An unprecedented nor’easter that ravaged the northeast last weekend with snow, wind, ice, fallen trees, and downed wires, left more than 820,000 Connecticut residences and businesses without electric power as of last Sunday. Some in Connecticut and Massachusetts remained still, after a week, without power. The storm arrived just two months after Tropical Storm Irene left nearly the same number of customers without power, some also for a week.

Many school districts in Connecticut have been closed for a full week, with school buildings that have generators having been turned into shelters for those needing hot meals and protection from evening subzero temperatures. Long lines at gas stations, reminiscent of the Carter presidency shortages, became a familiar sight in some areas. Halloween was officially “cancelled” in many towns, and many small businesses, already struggling due to both the economy, in general, as well as recent tax increases in Connecticut, have now suffered two full weeks of losses this year due to the lack of power.

Connecticut Light & Power (CL&P), a subsidiary of Northeast Utilities (NU), the state’s main electric utility,  reports that storm-related repairs are expected to cost between $75 million and $100 million. The company, which, like other utility companies affected by the storm, had to import line crews from other states, set a goal of 99% restoration of power by midnight, November 6th, a goal it was unable to meet.

But the serious tangle of trees and wires on the ground also mirrors the messy mixture of honest outrage of Connecticut residents and the political grandstanding of the state’s Democratic politicians who have had, in fact, a marriage of convenience with the mega-utility. 

In response to the anger and frustration of Connecticut residents and businessowners, there is plenty of Democratic finger-pointing and blaming to go around. Democratic and Working Families Party Governor Dannel Malloy, and Democratic lawmakers, are vowing to hold CL&P’s feet to the fire. Democratic Speaker of the State House, Christopher Donovan, a candidate for Congress, has suggested that CL&P be fined for not restoring power to customers sooner. Democratic Attorney General George Jepsen has called for an investigation into the utility company. And Jeff Butler, chief operating officer of CL&P, appears always ready to draw fire with his statements about how the company is “frustrated” that it has not been able to obtain more line crews, and how it has not met its stated goals. An interesting cast of characters, many of whom are also prepping Connecticut residents for rate increases to pay for the restoration for two major storms or “fines,” if they are imposed.

There are some legitimate problems with CL&P.

(more…)

On the 26th of October, DOL rescinded the 2007 Form LM-30 (conflicts-of-interests reports) and ignored statutory language to eliminate thousands of union officials from disclosing potential conflicts-of-interests when it created the 2011 Form LM-30.  DOL’s Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS) continued to lower standards by creating new exclusions and loopholes for ethically-challenged union officials to hide their activities.

As previously noted on BigGovernment.com, Obama’s OLMS Director John Lund has his own conflict-of-interest problems since he arrived at the U.S. Department of Labor regarding his Big Labor clients.  Lund has teamed up with similarly-conflicted former AFL-CIO lawyer, and now DOL’s Deputy Solicitor of Labor Deborah Greenfield.  (Greenfield was suing DOL to try to eliminate 2007 Form LM-30 disclosure reports, the one’s that the Solicitor of Labor’s office just approved eliminating.)   It is not surprising with these two at DOL, that it has chosen to promulgate a rule that guts union officer conflicts-of-interest reporting.

John Lund’s union clients and Deborah Greenfield’s AFL-CIO comrades will directly benefit from DOL’s new rule, and under their advice will accomplish what Greenfield’s AFL-CIO lawsuit couldn’t accomplish through the courts.

Even though 'Jobs' is supposed to be the Obama Administration's #1 priority, it appears that the U.S. Labor Department's focus is on regs that will only help union bosses.

The Labor Department has even become so bold that it does not appear to care what it writes as justification for its actions.   For example, the LM-30 final rule describes an obvious potential for a conflict-of-interest even as it states there is no potential for conflict-of-interest.

“Employers have historically agreed to compensate stewards, safety and health committee representatives, and others for such work because they see it as adding value to their organizations. …Having employees serve on employee assistance programs and wellness committees is also seen as a cost-effective business decision by many employers. The Department concurs with those commenters who stated that union leave and no docking arrangements increase the speed of grievance adjustments, and otherwise benefit labor-management relations. The Department does not view the section 202 reporting provisions as requiring the reporting of such mutually beneficial arrangements between employers and employees.”

It is bizarre.

(more…)

Has President Barack Obama been deceiving America, with his Ethics Executive Order 13490?  It certainly appears that the actions of the Obama Administration are far from his recent statement that he has “put into place the toughest ethics laws of any Administration in history [pause] in history.” A host of Obama’s appointments call into question the President’s commitment to his own Ethics Order.  Appointments such as U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) Sec. Hilda Solis, DOL Deputy Solicitor Deborah Greenfield, and NLRB Board member Craig Becker undermine Obama’s claim of “toughest ethics.”

Now, the National Right To Work Committee introduces John Lund,  Obama’s “overseer” of union financial reporting and disclosure at DOL’s Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS).  This Obama appointee is a former director of the now-defunct Pacific Northwest Labor College,  a former SEIU union employee , a fomer IUOE union employee, and former director of the University of Wisconsin School for Workers.   Lund’s appointment means that he is now in charge of investigating financial mismanagement and irregularities by the very labor union officials he has trained for decades. (click to view the NRTW shocking handout on Lund)

Big Labor Payback Job One for Obama

Even though Obama campaigned on transparency and a focus on ethics, cronies at DOL focused on eliminating basic financial union disclosure and union officials’ conflict-of-interest disclosures requirements.

At DOL, John Lund cut the number of labor union investigators, rescinded disclosure of union officer benefits, eliminated financial reporting for unions like the Wisconsin Education Association Council, and eliminated conflict-of-interest reporting for thousands of union officials.  Each of these actions benefits Big Labor Bosses, but undercuts those forced to pay union dues and fees as a condition of employment.

John Lund Conflicts-of-Interest

(more…)