Hide the truth before the election; and by the way "Shhhhh."

[jimpeel]

It seems that the administration is trying to get federal contractors to not conform with the law and urged them not to sent out layoff notices. Those notices would go out not only ahead of the layoffs but ahead of the election as well. This tactic violates the WARN Act.

SOURCE

Administration again urges contractors not to warn of layoffs, despite defense cuts

Published September 29, 2012
FoxNews.com

Read more:​

The Obama administration has doubled down on its plea to defense contractors not to warn employees about possible layoffs due to looming budget cuts -- going so far as to offer to cover legal fees in compensation challenges.

The move drew a stern rebuke Friday from South Dakota Republican Sen. John Thune, since federal law requires employers to give notice if mass layoffs are likely.

"For the second time, the Obama administration has now encouraged government contractors to ignore the WARN Act and hold off on warning employees about possible layoffs due to the looming sequestration cuts,” Thune, lead author of the Sequestration Transparency Act, said Friday.

The offer to pay the legal fees was included in a memorandum issued by the administration Friday that also restated the Labor Department's position from July that contractors should not issue written notices to employees because of the "uncertainty" over the across-the-board cuts to the defense budget and other federal spending that will occur Jan. 2 unless Congress reaches a new deal.

The notices are required under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act and generally require employers with more than 100 employees to provide 60-day notices of "mass layoffs if they are reasonably foreseeable."

<MORE>​

 

[2minkey]

"The offer to pay the legal fees was included in a memorandum issued by the administration Friday that also restated the Labor Department's position from July that contractors should not issue written notices to employees because of the "uncertainty" over the across-the-board cuts to the defense budget and other federal spending that will occur Jan. 2 unless Congress reaches a new deal."

what offer??? this shit pops up out of nowhere in the article. is fox unable to hire competent writers or do they assume their audience is too dumb to notice?

 

[Gonz]

The Obama administration has doubled down on its plea to defense contractors not to warn employees about possible layoffs due to looming budget cuts -- going so far as to offer to cover legal fees in compensation challenges.

The opening paragraph...

 

[2minkey]

yeah but there's a difference between a mention and an evidenced explanation, and it's more the former. foxnews readers (er, "readers" suggests some literacy... perhaps "viewers" is better) typically don't need -or desire - the latter. better to just chant when the bell dings.

that being said there's obviously an attempt at manipulating votes here.

 

[Winky]

While I'm inclined to agree with you that the mythical average viewer lack the ability to form a cogent thought...
At the end of the day this is the government telling the private sector to disregard a regulation that they implemented.
Clear away all the pap and it is plain to see that government meddling in the private sector doesn't work.

 

[jimpeel]

"The offer to pay the legal fees was included in a memorandum issued by the administration Friday that also restated the Labor Department's position from July that contractors should not issue written notices to employees because of the "uncertainty" over the across-the-board cuts to the defense budget and other federal spending that will occur Jan. 2 unless Congress reaches a new deal."

what offer??? this shit pops up out of nowhere in the article. is fox unable to hire competent writers or do they assume their audience is too dumb to notice?

Here ya go. Read paragraphs 2 & 3.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda/2012/m-12-19.pdf

September 28,2012
M-12-19
MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERS AND SENIOR
PRocuREMENT EXECUTIVES OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
FROM: F FEDERAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
JOSEPH G. JORDAN
ADMINISTRATOR

SUBJECT: Guidance on Allowable Contracting Costs Associated with the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act

The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 2101-2109, gen.erally requires employers with at least 100 employees to provide written notice to affected employees 60 days before ordering certain plant closings or mass layoffs if they are reasonably foreseeable. On July 30, 2012, the Department of Labor (DOL), which is the Federal agency responsible for administering the WARN Act, issued Training and Employment Guidance Letter N·o. 3-12 addressing the WARN Act's requirements in the context of the potential across-the-board budget cuts (known as sequestration) scheduled to occur on January 2, 2013 if Congress fails to act. DOL concluded that it is neither necessary nor appropriate for Federal contractors to provide WARN Act notice to employees 60 days in advance of the potential sequestration because of uncertainty about whether sequestration will occur and, if it did, what effect it would have on particular contracts, among other factors: In reaching this conclusion, DOL explained that giving notice in these circumstances would waste States' resources in undertaking employment assistance activities where none are needed and create unnecessary anxiety and uncertainty for workers.

Despite DOL's guidance, some contractors have indicated they are still considering issuing WARN Act notices, and some have inquired about' whether Federal contracting agencies would cover WARN Act-related costs in connection with the potential sequestration. To further minimize the potential for waste and disruption associated with the issuance of unwarranted layoff notices; this memorandum provides guidance regarding the allowability of certain liability and litigation costs associated with WARN Act compliance. Specifically, if (1) sequestration occurs and an agency terminates or modifies a contract that necessitates that the contractor order a plant closing or mass layoff of a type subject to WARN Act requirements, and (2) that contractor has followed a course of action consistent with DOL guidance; then any resulting employee compensation costs for WARN Act liability as determined by a court, as well as attorneys' fees and other litigation costs (irrespective of litigation outcome), would qualify as allowable costs and be covered by the contracting agency, if otherwise reasonable and allocable.

This guidance does not alter existing rights, responsibilities, obligations, or limitations under individual contract provisions or the governing cost principles set forth in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and other applicable law. Thus, agencies may treat as allowable other costs potentially associated with sequestration, including WARN Act-related costs arising under circumstances not specified in this guidance, based on the usual cost principles of allocability, allowability, and reasonableness as set forth in the FAR.

 

[2minkey]

hah thanks per posting that. very chicago huh?

 

[jimpeel]

Chicago!!! That's a code word for racists used against our dear Presidente!

 

[2minkey]

thanks for mentioning that.

 

[jimpeel]

Lord knows, they are applying racism to everything these days. "Cool" was the last one I recall.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/cbc-staff-opposition-to-obama-is-racist/article/1342346#.UGmq_a5w6lY

Angela Rye, Executive Director of the Congressional Black Caucus, argued that President Obama has struggled during his first term due to racially-motivated opposition from conservatives who dislike having a black president.

"This is probably the toughest presidential term in my lifetime," Rye said during CSPAN's Q&A yesterday. "I think that a lot of what the president has experienced is because he's black. You know, whether it's questioning his intellect or whether or not he's Ivy League. It's always either he's not educated enough or he's too educated; or he's too black or he's not black enough; he's too Christian or not Christian enough. There are all these things where he has to walk this very fine line to even be successful."

She said that "a lot" of conservative opposition is racially-charged, citing the use of the word "cool" in an attack ad launched by Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS superPAC.

"There's an ad, talking about [how] the president is too cool, [asking] is he too cool? And there's this music that reminds me of, you know, some of the blaxploitation films from the 70s playing in the background, him with his sunglasses," Rye said. "And to me it was just very racially-charged. They weren't asking if Bush was too cool, but, yet, people say that that's the number one person they'd love to have a beer with. So, if that's not cool I dont know what is.

She added that "even 'cool,' the term 'cool,' could in some ways be deemed racial [in this instance]."

 

[2minkey]

and you're all too happy to follow "them" right into the flood of raw sewage... does karl rove play off of certain stereotypes? sure he does. the right often pulls that willie horton shit. they ain't no dummies, it resonates with the dipshit nativist base and gets them votes. so what? it's both obvious and amusing. it's even more amusing when it's in the form of "i dare you to call me a racist," which turns big fat blobs like rush limbaugh into wee little helpless victims. and that's what all you lolly boys really want anyway. so you can complain more.

 

[Winky]

I know John Galt but who is karl rove?

 

[2minkey]

oh god not with the shitty self-help cult nonsense again.

 

[Winky]

that's right everyone is supposed to want an Obama phone

 

[2minkey]

that has nothing to do with your rationalizing your own laziness.

 

[Winky]

so this is all about me?

 

[2minkey]

of course it is, sugar. the squeaky wheel and all.

 

[Winky]

well thank heavens, up to this point I've lived my life
as a card a carrying member of the silent majority.
Figures that by the time we spoke up we'd be a minority?

 

[Winky]

The first person to mention the Massachusetts furlough program in the 1988 presidential campaign was Al Gore.

 

[2minkey]

and the first person to vigorously exploit that fellow and all the fear he symbolized to dipshit suburbanite blonds was...