14 out 15 competitions and I am sure we will win the one ongoing now. We will win because of the good work of our staffs which will demonstrate the efficiency and cost effectives of DOL employees. You get the job done! You get the job!
Contracting out is not an effective process and does not result in cost savings. It was enacted so that the government would not be doing the business of the private sector not to replace the mission of the government with the private sector. For instance the government should not be building build airplanes. It was never meant to take over the enforcement of government laws and regulations. It is ineffective and in efficient and costs the American taxpayers millions of unnecessary dollars. It didn’t work during the Carter Administration; the Reagan and Bush I administrations, didn’t work in the Clinton Administration and doesn’t work now. We have lost jobs, hired contract employees and kept on trucking.
Though downsized, outsourced and overworked, DOL is the only federal agency that achieved green in all of the Presidential Management Initiatives, the only federal agency to get to green and still accomplish the basic mission of the Department - the Only Federal agency that can make that claim. We are one of the smallest federal agencies but our impact and effect touches more lives than any other federal agency. You, through hard work and diligence accomplished everything that asked of you, achieved every initiative and worked on behalf of the American worker. You are the best. You get the job done! You get the job done!
So never let those dour devotees of dread, darkness, despair and doom get you down? You’ve been downsized; demoralized; discouraged and disrespected but you responded by being eager, enthusiastic; efficient and have exceeded. You’ve been outsourced; obstructed; offended and overused, but you prepared, perspired, prospered and prevailed. You get the job done! You get the job done!
You’ve been bedeviled, beset, belittled and betrayed. You’ve reacted with calmness, clarity, candor, character and class. No matter the Administration, the Policy or the Politics, you have always accomplished the Department’s business. The American workers know it; the AFL-CIO knows it and appreciates what you do. You get the job done! You get the job done!
And so as the motto of the NCFLL says, and please feel free to adopt it because it shouts to the rooftops the great job you accomplish each and everyday. “WHERE AMERICA WORKS, WE’RE WORKING FOR YOU!” You are there for the American worker everyday. You get the job done! You get the job done!
God bless you. God Bless the Department of Labor and God Bless America!
Thank you.
In the past two years, we have won 14 out 15 competitions and I am sure we will win the one ongoing now. We will win because of the good work of our staffs which will demonstrate the efficiency and cost effectives of DOL employees. You get the job done! You get the job!
Contracting out is not an effective process and does not result in cost savings. It was enacted so that the government would not be doing the business of the private sector not to replace the mission of the government with the private sector. For instance the government should not be building build airplanes. It was never meant to take over the enforcement of government laws and regulations. It is ineffective and in efficient and costs the American taxpayers millions of unnecessary dollars. It didn’t work during the Carter Administration; the Reagan and Bush I administrations, didn’t work in the Clinton Administration and doesn’t work now. We have lost jobs, hired contract employees and kept on trucking.
Though downsized, outsourced and overworked, DOL is the only federal agency that achieved green in all of the Presidential Management Initiatives, the only federal agency to get to green and still accomplish the basic mission of the Department - the Only Federal agency that can make that claim. We are one of the smallest federal agencies but our impact and effect touches more lives than any other federal agency. You, through hard work and diligence accomplished everything that asked of you, achieved every initiative and worked on behalf of the American worker. You are the best. You get the job done! You get the job done!
So never let those dour devotees of dread, darkness, despair and doom get you down? You’ve been downsized; demoralized; discouraged and disrespected but you responded by being eager, enthusiastic; efficient and have exceeded. You’ve been outsourced; obstructed; offended and overused, but you prepared, perspired, prospered and prevailed. You get the job done! You get the job done!
You’ve been bedeviled, beset, belittled and betrayed. You’ve reacted with calmness, clarity, candor, character and class. No matter the Administration, the Policy or the Politics, you have always accomplished the Department’s business. The American workers know it; the AFL-CIO knows it and appreciates what you do. You get the job done! You get the job done!
And so as the motto of the NCFLL says, and please feel free to adopt it because it shouts to the rooftops the great job you accomplish each and everyday. “WHERE AMERICA WORKS, WE’RE WORKING FOR YOU!” You are there for the American worker everyday. You get the job done! You get the job done!
God bless you. God Bless the Department of Labor and God Bless America!
Thank you.
Wednesday, October 05, 2005
President's Column - The Continuing Looting of Katrina Victims
The poor and disenfranchised in Louisiana, Texas and other places hit by the double whammy of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita are now facing other problems. These problems are not a force of nature but the fact of anti-worker, pro-corporation, give to the big donors’ avarice. In places devastated by the hurricane and the accompanying debacle, President Bush placed another burden or two on their backs. First he announced that the construction work to recover and rebuild would be let usually to the same cast of construction cronies by a no-bid system and that they would be relieved from paying the prevailing wage rate under the Davis-Bacon Act.
In an area where unemployment is at an all time high and with no work to be found, the President proudly announced that the towns will be rebuilt and the “victims” would help in the process. Jobs for all! But at what price?
This reconstruction is federally funded and therefore under the federal “Prevailing Wage Rate”, but the President signed an Executive Order waiving that law. In addition, to pile on the downtrodden, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFFCCP) has waived any requirement for these “no-bid” contractors to have an affirmative action plan. Most of these contractors have had to be in compliance for other federally funded construction in the past, but waiving the requirement that mandates them to have fair hiring practices. To add insult to injury less than 10% of the work will be given to local contractors.
The irony is that the prevailing wage rate for the New Orleans area is around $9.00 per hour and similar around the rest of the stricken areas, which is barely over the poverty level at best. The continuing irony is that less than. A recent study by the Congressional Research Service says that suspension of Davis-Bacon Act wage rules would not necessarily ensure federal contracts hold reconstruction costs in this area. Conservatives and liberals in Congress have been pushing competing measure regarding this issue. Conservatives are pushing legislation that would automatically suspend the wage-protection law in areas designated by the president as disaster areas, while liberals are supporting several bills that would revoke Bush’s suspension of the law. In the Congressional Research Report poses the question,” Perhaps the most frequently asked question concerning the Davis-Bacon act is: would the federal government (and the taxpayer) save money if the Davis-Bacon Act were repealed or modified to narrow its scope? The short answer is: No one really knows. Conversely, might Davis Bacon result in savings to the federal government in its purchase of construction? That too, would seem to be an open question,”CRS argues in “Davis-Bacon Suspension and Its legislative Aftermath.”
According to CRS, drawing conclusions about the law’s effects on contracting costs is impossible because “the state of current research would probably be insufficient to justify just an assertion.”
But the more pointed question is why give contracts to “friends” without competitive bidding, and then to skimp on the wages paid to the workers? It would be much better to give the bulk of the work to the local contractors, make them pay at least the prevailing wage rate. The money would stay in the area and bolster the economy.
The best way for the Bush Administration to rebuild these areas would be to stop the looting of taxpayer dollars, provide the victims of the tragedy a way to help them get out of poverty with dignity and fair wages.
In an area where unemployment is at an all time high and with no work to be found, the President proudly announced that the towns will be rebuilt and the “victims” would help in the process. Jobs for all! But at what price?
This reconstruction is federally funded and therefore under the federal “Prevailing Wage Rate”, but the President signed an Executive Order waiving that law. In addition, to pile on the downtrodden, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFFCCP) has waived any requirement for these “no-bid” contractors to have an affirmative action plan. Most of these contractors have had to be in compliance for other federally funded construction in the past, but waiving the requirement that mandates them to have fair hiring practices. To add insult to injury less than 10% of the work will be given to local contractors.
The irony is that the prevailing wage rate for the New Orleans area is around $9.00 per hour and similar around the rest of the stricken areas, which is barely over the poverty level at best. The continuing irony is that less than. A recent study by the Congressional Research Service says that suspension of Davis-Bacon Act wage rules would not necessarily ensure federal contracts hold reconstruction costs in this area. Conservatives and liberals in Congress have been pushing competing measure regarding this issue. Conservatives are pushing legislation that would automatically suspend the wage-protection law in areas designated by the president as disaster areas, while liberals are supporting several bills that would revoke Bush’s suspension of the law. In the Congressional Research Report poses the question,” Perhaps the most frequently asked question concerning the Davis-Bacon act is: would the federal government (and the taxpayer) save money if the Davis-Bacon Act were repealed or modified to narrow its scope? The short answer is: No one really knows. Conversely, might Davis Bacon result in savings to the federal government in its purchase of construction? That too, would seem to be an open question,”CRS argues in “Davis-Bacon Suspension and Its legislative Aftermath.”
According to CRS, drawing conclusions about the law’s effects on contracting costs is impossible because “the state of current research would probably be insufficient to justify just an assertion.”
But the more pointed question is why give contracts to “friends” without competitive bidding, and then to skimp on the wages paid to the workers? It would be much better to give the bulk of the work to the local contractors, make them pay at least the prevailing wage rate. The money would stay in the area and bolster the economy.
The best way for the Bush Administration to rebuild these areas would be to stop the looting of taxpayer dollars, provide the victims of the tragedy a way to help them get out of poverty with dignity and fair wages.
Saturday, October 01, 2005
President's Column - Lessons Learned in Disaster
As we sit, our eyes glued to the television, unable to stop watching the human tragedy and suffering caused by Katrina , further complicated by the shear weight of incompetent bureaucracy , you can learn some valuable things about the federal government and federal employees. A short four years after the tragedy of 9-11, our country faces another enormous blow and one which may almost be impossible to survive.
What you can learn, once again, is about the indomitable spirit of the American people. But it is being sorely tested. The death toll is expected to be in thousands, one of the single most devastating death tolls in our nation's history. It could possibly be twice that of all our disasters both natural and war combined for a single incident or event. But the spirit came through, how people helped each other, when the bureaucracy failed. How thousands of people volunteered to go to those states that were hit, just to be left languishing until somebody made a decision. But they volunteered and they helped and they fought.
The spirit of the people in those ravaged areas who fought for life though the tears and the horror, just to be ignored, disenfranchised and left by those who were in charge. But they hung on and helped others. Despite the pictures of "looting" by the blacks and "finding food" for the whites in the same disaster area., the spirit of those people who did not have the means to escape but had the will to survive, and did survive until they were placed in areas of relief, that offered little or none.
Prominent among them were the federal employees who lost everything, some still not accounted for, whose homes and families may be lost. Among them are the hundreds of federal employees who immediately volunteered to go and help either as volunteer firefighters, EMTs, National Guardsman or just private citizens. It was not from the lack of volunteerism that help was late; it was because "somebody" had to make a decision. A decision that took almost 4 days to make… too little, too late!
And for those federal employees who went there because of their duty, it was evident that the delay was not because of any union contract or union work rule. The folks on top couldn't get together. The rationale for this Administration wanting to eliminate or severely curtail union contracts and civil service rights was it would delay any mobilization of federal workforce to face any disaster whether from terrorists or natural disaster. All of this has been delayed by the unions or the courts and so existing contracts are mostly still in effect. And it did not delay the mobilization for a second. Every federal employee, union or otherwise was available, prepared and anxious to go where it was necessary and it was as it always had been, the lack of leadership to make the decision.
Millions have been spent on Homeland Security since 9 11 and plans have been drawn, field exercises have been conducted, analyzed and re-analyzed and re-thought for the past four years... and the first time out of the chute, it failed... not from the lack of planning, not from the constrictions of union contracts but by the shear incompetence of the leadership.
While I could gloat and be content that this proved what our unions were trying to convey to the Congress and Administration was proven to be dead wrong, I can't. I am sickened by the devastation and the loss of lives.
I take little comfort in the fact that federal employees, as well as the thousands of other people were right and our "government" got it all wrong. People should not have had to pay with their lives and others with the loss of all they possess to prove a point that federal workers as well as all Americans will rise to the occasion and not let anything get in the way to help others and survive in spite of the incompetent bureaucracy.
Saturday, July 30, 2005
President’s Column - It’s All a Matter of Priorities
The cost of federal contractors to accomplish the work of the government is astronomical. Some of the work is that which can not and should not be done by the government, but a lot of it is work that is currently being accomplished more efficiently and more effectively by federal employees. That is the end of my diatribe about contracting out for this article.
Federal Contractors are required to operate under the laws of the land, enforced by the various agencies of the U.S. Government. Agencies that regulate wages, overtime and safety laws, in addition these contractors have to pay all state, local and federal taxes and other fees that might apply. Some of the agencies are the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division; OSHA, OFCCP, the Equal Opportunity Commission and Immigration. Non-compliance with these varied and many agencies should result in the loss of the federal contract. In fact, companies with these types of violations should not be given federal contracts until the issues are resolved.
Yet, many of the contractors are repeat violators of most of the federal, state and local laws and still secure lucrative federal contracts. Even if such “monitoring” is being accomplished for compliance, which is doubtful, it appears to be forgiven and the same violators secure contracts over and over.
A Government Accountability Office (GAO) report has uncovered that more than 33,000 civilian contractors, many of which continue to win new contracts from the federal government – owe more than $3.3 billion in back taxes.
The report, Financial Management: Thousands of Civilian Agency Contractors Abuse the Federal Tax System with Little Consequence (GAO-5-637), investigated 50 civilian agency contractors more closely and found that all of them had “abusive and potentially criminal activity “auditors stated. It reported that businesses failed to forward the payroll taxes they collected from their employees to the IRS, which is a felony.
In one case, a contractor repeatedly opened new business and closed old ones that carried large tax debts for more than 20 years. Federal agencies paid that contractor $1 million in fiscal 2004, despite the fact that he owed almost $9000, 000 in taxes. In another case, a waste collection agency that contracts with the Veteran Affairs Department owes almost $13 million in taxes and the owner has property worth more than $2 million.
GAO auditors said the Treasury Department’s Financial Management Service (FMS), which dispenses and collects money for the government---mismanaged data related to tax collection and in some cases was not even aware of problems until GAO pointed them out. In fiscal 2004, FMS paid $3.8 billion to contractors without recording their proper name, the report stated.
The report recommended withholding payments to contractors if their payment file lacks a proper name. FMS disagreed, saying that withholding might delay payments to contractors who are paying their taxes. The GAO report said that the fact that these contractors have not paid taxes reduces their operating costs, which gives them an unfair competitive advantage against those who are paying their taxes.
There are no statistics that show how many of these same contractors violate the provisions of the Department of Labor’s Service Contract Act, the Davis Bacon Act and other wage and safety laws. Little oversight is accomplished, unless an employee complaint is filed. Other federal agencies such as EEOC and OFCCP and ICE operate similarly. But it appears that laws are being broken or at least bent to the same advantage by these contractors.
DOL’s OFCCP is one of the agencies charged with checking out potential federal contractors for compliance with the discriminatory and immigration laws and do very little of that at present. All Department of Labor agencies are supposed to check for illegal immigrants while conducting their investigations. Checking the INS I-9s against the names on the payroll lists, but has not happened much of late.
With all of this fraud, waste, abuse, non-payment of over $3.3 billion in taxes and potential violations of safety regulations, wage laws, potential discrimination and illegal immigrants, the Administration has by an Executive Order, charged OFCCP to go out and check whether federal contractors have posted and explained the Beck Poster. This is the Poster based on a Court Decision letting employees know that unless the company is a union shop, there is no requirement to join a union.
See, it’s all a matter of priorities! Collecting taxes isn't as important that keeping the union out of the workplace!
Federal Contractors are required to operate under the laws of the land, enforced by the various agencies of the U.S. Government. Agencies that regulate wages, overtime and safety laws, in addition these contractors have to pay all state, local and federal taxes and other fees that might apply. Some of the agencies are the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division; OSHA, OFCCP, the Equal Opportunity Commission and Immigration. Non-compliance with these varied and many agencies should result in the loss of the federal contract. In fact, companies with these types of violations should not be given federal contracts until the issues are resolved.
Yet, many of the contractors are repeat violators of most of the federal, state and local laws and still secure lucrative federal contracts. Even if such “monitoring” is being accomplished for compliance, which is doubtful, it appears to be forgiven and the same violators secure contracts over and over.
A Government Accountability Office (GAO) report has uncovered that more than 33,000 civilian contractors, many of which continue to win new contracts from the federal government – owe more than $3.3 billion in back taxes.
The report, Financial Management: Thousands of Civilian Agency Contractors Abuse the Federal Tax System with Little Consequence (GAO-5-637), investigated 50 civilian agency contractors more closely and found that all of them had “abusive and potentially criminal activity “auditors stated. It reported that businesses failed to forward the payroll taxes they collected from their employees to the IRS, which is a felony.
In one case, a contractor repeatedly opened new business and closed old ones that carried large tax debts for more than 20 years. Federal agencies paid that contractor $1 million in fiscal 2004, despite the fact that he owed almost $9000, 000 in taxes. In another case, a waste collection agency that contracts with the Veteran Affairs Department owes almost $13 million in taxes and the owner has property worth more than $2 million.
GAO auditors said the Treasury Department’s Financial Management Service (FMS), which dispenses and collects money for the government---mismanaged data related to tax collection and in some cases was not even aware of problems until GAO pointed them out. In fiscal 2004, FMS paid $3.8 billion to contractors without recording their proper name, the report stated.
The report recommended withholding payments to contractors if their payment file lacks a proper name. FMS disagreed, saying that withholding might delay payments to contractors who are paying their taxes. The GAO report said that the fact that these contractors have not paid taxes reduces their operating costs, which gives them an unfair competitive advantage against those who are paying their taxes.
There are no statistics that show how many of these same contractors violate the provisions of the Department of Labor’s Service Contract Act, the Davis Bacon Act and other wage and safety laws. Little oversight is accomplished, unless an employee complaint is filed. Other federal agencies such as EEOC and OFCCP and ICE operate similarly. But it appears that laws are being broken or at least bent to the same advantage by these contractors.
DOL’s OFCCP is one of the agencies charged with checking out potential federal contractors for compliance with the discriminatory and immigration laws and do very little of that at present. All Department of Labor agencies are supposed to check for illegal immigrants while conducting their investigations. Checking the INS I-9s against the names on the payroll lists, but has not happened much of late.
With all of this fraud, waste, abuse, non-payment of over $3.3 billion in taxes and potential violations of safety regulations, wage laws, potential discrimination and illegal immigrants, the Administration has by an Executive Order, charged OFCCP to go out and check whether federal contractors have posted and explained the Beck Poster. This is the Poster based on a Court Decision letting employees know that unless the company is a union shop, there is no requirement to join a union.
See, it’s all a matter of priorities! Collecting taxes isn't as important that keeping the union out of the workplace!
Tuesday, February 01, 2005
President’s Column - Contracting Out Just Doesn't Make Sense or Save Dollars
When one looks at contracting out (outsourcing) in the federal government rationally it really makes no sense. It saves no money; in fact even in the best of times it has proven to be more costly and less efficient. As a recent GSA Audit conducted by the GSA Inspector General documented that the existing process misuse has lead to wide spread fraud, abuse and waste.
I have demonstrated regarding the cost of contacting out a GS-4 administrative position, costing the Department of Labor $21.95 per hour. The contract employee only received a little more than $8.00 per hour with no benefits. The Department of Labor still had to supervise the employee and provide the equipment that was utilized to provide the service. With that scenario DOL could have hired two GS-4s with benefits for less money than then the cost of the contract.
This process added nothing to the local economy, even if the "work" remained in the community. Without benefits, an underpaid contract employee might easily become a burden on the local economy. Uninsured or underinsured workers cost the taxpayer millions of dollars each year in the cost of providing public assistance and cost of health care coverage for those who are not insured.
Speaking briefly regarding the economic impact of contracting out to low-paying federal contractors, it is part of phenomenon that some like to call "Wal-Martizing." That is to keep wages low so that they are forced to shop at places like Wal-Mart and are forced to apply for public assistance becoming a drain on the taxpayer and on and on and on. It seems to be a reprise of the early 1900s to keep workers poor!
But back to the main theme of whether contracting our makes sense. No matter the logic you apply to the process, it comes up short. Politicians extol the virtues of less government, but if someone is being paid with taxpayer’s money, performing the work that government is mandated to do. That’s not smaller government it is just shifting the money to, in most cases, a large contractor who might or not might not perform as efficiently. But this has become the right wing mantra and the public buys into it. They have somehow convinced the faithful and others that outsourcing is a way to save taxpayers money and make government smaller. When in reality the cost to the government is larger and it is merely a money-making proposition for the federal contractors and the politicians who get the campaign support from them. The taxpayer is the only loser in the process.
But the thing that puzzles me most is that Congress wants to contract out the work. If they belief is that the laws passed or regulations enacted are wrong, or that government agencies do not operate efficiently and it imposes undue hardship of employers, why not change the law or eliminate the regulations. Having a contractor perform the work still imposes the same regulations on companies it just pays someone else more money to do it. It provides neither efficiency to the process nor or less imposition on the companies.
One of the issues pointed out GSA Audit is that the contractor who received the original contract under the GSA regulations had in some cases sub-contracted the work out to other contractors who were not part of the original bid and may not provide the same level of efficiency nor security. So if the General Service Administration Inspector General’s audit is correct, it has cost the taxpayers billions of dollars in waste, abuse and even worse outright fraud!
I have demonstrated regarding the cost of contacting out a GS-4 administrative position, costing the Department of Labor $21.95 per hour. The contract employee only received a little more than $8.00 per hour with no benefits. The Department of Labor still had to supervise the employee and provide the equipment that was utilized to provide the service. With that scenario DOL could have hired two GS-4s with benefits for less money than then the cost of the contract.
This process added nothing to the local economy, even if the "work" remained in the community. Without benefits, an underpaid contract employee might easily become a burden on the local economy. Uninsured or underinsured workers cost the taxpayer millions of dollars each year in the cost of providing public assistance and cost of health care coverage for those who are not insured.
Speaking briefly regarding the economic impact of contracting out to low-paying federal contractors, it is part of phenomenon that some like to call "Wal-Martizing." That is to keep wages low so that they are forced to shop at places like Wal-Mart and are forced to apply for public assistance becoming a drain on the taxpayer and on and on and on. It seems to be a reprise of the early 1900s to keep workers poor!
But back to the main theme of whether contracting our makes sense. No matter the logic you apply to the process, it comes up short. Politicians extol the virtues of less government, but if someone is being paid with taxpayer’s money, performing the work that government is mandated to do. That’s not smaller government it is just shifting the money to, in most cases, a large contractor who might or not might not perform as efficiently. But this has become the right wing mantra and the public buys into it. They have somehow convinced the faithful and others that outsourcing is a way to save taxpayers money and make government smaller. When in reality the cost to the government is larger and it is merely a money-making proposition for the federal contractors and the politicians who get the campaign support from them. The taxpayer is the only loser in the process.
But the thing that puzzles me most is that Congress wants to contract out the work. If they belief is that the laws passed or regulations enacted are wrong, or that government agencies do not operate efficiently and it imposes undue hardship of employers, why not change the law or eliminate the regulations. Having a contractor perform the work still imposes the same regulations on companies it just pays someone else more money to do it. It provides neither efficiency to the process nor or less imposition on the companies.
One of the issues pointed out GSA Audit is that the contractor who received the original contract under the GSA regulations had in some cases sub-contracted the work out to other contractors who were not part of the original bid and may not provide the same level of efficiency nor security. So if the General Service Administration Inspector General’s audit is correct, it has cost the taxpayers billions of dollars in waste, abuse and even worse outright fraud!
Saturday, November 20, 2004
Correspondence - Companies Sue Union Retirees to Cut Promised Health Benefits
Room 229, Customs House
2nd and Chestnut Streets
Philadelphia, PA. 19106
215 597 5183
215 597 5172
November 19, 20004
2nd and Chestnut Streets
Philadelphia, PA. 19106
215 597 5183
215 597 5172
November 19, 20004
Ann L. Combs
Assistant Secretary
U. S. DOL EBSA
Room S 2524
200 Constitution Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20210
Dear Madam Secretary:
I have read a very disturbing article in the Wall Street Journal from November 10, 2004 entitled "Companies Sue Union Retirees to Cut Promised Health Benefits." This on its face is distressing but the quote from an unnamed Department of Labor spokesperson is absolutely ludicrous.
This quote was in reference to whether the retires can seek help from the Department and I assume it means EBSA. The quote is contained in this paragraph. "The retirees, by contrast, find themselves in a bind-unsure of their recourse and facing, as they age, the court system’s typical long waits for legal resolution. The U. S. Department of Labor is of little help. Retired workers 'aren't our constituents anymore', says a spokeswoman for the department."
Is this now the policy of the Department of Labor? If it is, what is the function of EBSA if not to monitor the Health and retirement funds of American workers? I find the quote to be outrageous!
I am also a vice president of the Pennsylvania State AFL-CIO and while I do not speak on behalf of the Department, I do find myself having to respond on behalf of my membership to the occasional complaint or questions asked by other unions in the state.
I am requesting that you repudiate the statement and provide clarification as to the function of EBSA in current times. This statement in the context of this article does a disservice to the hard working men and women of our agency and places a stain on the fine work of this agency for decades past.
If you have any questions, please contact me at the above address. I am attaching a copy of the article for your files.
Sincerely,
Jim Weyrauch
Executive Vice President
Sunday, July 04, 2004
President's Column - Contracting Out
Contracting out by this Administration and this Congress is an ever moving target and most time makes little or no sense. Take for example the Airport Screening positions. In the aftermath of September 11, Congress and others berated the system and said that the “contractors” were too lax, poorly trained and some may have had criminal records. This was in response to the fact that terrorists got through the screening methods, were able to board four airplanes with “weapons” and take them over and crash two of them into the World Trade Center, a third into the Pentagon and only because of the heroic actions of the passengers, the fourth plane crashed into a field in Pennsylvania.
Congress then debated, cajoled and created a new federal agency, The Transportation Safety Administration. An agency was set up, a Director was appointed and the hiring process began. The screening process of the new federal employees was accomplished by contractors (possibly the same contractor who screened the non-federal employees previously) and the TSA was set up at all of the airports.
Airline passengers were x-rayed, screened, searched and “wanded” by the new federal employees. For the most part, there were few incidents of the screening not working, but this seemed to be more of equipment malfunction than employee error. The only “glitch” seemed to be that these federal employees wanted to be protected by the union and wanted to have the same protection under the Civil Service Reform as the other federal employees. This triggered a rash of “union busting” not seen since the early 1930s. Court cases, firings and a very hostile work environment, but the work went on almost flawlessly.
Now, Congress has authorized the Administration the use of “Contract screeners”. This is to give back to the same or similar private contractors the position of screening airport passengers, if the airport wants to use them. No one has declared that the federal system doesn’t work or that the private contractors can do a better or safer job. Just that airports can make the decision.
Then take the IRS, Congressional hearings were held because of the terrible methods of collecting the taxes with far-reaching and serious changes in providing a “gentler government” to the taxpayer. So now, with the gentler IRS tax scofflaws are rampant and Congress has now authorized private sector tax collectors to get the unpaid taxes from the beleaguered tax payer. A footnote, many of the defense contractors have a combined unpaid tax bill of 6 billion dollars. They are patriotic enough to get the work, but not patriotic enough to pay their share of taxes.
So, I can’t figure it out, in the two agencies mentioned, the work is being contracted out because the federal workers did exactly want Congress and the Administrating wanted them to do, efficiently and to the letter of the regulations. No mention of whether the contracting out will save money or is a worth-while endeavor, just seems to be contacting out for the sake of contracting out.
Congress then debated, cajoled and created a new federal agency, The Transportation Safety Administration. An agency was set up, a Director was appointed and the hiring process began. The screening process of the new federal employees was accomplished by contractors (possibly the same contractor who screened the non-federal employees previously) and the TSA was set up at all of the airports.
Airline passengers were x-rayed, screened, searched and “wanded” by the new federal employees. For the most part, there were few incidents of the screening not working, but this seemed to be more of equipment malfunction than employee error. The only “glitch” seemed to be that these federal employees wanted to be protected by the union and wanted to have the same protection under the Civil Service Reform as the other federal employees. This triggered a rash of “union busting” not seen since the early 1930s. Court cases, firings and a very hostile work environment, but the work went on almost flawlessly.
Now, Congress has authorized the Administration the use of “Contract screeners”. This is to give back to the same or similar private contractors the position of screening airport passengers, if the airport wants to use them. No one has declared that the federal system doesn’t work or that the private contractors can do a better or safer job. Just that airports can make the decision.
Then take the IRS, Congressional hearings were held because of the terrible methods of collecting the taxes with far-reaching and serious changes in providing a “gentler government” to the taxpayer. So now, with the gentler IRS tax scofflaws are rampant and Congress has now authorized private sector tax collectors to get the unpaid taxes from the beleaguered tax payer. A footnote, many of the defense contractors have a combined unpaid tax bill of 6 billion dollars. They are patriotic enough to get the work, but not patriotic enough to pay their share of taxes.
So, I can’t figure it out, in the two agencies mentioned, the work is being contracted out because the federal workers did exactly want Congress and the Administrating wanted them to do, efficiently and to the letter of the regulations. No mention of whether the contracting out will save money or is a worth-while endeavor, just seems to be contacting out for the sake of contracting out.
Friday, June 04, 2004
Speech at Secretary’s 2004 Awards Ceremony - Philadelphia
I have the pleasure of once again addressing the 91st Annual Secretary’s Awards Ceremony. I look forward to it and am honored that I am asked. We come to this place and time every year to honor those among us who have achieved or exceeded in the production of a worthwhile project that deserves recognition. And all of the honorees deserve it.
But I come to speak about those of us who are not receiving an award this year but deserve recognition just as well. Those of us who are what I like to call Everyday Heroes. Some of us do extraordinary things, like Sgt Brian Murphy, Shop Steward at the MSHA Pittsburgh Health Technology Center who just returned from serving a year in Iraq. My Everyday Hero!
Henry Welcome, the Baltimore OFCCP office shop steward who collects money, clothing, toiletries and anything else that is useful and helps to support two orphanages, three hospitals, one nursing home and the 24,000 Children of the Street in his native land of Honduras and in his spare time acts as an interpreter for Hispanic Immigrants in his neighborhood. My Everyday Hero!
We will be conducting a clothing drive for Henry’s kids in the Philadelphia area and we hope that you all will be as generous with this as you have in the past for other worthwhile charities.
And of course our beloved union sister Dahlia Tyson, who just lost her long and valiant fight against cancer. Dahlia, who for years provided care inspiration to others by how well she lived her life and taught us all on how to have dignity and purpose at the end. Dahlia, who even in her final days still found time to provide comfort and cheer to those who were having their own struggle with cancer, My Everyday Hero!
We will be raising money to send to Cancer Research in her name and anyone wishing to contribute can send the check or cash to Local 644 Charities and mark it for the Dahlia Tyson Fund.
And there are others, lots of others, all of you and the rest of the 1800 DOL employees in the Philadelphia region. . You, who make the Department of Labor work, who in some capacity or other aid in the completion of the mission of promoting the welfare of the American Worker. You, who by doing your job as efficiently and effectively made it possible for today’s honorees have that little extra that secured their Award.
It never ceases to amaze me how well we do our jobs, despite the changes in administrations and policy, despite the slings and arrows of those who don’t like big government. And they, the anti-government people, have been in every Administration since President Carter. I admire President Carter as a great American and Ex-President, but he ran on changing government, as have all the administrations including the present one. This has been the mantra of the past 14 congresses since and the myriad of Secretaries and Assistant Secretaries we have had to endure. They all had the plan, the policy and the vision. But the mission has never changed and we stayed the course and did our jobs effectively, but not quietly. I say not quietly because Local 644 and the NCFLL have always been there to be your voice to set the record straight.
All of these people run on about making government smaller, but because of outsourcing the number of people being paid by the federal government has grown. It is estimated that there is anywhere from 13 to 17 million people doing government work and being paid with government money of that number, only 2 million of them are us. The rest are contractors, and we can not estimate the correct number because Congress won’t pass the The Reporting, Accounting and Cost Act or TRAC. When outsourcing competition is handled fairly, government workers, the real government workers win the competition 89% of the time. So I am always amazed how well you do your jobs, work in your communities and help your fellow man. You, who helped Local 644 Charities raise and distribute over $30,000 to needy folks and worthwhile causes. Who, gave generously to the Children’s with Aids project for years, providing over 600 Easter Baskets each. My Everyday Heroes!
You work hard for your government and your country and neither this administration nor this Congress should eliminate the fairness and respect you deserve for a job well done. The proper culmination of this event should be that each of you contacts your Congressional representative and telling him or her that fact!
I take great pride in telling everyone that I am a federal worker, I work for the U.S. Department of Labor and we do a great job! Look around you and see the great people you get to work with everyday. You! You are my Everyday Heroes!
Thank you!
But I come to speak about those of us who are not receiving an award this year but deserve recognition just as well. Those of us who are what I like to call Everyday Heroes. Some of us do extraordinary things, like Sgt Brian Murphy, Shop Steward at the MSHA Pittsburgh Health Technology Center who just returned from serving a year in Iraq. My Everyday Hero!
Henry Welcome, the Baltimore OFCCP office shop steward who collects money, clothing, toiletries and anything else that is useful and helps to support two orphanages, three hospitals, one nursing home and the 24,000 Children of the Street in his native land of Honduras and in his spare time acts as an interpreter for Hispanic Immigrants in his neighborhood. My Everyday Hero!
We will be conducting a clothing drive for Henry’s kids in the Philadelphia area and we hope that you all will be as generous with this as you have in the past for other worthwhile charities.
And of course our beloved union sister Dahlia Tyson, who just lost her long and valiant fight against cancer. Dahlia, who for years provided care inspiration to others by how well she lived her life and taught us all on how to have dignity and purpose at the end. Dahlia, who even in her final days still found time to provide comfort and cheer to those who were having their own struggle with cancer, My Everyday Hero!
We will be raising money to send to Cancer Research in her name and anyone wishing to contribute can send the check or cash to Local 644 Charities and mark it for the Dahlia Tyson Fund.
And there are others, lots of others, all of you and the rest of the 1800 DOL employees in the Philadelphia region. . You, who make the Department of Labor work, who in some capacity or other aid in the completion of the mission of promoting the welfare of the American Worker. You, who by doing your job as efficiently and effectively made it possible for today’s honorees have that little extra that secured their Award.
It never ceases to amaze me how well we do our jobs, despite the changes in administrations and policy, despite the slings and arrows of those who don’t like big government. And they, the anti-government people, have been in every Administration since President Carter. I admire President Carter as a great American and Ex-President, but he ran on changing government, as have all the administrations including the present one. This has been the mantra of the past 14 congresses since and the myriad of Secretaries and Assistant Secretaries we have had to endure. They all had the plan, the policy and the vision. But the mission has never changed and we stayed the course and did our jobs effectively, but not quietly. I say not quietly because Local 644 and the NCFLL have always been there to be your voice to set the record straight.
All of these people run on about making government smaller, but because of outsourcing the number of people being paid by the federal government has grown. It is estimated that there is anywhere from 13 to 17 million people doing government work and being paid with government money of that number, only 2 million of them are us. The rest are contractors, and we can not estimate the correct number because Congress won’t pass the The Reporting, Accounting and Cost Act or TRAC. When outsourcing competition is handled fairly, government workers, the real government workers win the competition 89% of the time. So I am always amazed how well you do your jobs, work in your communities and help your fellow man. You, who helped Local 644 Charities raise and distribute over $30,000 to needy folks and worthwhile causes. Who, gave generously to the Children’s with Aids project for years, providing over 600 Easter Baskets each. My Everyday Heroes!
You work hard for your government and your country and neither this administration nor this Congress should eliminate the fairness and respect you deserve for a job well done. The proper culmination of this event should be that each of you contacts your Congressional representative and telling him or her that fact!
I take great pride in telling everyone that I am a federal worker, I work for the U.S. Department of Labor and we do a great job! Look around you and see the great people you get to work with everyday. You! You are my Everyday Heroes!
Thank you!
Thursday, March 27, 2003
President's Column - DeLay and Big Business
Well, we are at war and our family members and friends are in "harm's way.” Federal employees can expect even bigger assaults on their rights, benefits and jobs - all in the name of Homeland Security or the War on Iraq. 170,000 of us have already lost our collective bargaining rights, and maybe our Civil Service Rights. We are contracted out and those of us who remain will probably be asked to take pay cut. Sacrifices always start at the lowest level.
The Majority Leader of the House, Representative Tom DeLay, sent out a fund raising letter for the National Right to Work Foundation. In it he blasted the American Labor Movement, its leaders and members, for being unpatriotic and "trying to expand their power" at the expense of homeland security and troops overseas.” His letter blasted unions for having strikes for working conditions, wages and other issues at Defense Plants and harangued on how Democratic Senators attempted to "hand over operational control of the Homeland Security Department to Big Labor Bosses.
While their may have been strikes at defense plants, no vital war materials were at risk. What he failed to mention was how Defense Contractors, and related industries, were overcharging the federal government - making millions of dollars, while employing tax dodging tactics in foreign countries. His harangue over the Homeland Security Department was not factually correct because all AFGE wanted was to maintain the collective bargaining rights of those employees, enjoyed in their former agencies, going into the new department. Collective Bargaining Rights have been enjoyed for many years throughout the declared and non-declared wars without problems either to homeland defense or to the troops in the field.
The truth is that a long and illustrious list of union members, including members of Local 644, have served their country in war and peace since the first World War. The further truth is that private industry has exploited all the war efforts since the Civil War, maybe even the Revolutionary War, and overcharged the Federal government to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars. So why is it unpatriotic to fight for decent wages and working conditions during a "war", but not for contractors to overcharge the government for needed war materials?
A union representative from Local 644 who flew 130 combat missions in Vietnam asked me if Representative DeLay had served in the military, and if he did, was he in combat? I don't know and I would not ask. I would say to Rep. DeLay, "shame on you for besmirching the good name of the thousands of union members and leaders who served their country and are now serving in the reserves who have been called to duty.
Local 644 joins with the millions of other union members who support our troops, no matter how we might feel about the mission. Union members and federal employees have sacrificed and served both in war and peace and will continue to do so for as long as it takes.
I am outraged at Representative DeLay's letter and the sentiment behind it and believe he owes the labor movement an apology. He has every right to raise money to fight unions, but not to call us unpatriotic for defending our rights. He may favor Big Business instead of small labor, but that does not give him the right to criticize our patriotism!
Wednesday, January 01, 2003
President's Column - Congress to pay off the Corporate America
It is a brand-new year, 2003, and the Homeland Security Department is up and running? Well, it’s a thought in someone's mind. No one is sure when it will be a reality and what impact the new department will have on the 170,000 employees and their collective bargaining rights. But what we are dead sure about is what happens to the "patriotic" corporations who will do business with the government. I put that into quotes, because in the passing of the legislation, the Wellstone Amendment was eliminated. This was the amendment voted on by 318 members of the House that would have barred corporations that move to offshore tax shelters like Bermuda from getting federal government contracts related to homeland security. This was eliminated in the last ditch efforts of the Congress to pay off the Corporate America's large campaign donations.
This is tax dodging at its best, and not a bit patriotic. The U.S. Treasury estimates that we lose $70 to 400 billion each year from American Corporations taking advantage of offshore tax shelters. And these resources are needed to pay for the government and to pay for homeland security. For example, Tyco, formerly of New Hampshire, now of avoids paying $400 million a year in U. S. taxes by setting up a shell headquarters offshore but was awarded $182 million in lucrative defense and homeland security related contracts in 2001 alone. If Tyco had paid its tax bill, Congress could have easily paid for 400 explosive detection systems, which are badly needed to protect U. S. travelers at airports around the nation.
Ingersoll Rand, formerly of New Jersey, now also in Bermuda earned as much last year in U.S. defense and homeland security contracts as it avoids in U. S. taxes by renting a mailbox. These taxes could have easily funded the proposed Cyberspace Warning Intelligence Network estimated to cost $30 million, or could buy 400,000 gas masks for American citizens.
Another amendment that eases the burden on American corporations is the one endorsed and enacted by the new Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist. It exempts the Eli Lilly company from lawsuits by parents who believe the company's vaccines may have caused their children's autism. How the defense of collective bargaining rights for Federal workers was considered unpatriotic, yet corporate tax dodging is not, escapes my comprehension. These amendments are in the new bill, the agency is not up and running, about 55,000 federal workers may have lost their collective bargaining rights and the country is no safer now than September 10, 2001. All this was done in the name of patriotism and for a secure homeland.
This is tax dodging at its best, and not a bit patriotic. The U.S. Treasury estimates that we lose $70 to 400 billion each year from American Corporations taking advantage of offshore tax shelters. And these resources are needed to pay for the government and to pay for homeland security. For example, Tyco, formerly of New Hampshire, now of avoids paying $400 million a year in U. S. taxes by setting up a shell headquarters offshore but was awarded $182 million in lucrative defense and homeland security related contracts in 2001 alone. If Tyco had paid its tax bill, Congress could have easily paid for 400 explosive detection systems, which are badly needed to protect U. S. travelers at airports around the nation.
Ingersoll Rand, formerly of New Jersey, now also in Bermuda earned as much last year in U.S. defense and homeland security contracts as it avoids in U. S. taxes by renting a mailbox. These taxes could have easily funded the proposed Cyberspace Warning Intelligence Network estimated to cost $30 million, or could buy 400,000 gas masks for American citizens.
Another amendment that eases the burden on American corporations is the one endorsed and enacted by the new Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist. It exempts the Eli Lilly company from lawsuits by parents who believe the company's vaccines may have caused their children's autism. How the defense of collective bargaining rights for Federal workers was considered unpatriotic, yet corporate tax dodging is not, escapes my comprehension. These amendments are in the new bill, the agency is not up and running, about 55,000 federal workers may have lost their collective bargaining rights and the country is no safer now than September 10, 2001. All this was done in the name of patriotism and for a secure homeland.
Monday, December 02, 2002
President's Column - An administration that wants to gut all of the labor laws
In a speech before the Federalist Society on November 14, Labor Secretary Elaine L. Chao bragged that her Department's budget had been cut more than "any other Cabinet department in this Administration. As for her goals, she reiterated her plan to have Labor Department enforcement agencies beef up their compliance assistance activities; her intent to hold labor organizations more accountable for dues expenditures and handling of pension funds; and her commitment to reforming what she termed the Fair Labor Standards Act's "literally ancient" and "absurdly complex" white-collar exemptions.
The Labor Department is the only government agency entrusted with the laws governing the conditions and safety of America workers. The Fair Labor Standards Act, enacted in 1938, was to be a safety and health law to force companies to work employees on an 8 hour day. The FLSA has been turned into a law that governs how much overtime pay is paid to workers for working as many hours as the workers in 1938 or more. The average worker now works 60 hours or more a week.
Secretary Chao has a task force meeting with business interests on how to extend the FLSA to cover overtime only after 160 hours per month. Which would mean that employers could and would work employees as many hours per day or weeks they wished, without the penalty of paying overtime until those hours exceed the 160 hours per month, and would only be required to pay over time if the employees are not exempt for some other reason.
While this an affront to the Labor movement who have fought for the 8 hour day for over a hundred years, it could seriously affect the health of the workers. Countless studies have proven that long work hours over an extended period of time cause long-range health problems and accidents do happen. So it is more than just cheating of these employees, it could seriously affects their health.
In regard to the issue of "monitoring the unions," the Office of Labor Management Standards has been doing this since the passage of the Landrum Griffin Act. OLMS does it effectively, and does protects the union members. But I what of the corporate fraud that has gone on and cheated thousands of non-union workers of their pensions? This agency should be fully funded and ramped up for those frauds yet to surface.
There is the strong appearance that this Administration wants to gut all of the labor laws. This is predictable given the all effort the Labor Movement did in the 2000 and 2002 Elections to defeat the foes of worker protection. But why gut all the laws that protect the millions of workers not protected by labor contracts. After all, there are only 19 million workers in organized labor and millions of others. I understand anti-labor, but why anti-worker?
The Labor Department is the only government agency entrusted with the laws governing the conditions and safety of America workers. The Fair Labor Standards Act, enacted in 1938, was to be a safety and health law to force companies to work employees on an 8 hour day. The FLSA has been turned into a law that governs how much overtime pay is paid to workers for working as many hours as the workers in 1938 or more. The average worker now works 60 hours or more a week.
Secretary Chao has a task force meeting with business interests on how to extend the FLSA to cover overtime only after 160 hours per month. Which would mean that employers could and would work employees as many hours per day or weeks they wished, without the penalty of paying overtime until those hours exceed the 160 hours per month, and would only be required to pay over time if the employees are not exempt for some other reason.
While this an affront to the Labor movement who have fought for the 8 hour day for over a hundred years, it could seriously affect the health of the workers. Countless studies have proven that long work hours over an extended period of time cause long-range health problems and accidents do happen. So it is more than just cheating of these employees, it could seriously affects their health.
In regard to the issue of "monitoring the unions," the Office of Labor Management Standards has been doing this since the passage of the Landrum Griffin Act. OLMS does it effectively, and does protects the union members. But I what of the corporate fraud that has gone on and cheated thousands of non-union workers of their pensions? This agency should be fully funded and ramped up for those frauds yet to surface.
There is the strong appearance that this Administration wants to gut all of the labor laws. This is predictable given the all effort the Labor Movement did in the 2000 and 2002 Elections to defeat the foes of worker protection. But why gut all the laws that protect the millions of workers not protected by labor contracts. After all, there are only 19 million workers in organized labor and millions of others. I understand anti-labor, but why anti-worker?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)