Little-Acorn
Well-Known Member
In 1988, a veto-proof Democrat Congress passed the WARN act, which required large employers to notify workers facing potential layoffs, 60 days before such layoffs were expected to take place. It became law without President Reagan's signature.
Now, with sequestration (automatic cuts across the board in govt spending, including in Defense) scheduled to take place on Jan. 1, 2013, employers such as large defense contractors are required to send out notices to all employees facing layoffs. Federal law allows no exceptions or extensions for employers covered by the WARN Act.
This means those companies must send out thousands of layoff warning notices, a few days before the November elections, required by Federal law. Many states also have state laws similar to the Federal WARN Act, requiring such advance notices of layoffs.
And so the White House, whose Constitutional duty is to make sure all Federal laws are obeyed, is begging those contractors to violate both Federal and State law. And they are even offering bribes, paying the companies' legal expenses if they will challenge the (until-today-clear) Federal laws in court and so delay sending the notices until after the elections.
Is there any corruption or violation the Obamanites won't commit to try to retain power, while refusing to do the job the people elected them to do?
Is it November yet?
------------------------------------------------------
http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hil...tractors-once-again-dont-issue-layoff-notices
Obama administration tells contractors again: Don’t issue layoff notices
by Jeremy Herb - 09/28/12 07:25 PM ET
The Obama administration issued new guidance intended for defense contractors Friday afternoon, reiterating the administration’s position that the companies should not be issuing layoff notices over sequestration.
The Labor Department issued guidance in July saying it would be “inappropriate” for contractors to issue notices of potential layoffs tied to sequestration cuts. But a few contractors, most notably Lockheed Martin, said they still were considering whether to issue the notices — which would be sent out just days before the November election.
But the Friday guidance from the Office of Management and Budget raised the stakes in the dispute, telling contractors that they would be compensated for legal costs if layoffs occur due to contract cancellations under sequestration — but only if the contractors follow the Labor guidance.
The guidance said that if plant closings or mass layoffs occur under sequestration, then “employee compensation costs for [Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification] WARN act liability as determined by a court” would be paid for covered by the contracting federal agency.
Senate Republicans, who accused the White House of trying to hide job losses after the first guidance, said Friday that the new OMB statement “puts politics ahead of American workers.”
“The Obama Administration is cynically trying to skirt the WARN Act to keep the American people in the dark about this looming national security and fiscal crisis,” Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) said in a statement. “The president should insist that companies act in accordance with the clearly stated law and move forward with the layoff notices.”
Now, with sequestration (automatic cuts across the board in govt spending, including in Defense) scheduled to take place on Jan. 1, 2013, employers such as large defense contractors are required to send out notices to all employees facing layoffs. Federal law allows no exceptions or extensions for employers covered by the WARN Act.
This means those companies must send out thousands of layoff warning notices, a few days before the November elections, required by Federal law. Many states also have state laws similar to the Federal WARN Act, requiring such advance notices of layoffs.
And so the White House, whose Constitutional duty is to make sure all Federal laws are obeyed, is begging those contractors to violate both Federal and State law. And they are even offering bribes, paying the companies' legal expenses if they will challenge the (until-today-clear) Federal laws in court and so delay sending the notices until after the elections.
Is there any corruption or violation the Obamanites won't commit to try to retain power, while refusing to do the job the people elected them to do?
Is it November yet?
------------------------------------------------------
http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hil...tractors-once-again-dont-issue-layoff-notices
Obama administration tells contractors again: Don’t issue layoff notices
by Jeremy Herb - 09/28/12 07:25 PM ET
The Obama administration issued new guidance intended for defense contractors Friday afternoon, reiterating the administration’s position that the companies should not be issuing layoff notices over sequestration.
The Labor Department issued guidance in July saying it would be “inappropriate” for contractors to issue notices of potential layoffs tied to sequestration cuts. But a few contractors, most notably Lockheed Martin, said they still were considering whether to issue the notices — which would be sent out just days before the November election.
But the Friday guidance from the Office of Management and Budget raised the stakes in the dispute, telling contractors that they would be compensated for legal costs if layoffs occur due to contract cancellations under sequestration — but only if the contractors follow the Labor guidance.
The guidance said that if plant closings or mass layoffs occur under sequestration, then “employee compensation costs for [Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification] WARN act liability as determined by a court” would be paid for covered by the contracting federal agency.
Senate Republicans, who accused the White House of trying to hide job losses after the first guidance, said Friday that the new OMB statement “puts politics ahead of American workers.”
“The Obama Administration is cynically trying to skirt the WARN Act to keep the American people in the dark about this looming national security and fiscal crisis,” Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) said in a statement. “The president should insist that companies act in accordance with the clearly stated law and move forward with the layoff notices.”
