FEDERAL INVESTIGATION SHOWS LEPAGE “ENDANGERED THE FAIR HEARING PROCESS”

Posted: February 27, 2014 | Government Oversight Committee, Senator Cain, Senator Jackson

Feds flag LePage’s Blaine House meeting to intimidate hearing officers

AUGUSTA—Federal officials have determined that Governor LePage and members of his administration interfered with unemployment hearing officers and unfairly endangered the quasi-judicial process.

 

The investigation by the U.S. Department of Labor found that behavior by Governor Paul LePage and his political appointees “endangered the fair hearings process” for Unemployment Compensation appeals. The review specifically cited LePage’s March 21, 2013 Blaine House meeting with hearing officers.

 

“For three years we have heard story after story about the Governor’s intimidation and bullying tactics. Today, the cat’s out of the bag. Governor LePage and his political appointees will stoop to any level of intimidation to get what they want,” said Sen. Troy Jackson of Allagash, the Senate Majority Leader.

 

Media reports indicate that during the March meeting, LePage called unemployment officers to a mandatory meeting, scolded the officers, and accused them of finding too many cases in favor of workers. After the meeting, several hearing officers came forward expressing their concern with Governor LePage’s attempt to influence the quasi-judicial process. Following the intimidation allegations, Governor LePage created a commission that later found that the hearing officers were not biased toward employees in their findings.

 

In a February 27 letter, Holly O’Brien, regional administrator for the U.S. Department of Labor, raised concerns that LePage’s labor commissioners have become directly involved in the decision making of the Division of Administrative Hearings (DAH), meeting directly with hearing officers or supervisors to discuss specific rulings.
According to the letter, “the level and nature of this participation has, at times, exceeded the normal management prerogative of managing day-to-day operations of DAH and could be perceived as an attempt to influence the appeals decision making process in favor of employers. When added to this internal MDOL pressure, the Governor’s direct intervention could be interpreted as an attempt to intimidate or direct hearing officers to view employers more sympathetically.”

 

“This is further confirmation of the governor’s ongoing mismanagement. He is governing by intimidation,” said House Majority Leader Seth Berry of Bowdoinham. “He is trying to hurt working Mainers.”

 

The Legislature’s bipartisan Government Oversight Committee has been reviewing the matter since April 2013 and will discuss the Federal Government’s findings during their meeting tomorrow at 9 a.m.

 

“The federal investigation shows that our concern about political interference from the administration was legitimate, and validates the need for a closer look at the hearings process generally,” said Senator Emily Cain the Senate Chair of the Government Oversight Committee. “I am not relieved by these findings. There continue to be questions about the lengths to which this administration will go to get its way.”

 

Rep. Chuck Kruger, the House Chair of the Government Oversight Committee, requested an investigation into the claims of worker intimidation following initial media reports on the March meeting at the Blaine House.

 

“At the time we requested the investigation we sought to sort rumor from fact,” said Rep. Kruger. “The federal findings confirm our fears of an attempt to unduly influence hearing officers. We will be reviewing the letter for recommendations and next steps.”

 

In its letter the Federal Government noted that the administration must ensure that hearing officers are free from actual or perceived intimidation.

 

Holly O’Brien, Regional Administrator for the US Department of Labor, wrote, “the Governor and his political appointees must ensure the UC appeals process is insulated from outside pressures that might compromise even the appearance of fairness and impartiality…in particular, the administration must make clear no personnel action will be taken against hearing officers over this matter.”

###