Obama doesn't want the negative optics of laying off employees of defense contractors right before the election, so he has been presuring these defense contractors to not issue notices until after the election:
http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill...layoff-notices
Quote:
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.
|
This is in direct violation of the WARN act (
http://www.doleta.gov/programs/factsht/warn.htm) which clearly states: "notice must be timed to reach the required parties at least 60 days before a closing or layoff." In other words he's asking them to break the law.
Afterwards, he says that contractors will bbe compensated for the legal costs of breaking the law by the government (taxpayer):
http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill...layoff-notices
Quote:
|
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.
|
Why don't things like this get more media play? Regardless, in my opinion it's a big deal that we have a sitting president urging corporationst to violate the law and then offering taxpayer money to cover the resulting court fees.
