This particular comment has nothing to do with the post to which it is attached, so we thought we'd pull it out and place it here in its own post so folks concerned with the topic would have the opportunity to get a look at it.
We do, naturally, have some thoughts on the topic the commenter asks about, but first wanted to open it up to see if anyone else had any input on this subject before we formulate a response. So, without further ado, here is the comment. Add anything you like, and we promise to address the substance of this sometime next week.
I'm disappointed in Minnesota Lawyer's recent lack of coverage of the ongoing story of attempts to organize a union at the AG's office and AG Swanson's ham-handed efforts to undermine that effort (the Keystone Cops would have done a better job a union-busting). Minnesota Lawyer's blog help make the story public earlier and exposed the questionable decision to keep Mike Hatch on board. Now Minn Lawyer appears to have forgotten to do any follow up coverage. It was big deal when there was unrest in the US Attorney's Office but somehow the departure of 1/3 of the line attorneys at the AG's office in the past year and ongoing unionization efforts doesn't make for a story of public interest? C'mon. Where's the journalism?While you are waiting for our insightful reply, we suggest you check out the piece Steve Perry wrote last week for his blog, the Daily Mole. ("It's cat-and-mouse in the AG's Office as staffers try to unionize.")
15 comments:
To publish a story, the press needs people to go on record, testify, be quoted, interviewed, and you won't find those sources in this story because of the fear factor. There are no free speech rights for employees of the Attorney General's Office.
One twisted theory in circulation: to the extent that Mike Hatch remains Lori's most trusted advisor, he is now setting her up to die a public political death by encouraging her to take the extreme union busting stance that defies the will of her professional staff. She has minions running around collecting signatures on a Lori "loyalty oath." It remains a mystery as to why she has not been called to account for the lies she told during her late summer MPR interview. Or her failure to live up to her word as given during the DFL endorsement process.
Her clueless, inept management of the primary expense line in the Attorney General's Office budget - its human resources - is a scandal. The number of highly talented attorneys, legal secretaries and other staff who are either leaving, seeking other jobs or show up every day unhappy in their current position is unheard of in the history of this once great office. Lori may well have some great ideas, but the real job of the AG is leadership. No one elected her because she can edit a citizen letter like no one else. Her management directives are carried out through intimidation and bullying as opposed to more effective management techniques. As a result, she is not able to deliver consistently the services demanded of the AGO. The office is severely hampered because the staff is unsettled, unhappy, unrecognized, unrewarded, underappreciated, underutilized, micromanaged all to the detriment of the taxpayers of the state of Minnesota.
Look at the comments to the January 20 posting on the AG Organizing Update blog, agunion.blogspot.com, if you, any other journalists, DFL officials, Republican officials or the Legislative Auditor would like some questions to ask the AG.
No free speech rights for employees of the Attorney General's Office, you say? We understand that when some AG staff members complained about the attorney circulating the loyalty-to-Lori petition, a member of the executive committee said that he had "a First Amendment right" to do this. Funny how that same First Amendment right doesn't seem to apply to the union organizers.
Thank you for following up on this, Mr. Cohen.
Why is this story important? Why does its importance go beyond the interests of Attorney General's Office lawyers and staff? For two reasons.
First, the Attorney General is Minnesota's highest law enforcement officer, with the power to prosecute and sue on behalf of the state. Wielding such power, the AG must be a lawyer of integrity and high ethics. At the least, The AG must put ethics above politics and personal political ambition. As anyone knows who has worked as an attorney on some of the AGO's high profile cases (by high profile, I mean those cases that Swanson chooses to publicize because of the perceived political impact), this is now not the case. The process is like this: Swanson, either directly or through a deputy, says to a staff attorney, "We're suing Company X for consumer fraud. Draft a Complaint (or CID)." As to the facts justifying the Complaint or CID? "Come up with something." This of course is practising law backwards, is an abuse of power and is extremely unethical. It also places the staff attorney in a bind. Either obey the duty that all lawyers have to act ethically and thereby risk losing your job (no, not risk losing your job, losing your job), or keep your job and act unethically. That so many attorneys have left the AGO since Swanson's election (approximately 1/3) and that so many are still looking to leave, demonstrates that this bind is unacceptable. It also points out why unionization, and the job protection it offers, is so important to the AGO's attorneys and professional staff, and so threatening to Swanson. It will enable the attorneys and staff to say "no" to unethical demands without fear of losing their jobs. This ability would be no different than the "independence" so many, including the local press, rightly claimed that the US Attorneys and Assistant US Attorneys needed when Alberto Gonzalez was running the Justice Dept. and Rachel Paulose was Minnesota's US Attorney.
Second, the Attorney General is an elected official who is accountable to the people of Minnesota. But how can the AG be held accountable when the only information the people receive about the AGO is information that Swanson herself chooses to release, usually through some staged press conference, which the press then uncritically reports (or, in the case of the StarTribune, uncritically praises)? The information Swanson wants suppressed (the attorney and staff departures, the unionization effort, the unethical practices) she can suppress through the threat of termination. Unionization will enable the attorneys and staff to speak without fear of being fired. They have a lot to say:
(1) on the unionization effort, its suppression by Swanson, including the firings of at least one attorney and one staff investigator for union activities;
(2) on the "loyalty oath" (loyalty oath!) being circulated throughout the office;
(3) on the departure of 1/3 of the attorneys and numerous professional staff members and the devastating impact those departures have had on the office; (The AGO is like a big public law firm. Would a big private law firm be able to function effectively if 1/3 of its attorneys, including some of the best and most experienced, departed in little over a year? Would a big private law firm have a practice group, let alone numerous practice groups, run entirely by inexperienced associates? How about it Faegre? Dorsey? Robins?);
(4) on the lawsuits and investigations, brought with the great fanfare of a press conference, that later quietly disappear, either through dismissal, settlement on the cheap or referral (unsolicited and with the bogus claim that the AG has no jurisdiction) to another state agency that has no idea what to do with it; (Remember the adoption agency case of early 2007, the big press conference with the distraught adoptive or would-be adoptive parents used as props? Whatever happened to that case? Did any of the journalists who so dutifully covered the press conference bother to find out? There are other cases, many others, that follow this same cynical pattern);
(5) on tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars, maybe more, used as payoffs and disguised as severance packages for those unjustly terminated or those who leave voluntarily but who know too much;
(6) on more taxpayer money used to pay outside counsel in order to keep the AGO's and Swanson's deepest darkest secrets as far outside the office as possible and to cloak them (dubiously) with attorney-client privilege;
(7) on noncompliance with Data Practices Act requests, including blatant lies and false information in response to those requests.
Why does this story matter? Lori Swanson does not own the Attorney General's Office. The people of Minnesota do. Sunlight will let them see what is happening there. Sunlight, as Justice Louis Brandeis said, is the best disinfectant. Come on, Journalists. Shine a ray of sunlight on the place.
At first I thought "What's there to cover? Just some office politics and transition pains." I guess I was wrong. If even one of the list of allegations is true it would be enough for a story or an investigation. Problem is, who investigates the Attorney General? Who has to ask what question or make what request to look into the alleged abuse of power and resources?
Isn't this something that the legislative auditor could be looking into?
Lori has framed this dispute as some outside political attack orchestrated by a former rival. BALONEY! It was started by four employees who didn't know one another before meeting, but shared the same goals of providing protection so that the fine work of the AGO could continue with appropriate input from the very well educated and experienced line staff. Due process, fair treatment, high quality work, and maintaining a degree of professionalism for which the office was admired and respected. One person looked up various organizations and called AFSCME because there was a number to call for an "organizer" to meet with us. We didn't call MAPE because the executive director is a close friend of Lori's and Mike's. The daughter of MAPE's ex dir, for instance, was given a job in the office that previously did not exist. In addition, Lori's close advisor and press secretary came from MAPE. We didn't trust MAPE to keep anything confidential. A majority of attorneys signed cards as of late May, 2007. Lori refused to cooperate with the process of voluntary recognition that she said she supported. In August, when asked about it on MPR by Kerry Miller, Lori said she had no knowledge that a majority of attorneys had signed cards. Very Bill Clinton of her - it depends on the meaning of - knowledge to a proven certainty? She tells the other labor leaders over dinner at the Lex paid out her campaign $ that this is some little tiff because someone out there doesn't like her. B as in B; S as in S. The goal when this started was to help her better accomplish the work she wants done, after all, a happier workforce is more productive. Well, all you donors to Lori's campaign - understand that your money is going to busting a legitimate desire of state workers to have bare bones protections and a bit of due process. And the rest of you in the wider labor community that do not support the AG workers right to organize - SHAME ON YOU!
What's really unfortunate in all of this is that the public is being harmed as well. The office is so dysfunctional right now that it's not filing cases it should be filing, it's botching the ones that it does file, and the attorneys are all too afraid to say or do anything because they know they'll be fired if they complain or protest. It *is* disturbing that Lori is taking her unionbusting tactics to such extremes, and it's even more disturbing that the attorneys in the office are forced to engage in practices that are at best ineffective and at worst unethical. The real tragedy, though, is that the office has lost 1/3 of its attorneys because those attorneys realized that the current AG isn't serving the public, and they didn't want to be a part of the farce.
I know that Lori is technically a member of the DFL, but I don't see how she can claim to be a Democrat when she's engaging in unionbusting. She also might be spouting good Democratic rhetoric about fighting for the little guy and the people of Minnesota, but in reality those working in the office know that her tactics are designed entirely to generate good press. She no longer effectively manages cases to get a good result for Minnesota citizens, because that takes time and gruntwork, neither of which gets headlines.
How bad does it have to get before the press will start to pick up on it?
AG Swanson appears to have some ability to end the distraction for herself and her staff -- embrace the unionization effort! Allow your staff to openly talk about unionization.
Lori, I voted for you because you weren't Jeff Johnson and you were a DFLer. Now I'm not so sure about either of those reasons.
“ Union busting is a field populated by bullies and built on deceit. A campaign against a union is an assault on individuals and a war on truth. As such, it is a war without honor. The only way to bust a union is to lie, distort, manipulate, threaten, and always, always attack. ”
Martin Jay Levitt, 1993, Confessions of a Union Buster[2]
The problems at the AGO are not just "growing pains" or the complaints of a few disgruntled workers. Attorneys at the AGO are not trusted to practice law. For example, attorneys are not allowed to give clients written legal advice until it has been reviewed by a manager and then a deputy AG; this was never the case in the past. This policy applies to attorneys who have been practicing for many years and are experts in their fields. Attorneys are also supposed to inform their division manager when they attend a client meeting, specifying who will be at the meeting and exactly what will be discussed. The AG is paranoid and treats our clients, primarily state agencies, as the enemy because the Commissioners are Republican appointees. This attitude undermines years of positive working relationships. The low moral permeates the office; attorneys, legal assistants, and legal secretaries keep leaving and those of us left behind feel foolish for hoping that things will get better.
I meant low "morale" in my last post, but low "morals" applies as well. No attorney should be put in the position of compromising his/her ethics to avoid being fired.
Three people have gone on the record--the union organizers posted their signed letter to Lori Swanson on the AGO Union blog this week. In spite of this public action, there has been no media coverage.
We'd like to hear more about the reasoning behind going to AFSCME. We are a group of grassroots organizers within MAPE. MPE.Grassroots@gmail.com
Post a Comment