• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Obama to Lockheed Martin – don’t announce layoffs till after election

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
Defense contractor Lockheed Martin heeded a request from the White House today — one with political overtones — and announced it will not issue layoff notices to thousands of employees just days before the November presidential election.

Lockheed, one of the biggest employers in the key battleground state of Virginia, previously warned it would have to issue notices to employees, required by law, due to looming defense cuts set to begin to take effect after Jan. 2 because of the failure of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction — the so-called Super-committee, which was created to find a way to cut $1.5 trillion from the federal deficit over the next decade.

Such massive layoffs could have threatened Obama’s standing in the state he won in 2008 and is hoping to carry again this November.

On Friday, the Obama administration reiterated that federal contractors should not issue notices to workers based on “uncertainty” over the pending $500 billion reduction in Pentagon spending that will occur unless lawmakers can agree on a solution to the budget impasse, negotiations over which will almost definitely not begin until after the election.

Contractors had been planning to send out notices because of the WARN Act — Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act — which according to the Department of Labor requires “most employers with 100 or more employees to provide notification 60 calendar days in advance of plant closings and mass layoffs.”

In a statement Friday, GOP Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte accused Obama of putting “his own reelection ahead of the interests of working Americans and our national security by promising government contractors that their salary and liability costs will be covered at taxpayer expense if they do not follow the law that requires advance warning to employees of jobs that may be lost due to sequestration. … Apparently, President Obama puts politics ahead of American workers by denying them adequate time to plan their finances and take care of their families. The people who work in the defense industry and other government contracting companies deserve as much notice as possible that they are on track to lose their jobs.”

*EDIT* - SheHatesMe thinks I am hiding info for only posting 1/2 the article, even though I gave a link, so here is the rest of it.

In July the Labor Department issued legal guidance making clear that federal contractors are not required to provide layoff notices 60 days in advance of the potential Jan. 2 sequestration order, and that doing so would be inconsistent with the purpose of the WARN Act.

In Friday’s memo, the Office of Management and Budget reiterated that notice, urging agencies’ contracting officials and CFOs to “minimize the potential for waste and disruption associated with the issuance of unwarranted layoff notices.”

The guidance issued Friday told contractors that if the automatic cuts happen and contractors lay off employees the government will cover certain liability and litigation costs in the event the contractor is later sued because it hadn’t provided adequate legal warning to its employees, but only if the contractor abides by the administration’s notice and refrains from warning employees now.

After “careful review” Lockheed announced today that it will abide by the administration’s guidance.

“We will not issue sequestration-related WARN notices this year,” Lockheed announced in a written statement. “The additional guidance offered important new information about the potential timing of DOD actions under sequestration, indicating that DOD anticipates no contract actions on or about 2 January, 2013, and that any action to adjust funding levels on contracts as a result of sequestration would likely not occur for several months after 2 Jan. The additional guidance further ensures that, if contract actions due to sequestration were to occur, our employees would be provided the protection of the WARN Act and that the costs of this protection would be allowable and recoverable.

“We remain firm in our conviction that the automatic and across-the-board budget reductions under sequestration are ineffective and inefficient public policy that will weaken our civil government operations, damage our national security, and adversely impact our industry. We will continue to work with leaders in our government to stop sequestration and find more thoughtful, balanced, and effective solutions to our nation’s challenges,” Lockheed said

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/at-white-house-request-lockheed-martin-drops-plan-to-issue-layoff-notices/

Unless you are going to guarantee them employment, they need advanced notice that they may lose their jobs. Obama sure is looking out for the middle class isn't he????
 
Last edited:
Feb 10, 2000
30,031
66
91
In fairness it seems likely this will be resolved through negotiations following the election, regardless of the outcome of the election, because as much as the Republicans in Congress love sticking their thumb in the President's eye, they love defense spending even more. There doesn't seem to be much point in announcing layoffs that will most likely never occur.
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
That disgusting pos and excuse for a human being obama needs to be kicked out for this nonsense. He only cares about winning not about jobs
 

SheHateMe

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2012
7,251
20
81
There doesn't seem to be much point in announcing layoffs that will most likely never occur.
That's exactly what I got out of the whole thing.


That disgusting pos and excuse for a human being obama needs to be kicked out for this nonsense. He only cares about winning not about jobs
It's obvious you don't understand what is being said in the article. Do you just cruise the forums looking for a thread with Obama's name in it so you can post something stupid in it?
 
Last edited:

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,819
1,123
126
I second the notion that POS human beings need to be kicked out...

We'll see how that plays out here lambchoptible...

As for the OP... sounds like it is pretty common ADVANCED knowledge they MIGHT lose their jobs. Outrage not found. Inane logical fallacy located in commentary.
 

emperus

Diamond Member
Apr 6, 2012
7,335
788
126
I second the notion that POS human beings need to be kicked out...

We'll see how that plays out here lambchoptible...

As for the OP... sounds like it is pretty common ADVANCED knowledge they MIGHT lose their jobs. Outrage not found. Logical fallacy located in commentary.
This.
 

SheHateMe

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2012
7,251
20
81
Oh hey look, the OP left out some tidbits.

“We will not issue sequestration-related WARN notices this year,” Lockheed announced in a written statement. “The additional guidance offered important new information about the potential timing of DOD actions under sequestration, indicating that DOD anticipates no contract actions on or about 2 January, 2013, and that any action to adjust funding levels on contracts as a result of sequestration would likely not occur for several months after 2 Jan. The additional guidance further ensures that, if contract actions due to sequestration were to occur, our employees would be provided the protection of the WARN Act and that the costs of this protection would be allowable and recoverable.
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,830
1
0
Misleading title. The Obama admin told them not to announce layoffs because the budget would be resolved after the election which would make layoffs unnecessary.

The reason sequestration would happen is due to Republican obstructionism... which makes it extremely ironic that they're trying to make it sound like Obama is trying to delay a layoff announcement for political gain.
 

SheHateMe

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2012
7,251
20
81
Misleading title. The Obama admin told them not to announce layoffs because the budget would be resolved after the election which would make layoffs unnecessary.

The reason sequestration would happen is due to Republican obstructionism... which makes it extremely ironic that they're trying to make it sound like Obama is trying to delay a layoff announcement for political gain.

Hey, stop trying to research and stuff, I'm trying to bash Obama here!
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
obama pretends to care about jobs but look at that pos, he is a disgusting human being and its time to take out the trash in November
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Administrator
Mar 5, 2001
49,606
162
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
That disgusting pos and excuse for a human being obama needs to be kicked out for this nonsense. He only cares about winning not about jobs
Hmmm? Reading comprehension problems? The nonsense is that the Republicans are trying to make it appear that there will be layoffs (when most likely, there won't be any) in order to damage Obama's re-election chances.
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
Hmmm? Reading comprehension problems? The nonsense is that the Republicans are trying to make it appear that there will be layoffs (when most likely, there won't be any) in order to damage Obama's re-election chances.
The article said he wants them to postpone it and knowing obama I am not surprised he would do this, he only cares about power
 

SheHateMe

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2012
7,251
20
81
The article said he wants them to postpone it and knowing obama I am not surprised he would do this, he only cares about power

Please, you have never met Obama in your life. Its obvious you don't understand the article. Run along and play with the other kids while the adults talk.

“We will not issue sequestration-related WARN notices this year,” Lockheed announced in a written statement. “The additional guidance offered important new information about the potential timing of DOD actions under sequestration, indicating that DOD anticipates no contract actions on or about 2 January, 2013, and that any action to adjust funding levels on contracts as a result of sequestration would likely not occur for several months after 2 Jan. The additional guidance further ensures that, if contract actions due to sequestration were to occur, our employees would be provided the protection of the WARN Act and that the costs of this protection would be allowable and recoverable.
You don't understand what is being said here, do you?
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
Are you upset that your attempt at an anti-Obama thread flopped?


:p
LOL, thread flop not found. How about Obama just come out and promise a budget will get passed and they will keep their jobs. We all know he keeps his promises. Oh wait, he already promised a group of GM workers they would keep their jobs and we all know how that turned out.
 

SheHateMe

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2012
7,251
20
81
LOL, thread flop not found. How about Obama just come out and promise a budget will get passed and they will keep their jobs. We all know he keeps his promises. Oh wait, he already promised a group of GM workers they would keep their jobs and we all know how that turned out.
Dohohooo, how funny is it that you believe that GM story Ryan sold to you. It was already debunked that Obama did not promise those workers that they would not be laid off. He also was not responsible for the plant closing either, it closed under Bush. That's pure comedy gold....
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
The guidance issued Friday told contractors that if the automatic cuts happen and contractors lay off employees the government will cover certain liability and litigation costs in the event the contractor is later sued because it hadn’t provided adequate legal warning to its employees, but only if the contractor abides by the administration’s notice and refrains from warning employees now.
It's nice our tax dollars will now pay for the legal battle that Obama's policies will create.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
Dohohooo, how funny is it that you believe that GM story Ryan sold to you. It was already debunked that Obama did not promise those workers that they would not be laid off. He also was not responsible for the plant closing either, it closed under Bush. That's pure comedy gold....
Gonna go down swinging huh? I believe it because Obama is quoted saying it. You gonna believe he didn't say it because of Politifact?
 

SheHateMe

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2012
7,251
20
81
It's nice our tax dollars will now pay for the legal battle that Obama's policies will create.
Which one of Obama's policies led to our Defense fund drying up? You know..the fund we have seemingly had an unlimited amount of funds in to fuel the war on terror by buying weapons for our enemies and coming back years later to blow them up and stuff.

Oh wait,

Having to negotiate a new budget for our defense spending is all Obama's fault. He spent all that money in 4 years. Dang!
 

SheHateMe

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2012
7,251
20
81
Gonna go down swinging huh? I believe it because Obama is quoted saying it. You gonna believe he didn't say it because of Politifact?
It's better than going down lying.


Gonna go down swinging huh? I believe it because Obama is quoted saying it. You gonna believe he didn't say it because of Politifact?
Okay, honey boo boo. Go ahead and show me the exact quote where Obama told the workers in Jainesville that their plant would not shut down.

“I know that General Motors received some bad news yesterday, and I know how hard your governor has fought to keep jobs in this plant. But I also know how much progress you’ve made -- how many hybrids and fuel-efficient vehicles you’re churning out," Obama said. “And I believe that if our government is there to support you and give you the assistance you need to re-tool and make this transition, that this plant will be here for another 100 years.” -Obama in 2008
Where is the line where he promises the plant wouldn't close? Oh yeah, and did you forget that Obama later bailed out Ford, GM, AND Chrysler? As expensive as that bailout was..it was INDEED "assistance you need to re-tool".

Actually, it looks like GM is pulling through! General Motors sees 1.5 percent sales gain

The Washington Post's Greg Sargent on Thursday interviewed a Ryan-supporting Wisconsin businessman, who argued that the plant may have been unsalvageable, even with significant government support.

"This morning, I spoke to a leading business official in Janesville, Wisconsin, who was at the center of efforts to save the GM plant -- one who supports Paul Ryan -- and he offered a nuanced version of the history that strains simplistic interpretations," Sargent reported. "The official, John Beckord, who heads the pro-business group Forward Janesville, makes two key points. First, that the market for the GM product in question collapsed much faster than anyone expected it would at the time of Obama’s speech. Second, that there is no telling whether the plant would have reopened, even if the economy had recovered faster."
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY