Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Hillary Dropped DOL Sec Tom Perez Because Of Charges Of Cover-up & Corruption At OSHA
Tom Perez, US secretary of Labor may have been dropped from consideration by Hillary Clinton be causes of charges of corruption and a cover-up by Secretary Perez who approved the firing of Federal OSHA Lawyer, AFGE Steward and Workplace Whistleblower Protection investigator Darrell Whitman. Whitman has charged that he and other AFGE OSHA WPP have been bullied terrorized and terminated due to their investigations of retaliation against OSHA whistleblowers.
Tom Perez Accused Of Okaying Whistleblower Retaliations-in a June 26 letter to American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) President J. David Cox first reported by the Washington Free Beacon’s Bill McMorris — called for a special prosecutor to investigate DOL.
http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/22/tom-perez-accused-of-okaying-whistleblower-retaliations/#ixzz4Grl5Y0HD
KATHRYN WATSON
Reporter
10:36 PM 07/22/2016
Labor Sec. Tom Perez speaks at a Clinton campaign event in Chula Vista, Calif., May 21, 2016. (YouTube screengrab)
Labor Department Secretary Tom Perez, who was on Hillary Clinton’s vice-presidential shortlist, covered up “widespread corruption within his agency, a whistleblower demanding an independent investigation claimed.
Former Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regional investigator Darrell Whitman — in a June 26 letter to American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) President J. David Cox first reported by the Washington Free Beacon’s Bill McMorris — called for a special prosecutor to investigate DOL.
Whitman claimed Perez retaliated against him and other OSHA investigators who reported abuse, fraud and discrimination in the department.
Whitman said Perez, rather than investigate his complaints in a May 2014 letter, “authorized and/or ratified a retaliatory investigation, which led to my removal, the removal of two other highly qualified and experienced investigators, and the resignation of a fourth highly qualified investigator who was disgusted by these developments.”
“By the end of 2015, five of the six Region IX investigators who actively objected to the corruption had been removed or forced out of their jobs,” Whitman told Cox.
Whitman said the DOL Office of Inspector General (IG) and the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) “cannot conduct a credible investigation,” because they’re too close to the situation. Whitman asked Cox to support his push for the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate DOL corruption. (RELATED: Department of Labor Employees To Rally Against Obama Officials Over Discrimination Claims)
Pundits sometimes place Perez on Clinton’s VP shortlist, however Clinton announced Friday she will run with Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine. The Democratic National Convention begins Monday.
This isn’t the first time someone has claimed Perez quashed whistleblowers. Congress nearly halted his appointment in 2013 because Perez, while head of the Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Rights Division, prevented a whistleblower’s $200 million discrimination lawsuitfrom reaching the U.S. Supreme Court.
Follow Kathryn on Twitter
Send tips to katie [at] dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
press release you will receive on Monday, August 8.
Whistleblower Says Potential Hillary Veep Covered Up Corruption
Former Labor Department inspector accuses Perez of squashing whistleblowers
http://freebeacon.com/issues/whistleblower-says-potential-hillary-veep-covered-corruption/
Tom Perez / AP
BY: Bill McMorris
July 21, 2016 2:00 pm
A Labor Department whistleblower accused one of Hillary Clinton’s potential vice presidential picks of corruption and called for an investigation into corruption at the department.
Darrell Whitman, a former inspector at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, published a letter calling for a special prosecutor to investigate allegations of corruption at the Labor Department. Whitman said that Labor Secretary Tom Perez, who is on the short list to become Hillary Clinton’s running mate, retaliated against investigators who attempted to curb corruption at the agency.
He sent the letter to American Federation of Government Employees President J. David Cox asking for the union’s support in his effort to protect whistleblowers at the department in late June.
“Evidence indicates the secretary authorized and/or ratified a retaliatory investigation, which led to my removal, the removal of two other highly qualified and experienced investigators, and the resignation of a fourth highly qualified investigator who was disgusted by these developments,” the letter says. “By the end of 2015, five of the six Region IX investigators who actively objected to the corruption had been removed or forced out of their jobs.”
Secretary Perez is no stranger to allegations of abuse from whistleblowers.
Senate Republicans nearly blocked his 2013 appointment over his handling of a corruption lawsuit as the head of the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division. Perez scrapped a whistleblower suit worth $200 million against the city of St. Paul, Minn. after the city government dropped a Supreme Court appeal that threatened to reverse a precedent on the doctrine of disparate impact.
A House Oversight Committee investigation concluded that Perez acted inappropriately, while the St. Paul whistleblower called his treatment “appalling.”
“Perez took steps attempting to cover-up his involvement in the quid pro quo and offered numerous misleading statements to investigators that are contradicted by the evidence,” then-committee chairman Darrell Issa (R., Calif.) said in a release. “Mr. Perez’s conduct has stained the integrity of the Justice Department and created serious doubt about its commitment to protecting the legal rights of whistleblowers who come forward with legitimate information about abuses of taxpayer funds.”
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R., Tenn.) condemned the Senate Labor Committee for advancing his nomination, saying Perez was “wheeling and dealing … in a way that is inappropriate for an assistant attorney general.”
Whitman said in his letter to Cox that Perez continued to use retaliatory tactics to handle whistleblowers at the Labor Department.
“Because of the involvement of the Secretary of Labor in a retaliatory investigation/cover-up and possible obstruction of justice, the DOL cannot conduct a credible investigation,” Whitman said in the June 27 letter. “It is a tragic irony that the Department of Labor ranks near the bottom of the federal government in its respect for employee rights and interests. But that tragedy is compounded when it affects the ability of DOL employees to provide services to the American working public.”
Neither the union, nor the department responded to request for comment.
comments [at] freebeacon.com
Open Call for a Special Prosecutor to Investigate Corruption in the U.S. Department of Labor DOL by
Public Safety Advocate & Department of Labor OSHA Whistleblower Protection Program WPP Whistleblower Darrell Whitman
J. David Cox, President
American Federation of Government Employees AFGE
6/27/16
Dear Brother Cox,
I am a member of AFGE Local 2391. Up to May 2015, I was a union steward and the AFGE representative to the San Francisco Central Labor Council. In May 2015, I was removed from my position as a regional investigator with OSHA’s Region IX Whistleblower Protection Program. For several years, I unsuccessfully attempted to report and gain corrective action for wide-spread corruption in Region IX, which led to: the termination of the previous union steward, abuse of OSHA employees, including discrimination against employees with disabilities, a general disregard of obligations under the Collective Bargaining Agreement, retaliation against American workers who sought assistance from the Whistleblower Protection Program, attacks against myself and four other investigators who objected to this corruption, and the falsification of official documents to hide the corruption.
In May 2014, I sent a letter to U.S. Secretary of Labor, Thomas Perez, copied to my political representatives in California, the Chairs of the House and Senate committees that oversee OSHA, and to the White House. The letter summarized documented evidence of the corruption in Region IX OSHA, and at the end of the letter I asked for a “creditable audit/investigation of OSHA Region IX.” The Secretary’s office refused to respond to the letter and failed to direct me to report the situation to the DOL Inspector General and/or the Office of Special Counsel, which is the standard protocol in these situations. Rather, evidence indicates the Secretary authorized and/or ratified a retaliatory investigation, which led to my removal, the removal of two other highly qualified and experienced investigators, and the resignation of a fourth highly qualified investigator who was disgusted by these developments. By the end of 2015, five of the six Region IX investigators who actively objected to the corruption had been removed or forced out of their jobs.
Following my removal, I was approached and offered legal representation by Tom Divine, legal director of the Government Accountability Project (GAP), who had taken notice of press coverage about the affair. On April 6, 2016, GAP filed a complaint with the Office of Special Counsel, which is now awaiting action. The complaint was supported by a 217-page sworn affidavit which cited more than 340 exhibits documenting the corruption. For reasons discussed below, Mr. Devine believes that the Office of Special Counsel will be unable to conduct a credible investigation, and after the OSC completes their initial evaluation of the complaint he plans to go to Congress with a request for the appointment of a special prosecutor for this purpose.
The Whistleblower Protection Program represents the most powerful federal programs directed at workplace and public safety and health. With the substantial withdrawal of direct federal action to protect employees and the public, employees have become the nation’s front line defense against safety and health threats under twenty-two statutes. These statutes extend protection to employees in the vast majority of American workplaces, including: air carriers, railroads, nuclear facilities, food and agricultural services, truck and public transportation, pipelines, ocean shipping, and financial services. OSHA’s management of the WBPP has been under scrutiny for many years, prompting two outside audits in 2010, which unfortunately were met by OSHA management with a cover-up rather than a correction of the problems. The corruption represented by this cover up now extends into other DOL agencies, including the DOL Office of Solicitor and the DOL Office of Inspector General.
It is OSC’s practice to prepare an investigation, but task it to the Inspector General of the Department where the complaint arose. In this case, that would be tasked to the DOL Inspector General. However, because of the involvement of the Secretary of Labor in a retaliatory investigation/cover-up and possible obstruction of justice, the DOL cannot conduct a credible investigation. Further, because of the gravity of the charges reflected in my OSC complaint, and the apparent collapse of the WBPP, it is imperative that a thorough investigation be conducted. It is for these reasons that we are asking for your support in making this call for the appointment of a special prosecutor.
AFGE has a special role to play in ensuring not only the rights and interests of federal workers, but in protecting the public interest. It is a tragic irony that the Department of Labor ranks near the bottom of the federal government in its respect for employee rights and interests. But that tragedy is compounded when it affects the ability of DOL employees to provide services to the American working public. The union grievance process is largely broken. In part, because many DOL managers regard it and the CBA as more a nuisance than a contract – if they don’t respect employee legal rights, why would they respect the CBA? And in part because of the cronyism and careerism that dominates DOL management.
I was very fortunate to have the faithful support of my brother and sister union members, and the tireless commitment of other AFGE stewards who went the 3rd, 4th, and sometimes 5th mile to try to successfully resolve the problems in OSHA Region IX. I would not have been able to survive and continue the struggle against corruption without their support. The American public should be able to look with pride and confidence on the work of these faithful union members, and understand the critical roles they perform in the public interest. But evidenced by my OSC complaint, our members cannot enjoy a workplace free of hostile and corrupt management without the AFGE’s leadership in directly attacking this problem.
I hope you will give careful consideration to this request and discuss it with AFGE and other union leaders. In supporting this call, you will be reaffirming the importance of transparency and good management, and will reconfirm the value of unions and their membership.
Respectfully,
Darrell Whitman
Public Safety Advocate &
Department of Labor OSHA Whistleblower Protection Program WPP Whistleblower
publicsafety [at] gmail.com
Federal Agency That Protects Whistleblowers Accused of Retaliating Against One of its Own
http://www.fairwarning.org/2016/04/ex-whistleblower-investigator-blows-the-whistle-on-osha/
By Stuart Silverstein on April 11, 2016
Darrell Whitman, former whistleblower investigator for the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration
For nearly five years, Darrell Whitman was a federal investigator who probed whistleblowers’ complaints about being fired or otherwise punished for exposing alleged corporate misconduct.
He wanted to help whistleblowers, viewing them as a crucial line of defense against employers who violated health and safety standards or wasted taxpayer dollars.
But now Whitman, 70, is blowing the whistle himself. And he is accusing the agency where he used to work, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the branch of the Labor Department whose duties include protecting whistleblowers.
Whitman, in a whistleblower claim filed last week with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, charges that the San Francisco regional office of OSHA’s Whistleblower Protection Program routinely dumped legitimate complaints. What’s more, Whitman’s complaint says his disclosures to senior OSHA and Labor Department officials -– all the way up to Labor Secretary Thomas Perez — “did not spark good faith corrective action. Rather, they led to investigations of Mr. Whitman that eventually formed the basis for his termination” last May. He claims that three other investigators who protested the office’s practices also were fired or pushed out.
The result, Whitman claims, is that safety hazards and wasteful spending persist while whistleblowers often are silenced by employers that get away with illegal retaliation.
Whitman’s complaint largely tracks the concerns he raised in letters to federal officials (examples here and here) and in interviews with FairWarning and previously with KNTV (NBC in the Bay Area). He zeroes in on his former boss, Joshua Paul, and other officials in OSHA’s San Francisco regional office, which oversees California, Arizona, Nevada and Hawaii.
Sometimes, Whitman said, Paul ordered investigators to water down their findings or reversed the findings without explanation. In other instances, Whitman said, cases would be closed out after quickie investigations that barely examined the retaliation claims. Other times, he said, Paul dragged his feet in completing investigations for three years or more, apparently to put pressure on whistleblowers to settle.
‘The companies would scream bloody murder’
Whitman told FairWarning that those problems in San Francisco reflect a broader breakdown across the 10 regional OSHA offices that administer the whistleblower program. He maintains that the program often is too cozy with business to take on rogue employers. “There’s open hostility within OSHA to this program,” Whitman said.
If the program did its job, “the companies would scream bloody murder,” added Whitman, an attorney with a PhD in politics who has taught college, served as a campaign consultant and worked as a lawyer in government and private practice.
Whitman’s complaint calls for his reinstatement, back pay and damages, while also seeking an investigation of Paul “and any other relevant DOL [Department of Labor] officials.”
OSHA disputed Whitman’s allegations. In a written response, Jordan Barab, a Labor Department deputy assistant secretary, said: “To suggest that OSHA is not committed to protecting workers or that it is arbitrarily dismissing cases is not only absurd, it’s a huge disservice to the investigators who work hard to protect the rights of whistleblowers across the country. The Whistleblower Protection Program is a small staff with an enormous task, and that staff is committed, at every level of the organization, to protecting the rights of workers and to upholding the law.”
As for Paul, in November he moved from his job as senior investigator overseeing whistleblower investigations in San Francisco to a new role as coordinator of the region’s alternative dispute resolution program, which works on whistleblower cases. OSHA said the job change was unrelated to Whitman’s allegations. OSHA turned down a request for an interview with Paul, saying it “would not be appropriate” for him to respond to Whitman’s allegations.
OSHA is responsible for enforcing whistleblower provisions under 22 federal laws that cover everything from nuclear power plants and public transit to the trucking, railroad and airline industries.
But as Congress has assigned OSHA one category of workers after another, some critics say its staff has been swamped by the added workload, creating incentives to dismiss cases to keep up.
WW8-7-16 OSHA WPP Investigator Whitman On Cover-up and Corruption
https://soundcloud.com/workweek-radio/ww8-7-16-osha-wpp-investigator-whitman-on-cover-up-and-corruption
Darrell Whitman, a fired Federal OSHA lawyer at the Whistleblower Protection Program WPP talks about the failure of the Office Of Special Counsel OSC to protect federal employees who are whistleblowers and the cover-up and corruption at the Department of Labor and among top Obama officials.
He discusses the obstruction of justice and the complete failure to enforce the federal osha protection laws while putting corporate lawyers on the boards of OSHA to give guidance to the regulatory agency.
Interview was done on August 7, 2016
Additional media:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WA0nLj6sZ5Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfr7rtfqeFc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfr7rtfqeFc
https://soundcloud.com/workweek-radio/ww3-29-16-osha-dol-manager-corruption-with-darrell-whitman-and-adam-finkel
http://www.dailycensored.com/ohsagate/
https://soundcloud.com/workweek-radio/ww6-2-15-osha-lawyer-darrell-whitman-interviewed-part-1
https://soundcloud.com/workweek-radio/ww6-9-15-osha-lawyer-darrell-whitman-interviewed-part-2
https://soundcloud.com/workweek-radio/ww3-17-15-osha-corruption-with-madry-and-usw-oil-strike
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfr7rtfqeFc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gotQhC1lHE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08OY7kMydSs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQ3zii0T3z4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQ3zii0T3z4
https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/10/28/18779351.php
HIG TestAmerica
http://higcapital.com/portfolio/company/98
http://www.mintpressnews.com/federal-whistleblower-investigator-fired-after-blowing-the-whistle-on-his-own-agency/210347/
Madry Court Cases
http://www.oalj.dol.gov/Decisions/ALJ/TSC/2013/MADRY_MICHAEL_J_v_EMLAB_PandK_LLC_2013TSC00001_(OCT_09_2015)_130744_ORDER_PB.PDF#search=michael%20madry
http://www.cc.com/episodes/xiptmz/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-february-26--2015---olivia-wilde-season-20-ep-20067
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/investigations/OSHA-Whistleblower-Investigator-Blows-Whistle-on-Own-Agency–293711041.html
Production of KPFA WorkWeek Radio
workweek [at] kpfa.org
http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/22/tom-perez-accused-of-okaying-whistleblower-retaliations/#ixzz4Grl5Y0HD
KATHRYN WATSON
Reporter
10:36 PM 07/22/2016
Labor Sec. Tom Perez speaks at a Clinton campaign event in Chula Vista, Calif., May 21, 2016. (YouTube screengrab)
Labor Department Secretary Tom Perez, who was on Hillary Clinton’s vice-presidential shortlist, covered up “widespread corruption within his agency, a whistleblower demanding an independent investigation claimed.
Former Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regional investigator Darrell Whitman — in a June 26 letter to American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) President J. David Cox first reported by the Washington Free Beacon’s Bill McMorris — called for a special prosecutor to investigate DOL.
Whitman claimed Perez retaliated against him and other OSHA investigators who reported abuse, fraud and discrimination in the department.
Whitman said Perez, rather than investigate his complaints in a May 2014 letter, “authorized and/or ratified a retaliatory investigation, which led to my removal, the removal of two other highly qualified and experienced investigators, and the resignation of a fourth highly qualified investigator who was disgusted by these developments.”
“By the end of 2015, five of the six Region IX investigators who actively objected to the corruption had been removed or forced out of their jobs,” Whitman told Cox.
Whitman said the DOL Office of Inspector General (IG) and the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) “cannot conduct a credible investigation,” because they’re too close to the situation. Whitman asked Cox to support his push for the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate DOL corruption. (RELATED: Department of Labor Employees To Rally Against Obama Officials Over Discrimination Claims)
Pundits sometimes place Perez on Clinton’s VP shortlist, however Clinton announced Friday she will run with Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine. The Democratic National Convention begins Monday.
This isn’t the first time someone has claimed Perez quashed whistleblowers. Congress nearly halted his appointment in 2013 because Perez, while head of the Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Rights Division, prevented a whistleblower’s $200 million discrimination lawsuitfrom reaching the U.S. Supreme Court.
Follow Kathryn on Twitter
Send tips to katie [at] dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
press release you will receive on Monday, August 8.
Whistleblower Says Potential Hillary Veep Covered Up Corruption
Former Labor Department inspector accuses Perez of squashing whistleblowers
http://freebeacon.com/issues/whistleblower-says-potential-hillary-veep-covered-corruption/
Tom Perez / AP
BY: Bill McMorris
July 21, 2016 2:00 pm
A Labor Department whistleblower accused one of Hillary Clinton’s potential vice presidential picks of corruption and called for an investigation into corruption at the department.
Darrell Whitman, a former inspector at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, published a letter calling for a special prosecutor to investigate allegations of corruption at the Labor Department. Whitman said that Labor Secretary Tom Perez, who is on the short list to become Hillary Clinton’s running mate, retaliated against investigators who attempted to curb corruption at the agency.
He sent the letter to American Federation of Government Employees President J. David Cox asking for the union’s support in his effort to protect whistleblowers at the department in late June.
“Evidence indicates the secretary authorized and/or ratified a retaliatory investigation, which led to my removal, the removal of two other highly qualified and experienced investigators, and the resignation of a fourth highly qualified investigator who was disgusted by these developments,” the letter says. “By the end of 2015, five of the six Region IX investigators who actively objected to the corruption had been removed or forced out of their jobs.”
Secretary Perez is no stranger to allegations of abuse from whistleblowers.
Senate Republicans nearly blocked his 2013 appointment over his handling of a corruption lawsuit as the head of the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division. Perez scrapped a whistleblower suit worth $200 million against the city of St. Paul, Minn. after the city government dropped a Supreme Court appeal that threatened to reverse a precedent on the doctrine of disparate impact.
A House Oversight Committee investigation concluded that Perez acted inappropriately, while the St. Paul whistleblower called his treatment “appalling.”
“Perez took steps attempting to cover-up his involvement in the quid pro quo and offered numerous misleading statements to investigators that are contradicted by the evidence,” then-committee chairman Darrell Issa (R., Calif.) said in a release. “Mr. Perez’s conduct has stained the integrity of the Justice Department and created serious doubt about its commitment to protecting the legal rights of whistleblowers who come forward with legitimate information about abuses of taxpayer funds.”
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R., Tenn.) condemned the Senate Labor Committee for advancing his nomination, saying Perez was “wheeling and dealing … in a way that is inappropriate for an assistant attorney general.”
Whitman said in his letter to Cox that Perez continued to use retaliatory tactics to handle whistleblowers at the Labor Department.
“Because of the involvement of the Secretary of Labor in a retaliatory investigation/cover-up and possible obstruction of justice, the DOL cannot conduct a credible investigation,” Whitman said in the June 27 letter. “It is a tragic irony that the Department of Labor ranks near the bottom of the federal government in its respect for employee rights and interests. But that tragedy is compounded when it affects the ability of DOL employees to provide services to the American working public.”
Neither the union, nor the department responded to request for comment.
comments [at] freebeacon.com
Open Call for a Special Prosecutor to Investigate Corruption in the U.S. Department of Labor DOL by
Public Safety Advocate & Department of Labor OSHA Whistleblower Protection Program WPP Whistleblower Darrell Whitman
J. David Cox, President
American Federation of Government Employees AFGE
6/27/16
Dear Brother Cox,
I am a member of AFGE Local 2391. Up to May 2015, I was a union steward and the AFGE representative to the San Francisco Central Labor Council. In May 2015, I was removed from my position as a regional investigator with OSHA’s Region IX Whistleblower Protection Program. For several years, I unsuccessfully attempted to report and gain corrective action for wide-spread corruption in Region IX, which led to: the termination of the previous union steward, abuse of OSHA employees, including discrimination against employees with disabilities, a general disregard of obligations under the Collective Bargaining Agreement, retaliation against American workers who sought assistance from the Whistleblower Protection Program, attacks against myself and four other investigators who objected to this corruption, and the falsification of official documents to hide the corruption.
In May 2014, I sent a letter to U.S. Secretary of Labor, Thomas Perez, copied to my political representatives in California, the Chairs of the House and Senate committees that oversee OSHA, and to the White House. The letter summarized documented evidence of the corruption in Region IX OSHA, and at the end of the letter I asked for a “creditable audit/investigation of OSHA Region IX.” The Secretary’s office refused to respond to the letter and failed to direct me to report the situation to the DOL Inspector General and/or the Office of Special Counsel, which is the standard protocol in these situations. Rather, evidence indicates the Secretary authorized and/or ratified a retaliatory investigation, which led to my removal, the removal of two other highly qualified and experienced investigators, and the resignation of a fourth highly qualified investigator who was disgusted by these developments. By the end of 2015, five of the six Region IX investigators who actively objected to the corruption had been removed or forced out of their jobs.
Following my removal, I was approached and offered legal representation by Tom Divine, legal director of the Government Accountability Project (GAP), who had taken notice of press coverage about the affair. On April 6, 2016, GAP filed a complaint with the Office of Special Counsel, which is now awaiting action. The complaint was supported by a 217-page sworn affidavit which cited more than 340 exhibits documenting the corruption. For reasons discussed below, Mr. Devine believes that the Office of Special Counsel will be unable to conduct a credible investigation, and after the OSC completes their initial evaluation of the complaint he plans to go to Congress with a request for the appointment of a special prosecutor for this purpose.
The Whistleblower Protection Program represents the most powerful federal programs directed at workplace and public safety and health. With the substantial withdrawal of direct federal action to protect employees and the public, employees have become the nation’s front line defense against safety and health threats under twenty-two statutes. These statutes extend protection to employees in the vast majority of American workplaces, including: air carriers, railroads, nuclear facilities, food and agricultural services, truck and public transportation, pipelines, ocean shipping, and financial services. OSHA’s management of the WBPP has been under scrutiny for many years, prompting two outside audits in 2010, which unfortunately were met by OSHA management with a cover-up rather than a correction of the problems. The corruption represented by this cover up now extends into other DOL agencies, including the DOL Office of Solicitor and the DOL Office of Inspector General.
It is OSC’s practice to prepare an investigation, but task it to the Inspector General of the Department where the complaint arose. In this case, that would be tasked to the DOL Inspector General. However, because of the involvement of the Secretary of Labor in a retaliatory investigation/cover-up and possible obstruction of justice, the DOL cannot conduct a credible investigation. Further, because of the gravity of the charges reflected in my OSC complaint, and the apparent collapse of the WBPP, it is imperative that a thorough investigation be conducted. It is for these reasons that we are asking for your support in making this call for the appointment of a special prosecutor.
AFGE has a special role to play in ensuring not only the rights and interests of federal workers, but in protecting the public interest. It is a tragic irony that the Department of Labor ranks near the bottom of the federal government in its respect for employee rights and interests. But that tragedy is compounded when it affects the ability of DOL employees to provide services to the American working public. The union grievance process is largely broken. In part, because many DOL managers regard it and the CBA as more a nuisance than a contract – if they don’t respect employee legal rights, why would they respect the CBA? And in part because of the cronyism and careerism that dominates DOL management.
I was very fortunate to have the faithful support of my brother and sister union members, and the tireless commitment of other AFGE stewards who went the 3rd, 4th, and sometimes 5th mile to try to successfully resolve the problems in OSHA Region IX. I would not have been able to survive and continue the struggle against corruption without their support. The American public should be able to look with pride and confidence on the work of these faithful union members, and understand the critical roles they perform in the public interest. But evidenced by my OSC complaint, our members cannot enjoy a workplace free of hostile and corrupt management without the AFGE’s leadership in directly attacking this problem.
I hope you will give careful consideration to this request and discuss it with AFGE and other union leaders. In supporting this call, you will be reaffirming the importance of transparency and good management, and will reconfirm the value of unions and their membership.
Respectfully,
Darrell Whitman
Public Safety Advocate &
Department of Labor OSHA Whistleblower Protection Program WPP Whistleblower
publicsafety [at] gmail.com
Federal Agency That Protects Whistleblowers Accused of Retaliating Against One of its Own
http://www.fairwarning.org/2016/04/ex-whistleblower-investigator-blows-the-whistle-on-osha/
By Stuart Silverstein on April 11, 2016
Darrell Whitman, former whistleblower investigator for the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration
For nearly five years, Darrell Whitman was a federal investigator who probed whistleblowers’ complaints about being fired or otherwise punished for exposing alleged corporate misconduct.
He wanted to help whistleblowers, viewing them as a crucial line of defense against employers who violated health and safety standards or wasted taxpayer dollars.
But now Whitman, 70, is blowing the whistle himself. And he is accusing the agency where he used to work, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the branch of the Labor Department whose duties include protecting whistleblowers.
Whitman, in a whistleblower claim filed last week with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, charges that the San Francisco regional office of OSHA’s Whistleblower Protection Program routinely dumped legitimate complaints. What’s more, Whitman’s complaint says his disclosures to senior OSHA and Labor Department officials -– all the way up to Labor Secretary Thomas Perez — “did not spark good faith corrective action. Rather, they led to investigations of Mr. Whitman that eventually formed the basis for his termination” last May. He claims that three other investigators who protested the office’s practices also were fired or pushed out.
The result, Whitman claims, is that safety hazards and wasteful spending persist while whistleblowers often are silenced by employers that get away with illegal retaliation.
Whitman’s complaint largely tracks the concerns he raised in letters to federal officials (examples here and here) and in interviews with FairWarning and previously with KNTV (NBC in the Bay Area). He zeroes in on his former boss, Joshua Paul, and other officials in OSHA’s San Francisco regional office, which oversees California, Arizona, Nevada and Hawaii.
Sometimes, Whitman said, Paul ordered investigators to water down their findings or reversed the findings without explanation. In other instances, Whitman said, cases would be closed out after quickie investigations that barely examined the retaliation claims. Other times, he said, Paul dragged his feet in completing investigations for three years or more, apparently to put pressure on whistleblowers to settle.
‘The companies would scream bloody murder’
Whitman told FairWarning that those problems in San Francisco reflect a broader breakdown across the 10 regional OSHA offices that administer the whistleblower program. He maintains that the program often is too cozy with business to take on rogue employers. “There’s open hostility within OSHA to this program,” Whitman said.
If the program did its job, “the companies would scream bloody murder,” added Whitman, an attorney with a PhD in politics who has taught college, served as a campaign consultant and worked as a lawyer in government and private practice.
Whitman’s complaint calls for his reinstatement, back pay and damages, while also seeking an investigation of Paul “and any other relevant DOL [Department of Labor] officials.”
OSHA disputed Whitman’s allegations. In a written response, Jordan Barab, a Labor Department deputy assistant secretary, said: “To suggest that OSHA is not committed to protecting workers or that it is arbitrarily dismissing cases is not only absurd, it’s a huge disservice to the investigators who work hard to protect the rights of whistleblowers across the country. The Whistleblower Protection Program is a small staff with an enormous task, and that staff is committed, at every level of the organization, to protecting the rights of workers and to upholding the law.”
As for Paul, in November he moved from his job as senior investigator overseeing whistleblower investigations in San Francisco to a new role as coordinator of the region’s alternative dispute resolution program, which works on whistleblower cases. OSHA said the job change was unrelated to Whitman’s allegations. OSHA turned down a request for an interview with Paul, saying it “would not be appropriate” for him to respond to Whitman’s allegations.
OSHA is responsible for enforcing whistleblower provisions under 22 federal laws that cover everything from nuclear power plants and public transit to the trucking, railroad and airline industries.
But as Congress has assigned OSHA one category of workers after another, some critics say its staff has been swamped by the added workload, creating incentives to dismiss cases to keep up.
WW8-7-16 OSHA WPP Investigator Whitman On Cover-up and Corruption
https://soundcloud.com/workweek-radio/ww8-7-16-osha-wpp-investigator-whitman-on-cover-up-and-corruption
Darrell Whitman, a fired Federal OSHA lawyer at the Whistleblower Protection Program WPP talks about the failure of the Office Of Special Counsel OSC to protect federal employees who are whistleblowers and the cover-up and corruption at the Department of Labor and among top Obama officials.
He discusses the obstruction of justice and the complete failure to enforce the federal osha protection laws while putting corporate lawyers on the boards of OSHA to give guidance to the regulatory agency.
Interview was done on August 7, 2016
Additional media:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WA0nLj6sZ5Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfr7rtfqeFc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfr7rtfqeFc
https://soundcloud.com/workweek-radio/ww3-29-16-osha-dol-manager-corruption-with-darrell-whitman-and-adam-finkel
http://www.dailycensored.com/ohsagate/
https://soundcloud.com/workweek-radio/ww6-2-15-osha-lawyer-darrell-whitman-interviewed-part-1
https://soundcloud.com/workweek-radio/ww6-9-15-osha-lawyer-darrell-whitman-interviewed-part-2
https://soundcloud.com/workweek-radio/ww3-17-15-osha-corruption-with-madry-and-usw-oil-strike
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfr7rtfqeFc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gotQhC1lHE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08OY7kMydSs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQ3zii0T3z4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQ3zii0T3z4
https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/10/28/18779351.php
HIG TestAmerica
http://higcapital.com/portfolio/company/98
http://www.mintpressnews.com/federal-whistleblower-investigator-fired-after-blowing-the-whistle-on-his-own-agency/210347/
Madry Court Cases
http://www.oalj.dol.gov/Decisions/ALJ/TSC/2013/MADRY_MICHAEL_J_v_EMLAB_PandK_LLC_2013TSC00001_(OCT_09_2015)_130744_ORDER_PB.PDF#search=michael%20madry
http://www.cc.com/episodes/xiptmz/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-february-26--2015---olivia-wilde-season-20-ep-20067
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/investigations/OSHA-Whistleblower-Investigator-Blows-Whistle-on-Own-Agency–293711041.html
Production of KPFA WorkWeek Radio
workweek [at] kpfa.org
For more information:
http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/22/tom-pere...
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$200.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network
They forced him to get a fit for duty eval to try and get him to quit, relalite against him, and make a fabricated paper trail. Others were informed that this was a planned retaliation and informed that the Senator and or Congressman would be informed.
Evidence that bad employers will use a fit for duty eval to retalite against those that speak up.
Whistleblowers must watch for retaliatory fitness-for-duty exams
mspb.federaltimes.com › Federal Workplace
Jul 28, 2014 - Years ago, retaliation in the form of fitness for duty examinations was such a ... requirements or that is part of a medical evaluation program.
They kept stopping him at the gate coming to work and telling him to go home without a specific reason hoping he would react in a manner that they could justify terminating him (Witnesses: Bog King, Jason Lanono, Don Ferretti, Jane Hoyt, Maureen Marquis, Aaron Miklosko, David Johnson, Mike Crosbie..
The employee emails Kraft Foods corporate and got a reply. However, after reporting that he was being retaliated against, Kraft Foods Maureen Marquis, the Human Resource Manager, separated the employee that afternoon without pay, without a specific reason why, refused to let him get his car keys, and forced him to run home 6 miles in his work boots to get his spare set of key, bike back the 6 miles to the plant to get his car, wallet, and keys after calling for help. The Kraft Foods Safety Security & Environmental Manager, MaryEllen Doherty, admitted that not giving or letting the employee get his keys was a decision that Kraft Foods made.
The employee filed an OSHA Whistleblower Complaint. Kraft Foods had reported to the STATE that the reason the employee was separated was DUE TO LACK OF WORK. Hoping the employee's years of enduring retaliation, would get him to collect unemployment and walk away. Instead, the employee filed a OSHA Whistleblower Complaint.
OSHA Investigator (Maryash) requested a telephone conference. After it started she asked to record it. The employee agreed as he had nothing to hide.
The employee then discovered that Kraft Foods had Kenneth Wengert on the OSHA Whistleblower Protection Advisory Committee for MANAGEMENT (2012-2105). The employee sent the OSHA Investigator (Maryash) an email asking informing her that he knew Kraft Foods had a member on the WPAC and asked questions and if he could record the next telephone conference. OSHA Investigator (Maryash) sent and "email" and said she would not answer all his questions and he could not record the next telephone conference.
The local OSHA Office (Andover Ma) went to the Kraft Foods Plant Woburn for the second time in 2013. This time it was a direct result of the employee's "signed" OSHA Complaint. Both times Kraft Foods was sited for SERIOUS violations after they went unresolved after reporting them internally.
Kraft Foods representatives made sworn statements under the penalty of perjury blaming the employee for the separation. They probably didn't know that the employee got a call from the STATE and received records from the STATE that Kraft Foods already communicated to the STATE that the reason for the separation was DUE TO LACK OF WORK.
Elected Officials and the state have been notified. So far no one has appeared to hold Kraft Foods and OSHA legally accountable. A Super Lawyer, after knowing the case was against Kraft Foods, refused to hear the apology message left by Kraft Foods HRM after she was caught communicating false allegations against the worker across state lines.
The Kraft Foods Plant Manager, Jane Hoyt, apologized to the employee in the presence of Aaron Miklosko an Gus Dresser for the retaliation the employee was enduring stating IT MADE HER SICK. However, there is no record that OSHA interviewed Jane Hoyt or other key witnesses about what took place at the Kraft Foods Plant in Woburn Massachusetts.
The employee reported exposure to hazardous chemicals in a non-venting locker as one of his many reports of violations. Reaching out to various agencies, no one seems to be monitoring the cancer rate and other serious illness at Kraft Foods Plants.
Witnesses include but not limited to:
Jane Hoyt
Maureen Marquis
Aaron Miklosko
Jason Lonano
David Johnson
Tracy Gardner
Mike Crosbie
Mike Conroy
Fran Harrigan
Lou Lopes Sr
Lou Lopes Jr.
Don Ferretti
Rich Cormier
Mikel Blido
Dan Solorzano
David Solorzano
Ask Kraft Foods and OSHA for the more than 100 pages of evidence sent to OSHA.
Ask Kraft Foods for all the emails relating to violations / safety sent and received by employees to include but not limited to the ones supervisors sent that included attached pictures for safety violations.
Ask OSHA if they obtained all the emails.
Recommendation for the
United States Department of Labor
Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA).
(Review Darrell Whitman & OSHA)
1. Require all “Informal Conferences” between OSHA and the company to be recorded and this recorded is given to the person / people (here in defined as “THE ENTITY) who filed the complaint. The Entity who filed the complaint will be notified no least than one week before the “Information Conference” as to the location and who is scheduled to attend for the company and OSHA. The attendees name and title will be provided to The Entity. (This allows for statements to be challenged given all parties due process. This will also allow all individuals to be known for possible questioning later and if any employee dies, gets injured or comes done with an illness that can be associated with what has already been reported to the company and or OSHA, an investigation can look into why the violations still went unresolved).
2. OSHA will provide the CEO of all Whistleblower complaints against their company. The CEO is then required to initial the cover letter and send a copy back to OSHA who will provide a copy to The Entity. (This gives the CEO the opportunity to review the case, correct safety violations, hold those accountable who make false and or misleading statements. It also holds the CEO accountable suboridantes to make false and misleading statements to protect senior officials and or the company).
3. Any member of the OSHA Whistleblower Protection Advisory Committee (WPAC) who has a Whistleblower Complaint against their company has to either step down or review and initial that they reviewed the complaint. (This helps prevent a conflict of interest and allows for the committee members to have a first hand knowledge of cases and how to ensure honesty and due process and be better educated on both sides of a Whistleblower Case.)
4. The Entity who files an OSHA complaint will be allowed to call into the informal conference between OSHA and the company and use that recording to consult with a lawyer and or elected officials. The Entity will have the right to use the recording in court as evidence in their case.. (This helps improve the integrity of information and allows for the OSHA investigator to have better knowledge as THE ENTITY filing the complaint can challenge statements made by the company where the OSHA investigator may have no experience or knowledge of. (For example, the statements provided by one company representatives clearly left loose ends that should have been challenged and would further support the employee’s case that was closed on behalf of a company who has a member on the WPAC at the time of the case. If the OSHA investigator is getting the run around or being delayed by frivolous questions and or statements, The Entity may have knowledge to help the OSHA investigator move the case close to a resolution, help get the violations removed, and point out false and misleading statement before they get used in any further narrative.)
5. All Plant Managers will be required to initial off all responses to an OSHA investigation. (This ensures that the Plant Manager knows what their subordinates are doing and can make sure that everything reported does not contain fabrications or misleading statements. This prevents subordinates being used as a scapegoat or being pressured to file any false and or misleading statements.)
6. All OSHA Investigators “must” sign off a checklist of what they did during the investigation and and a copy goes to the person who files the Whistleblower Complaint. The Investigator must maintain proof “each” element was completed before checking it off. (This ensures that all steps are followed and prove of those steps can be obtained. For example, if OSHA contacted the state in one case, they would have clearly discovered that the company reported that they reason hey separated an employee who reported over 50 violations was due to the lack of work. Then when the company replied to THE Entity’s Whistleblower Case blaming the employee, OSHA could have quickly closed the case on behalf of The Entity and filed charges against the company. The case could have closed early instead of lasting as long as it takes for The Entity to clear their name from the false and misleading statements that were further used by the OSHA Investigator in their reports / letter.)
7. All OSHA Investigators will allow The Entity to record all telephone conferences and use those recordings in court to support their case. (This will allow all documents and statements to be crossed referenced and challenged. In one referenced case the OSHA Investigator asked The Entity if they can record their telephone conference after it already started. The Entity agreed. There should be “no” reason the OSHA Investigator sent an email stating they would not answer all The Entities questions and no reason to deny The Entity the right to record the telephone conference after The Entity discovered that their former employer had a member on the OSHA Whistleblower Protection Advisory Committee (WPAC. )
8. All companies who respond to an OSHA Whistleblower case “must” release “all” emails The Entity received and sent regarding “all” violations and retaliation.
9. All companies that respond to an OSHA Whistleblower complaint must provide the date, time, place, names of witness, location, who said what, outside temperature, names and titles of all supervisors and managers as well as employees on shift, all relative documents / photos, senior company official that knows about the Whistleblower’s case, and “all” specific information for “every” allegations they make against the person who files the complaint and OSHA must provide a full and complete copy to the person filing the complaint.
10. OSHA Investigators will wear body cameras when going to inspect workplaces where “serious” violations were reported. (This will show the people they contacted and those they did not. It will show any delay in gaining access; and other key details that otherwise may not be obtained).
Recommendation for the
United States Department of Labor
Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA).
(Review Darrell Whitman & OSHA)
1. Require all “Informal Conferences” between OSHA and the company to be recorded and this recorded is given to the person / people (here in defined as “THE ENTITY) who filed the complaint. The Entity who filed the complaint will be notified no least than one week before the “Information Conference” as to the location and who is scheduled to attend for the company and OSHA. The attendees name and title will be provided to The Entity. (This allows for statements to be challenged given all parties due process. This will also allow all individuals to be known for possible questioning later and if any employee dies, gets injured or comes done with an illness that can be associated with what has already been reported to the company and or OSHA, an investigation can look into why the violations still went unresolved).
2. OSHA will provide the CEO of all Whistleblower complaints against their company. The CEO is then required to initial the cover letter and send a copy back to OSHA who will provide a copy to The Entity. (This gives the CEO the opportunity to review the case, correct safety violations, hold those accountable who make false and or misleading statements. It also holds the CEO accountable suboridantes to make false and misleading statements to protect senior officials and or the company).
3. Any member of the OSHA Whistleblower Protection Advisory Committee (WPAC) who has a Whistleblower Complaint against their company has to either step down or review and initial that they reviewed the complaint. (This helps prevent a conflict of interest and allows for the committee members to have a first hand knowledge of cases and how to ensure honesty and due process and be better educated on both sides of a Whistleblower Case.)
4. The Entity who files an OSHA complaint will be allowed to call into the informal conference between OSHA and the company and use that recording to consult with a lawyer and or elected officials. The Entity will have the right to use the recording in court as evidence in their case.. (This helps improve the integrity of information and allows for the OSHA investigator to have better knowledge as THE ENTITY filing the complaint can challenge statements made by the company where the OSHA investigator may have no experience or knowledge of. (For example, the statements provided by one company representatives clearly left loose ends that should have been challenged and would further support the employee’s case that was closed on behalf of a company who has a member on the WPAC at the time of the case. If the OSHA investigator is getting the run around or being delayed by frivolous questions and or statements, The Entity may have knowledge to help the OSHA investigator move the case close to a resolution, help get the violations removed, and point out false and misleading statement before they get used in any further narrative.)
5. All Plant Managers will be required to initial off all responses to an OSHA investigation. (This ensures that the Plant Manager knows what their subordinates are doing and can make sure that everything reported does not contain fabrications or misleading statements. This prevents subordinates being used as a scapegoat or being pressured to file any false and or misleading statements.)
6. All OSHA Investigators “must” sign off a checklist of what they did during the investigation and and a copy goes to the person who files the Whistleblower Complaint. The Investigator must maintain proof “each” element was completed before checking it off. (This ensures that all steps are followed and prove of those steps can be obtained. For example, if OSHA contacted the state in one case, they would have clearly discovered that the company reported that they reason hey separated an employee who reported over 50 violations was due to the lack of work. Then when the company replied to THE Entity’s Whistleblower Case blaming the employee, OSHA could have quickly closed the case on behalf of The Entity and filed charges against the company. The case could have closed early instead of lasting as long as it takes for The Entity to clear their name from the false and misleading statements that were further used by the OSHA Investigator in their reports / letter.)
7. All OSHA Investigators will allow The Entity to record all telephone conferences and use those recordings in court to support their case. (This will allow all documents and statements to be crossed referenced and challenged. In one referenced case the OSHA Investigator asked The Entity if they can record their telephone conference after it already started. The Entity agreed. There should be “no” reason the OSHA Investigator sent an email stating they would not answer all The Entities questions and no reason to deny The Entity the right to record the telephone conference after The Entity discovered that their former employer had a member on the OSHA Whistleblower Protection Advisory Committee (WPAC. )
8. All companies who respond to an OSHA Whistleblower case “must” release “all” emails The Entity received and sent regarding “all” violations and retaliation.
9. All companies that respond to an OSHA Whistleblower complaint must provide the date, time, place, names of witness, location, who said what, outside temperature, names and titles of all supervisors and managers as well as employees on shift, all relative documents / photos, senior company official that knows about the Whistleblower’s case, and “all” specific information for “every” allegations they make against the person who files the complaint and OSHA must provide a full and complete copy to the person filing the complaint.
10. OSHA Investigators will wear body cameras when going to inspect workplaces where “serious” violations were reported. (This will show the people they contacted and those they did not. It will show any delay in gaining access; and other key details that otherwise may not be obtained).
OSHA