[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 65 (Monday, May 5, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5740-S5741]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    RECESS APPOINTMENT OF PETER EIDE

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, today I rise to share my concerns about 
the recess appointment of Peter Eide to fill the post of general 
counsel at the Federal Labor Relations Authority.
  Recently, President Bush announced several recess appointments of 
pending nominees to fill posts in his administration. One of those 
appointments was granted to Peter Eide. Mr. Eide's nomination has been 
under active consideration by the Governmental Affairs Committee since 
its referral, and a public hearing to consider his appointment was held 
on April 10. I am disappointed that the President chose to exercise his 
discretion to make this recess appointment rather than allowing the 
advice and consent process to continue on course.
  Mr. Eide's credentials would make him an impeccable candidate for any 
number of positions in the Federal Government. However, General Counsel 
at the Federal Labor Relations Authority is not one of them.
  The position to which Mr. Eide was appointed is described under law 
as being a neutral party in the settlement of disputes that arise 
between Federal agencies and unions on matters outlined in the Federal 
Service Labor Management Relations statute. However, for the past 12 
years, Mr. Eide has been an outspoken critic of labor protections on 
behalf of the Chamber of Commerce. He has consistently supported the 
dilution of protections for workers. He opposed OSHA regulations on 
safety and health programs, including ergonomics standards. He opposed 
provisions of the 1991 Civil Rights Act that provide compensatory 
damages and jury trials for violations of the Americans with 
Disabilities Act. He advocated a policy that would exempt employers who 
hired former welfare recipients from employment discrimination laws for 
18 months. He consistently opposed increases in the Federal minimum 
wage. I find it disconcerting that someone who has been such a 
passionate and unrelenting foe of such labor protections for so many 
years would not only seek this position, but feel he is qualified to be 
the general counsel of the Federal Labor Relations Authority.
  Looking beyond his former policy positions, Mr. Eide also lacks the 
requisite experience with Federal labor-management relations that I 
believe this important post necessitates. Most of his recent labor law 
experience has been in the private sector representing

[[Page S5741]]

management viewpoints. Nothing in his experience indicates he has the 
qualifications to perform a job representing Federal employee labor 
concerns.
  Given his background, Federal employee labor organizations are 
worried about Mr. Eide's ability to perform the functions of his new 
post. I believe they have good reason to be concerned. I am submitting 
for the Record letters that I have received from Federal labor union 
leaders in opposition to Mr. Eide's nomination. I ask unanimous consent 
that these documents be printed in the Record at the conclusion of my 
statement.
  As I have previously stated, Mr. Eide has the qualifications to serve 
in hundreds of positions throughout the Federal Government. General 
Counsel at the Federal Labor Relations Authority is simply not one of 
them.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:
         The National Treasury Employees Union,
                                   March 26, 2003, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Richard J. Durbin,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Durbin: The National Treasury Employees Union, 
     the largest independent union of federal employees, 
     respectfully opposes the nomination of Peter Eide to be 
     General Counsel of the Federal Labor Relations Authority 
     (FLRA).
       As members of the Governmental Affairs committee are aware, 
     the General Counsel of the FLRA is charged with enforcing the 
     provisions of the Federal Sector Labor-Management Relations 
     Statute (FSLMRS). The General Counsel directs the operations 
     of the FLRA's regional offices in their investigation of 
     unfair labor practices and in their conduct of representation 
     matters, such as running elections and making appropriate 
     unit determinations. The General Counsel is the prosecutor 
     for the FLRA; the incumbent determines, in the first 
     instance, whether to pursue alleged misconduct and, if so, 
     under what legal theory. The refusal of the General Counsel 
     to issue a complaint on an alleged unfair labor practice 
     charge is unreviewable. If the General Counsel does issue a 
     complaint, he or she controls the course of the litigation 
     before the FLRA.
       Mr. Eide, in our opinion, is not qualified to perform the 
     important responsibilities of the position of General 
     Counsel. Although the General Counsel is the chief 
     prosecuting lawyer for the FLRA, Mr. Eide has not been a 
     practicing lawyer since 1990. Moreover, his legal experience 
     up to the date was confined to private sector labor 
     relations. There is nothing in his record that indicates any 
     experience whatsoever in federal sector labor relations, 
     which differs in many major respects from its private sector 
     counterpart.
       Perhaps even more troubling to NTEU, Mr. Eide's work for 
     the last twelve years has been as an advocate for the 
     dilution of statutory protections for employees. As Manager 
     and then Director of Labor Policy for the Chamber of 
     Commerce, Mr. Eide has worked to oppose OSHA regulations on 
     safety and health programs. For example, he has proudly 
     pointed to this role in spearheading a coalition of 
     businesses and associations opposing OSHA ergonomics 
     regulations. He has also worked vigorously to undermine the 
     Fair Labor Standards Act and to amend Title VII of the Civil 
     Rights Act of 1964. In short, there is nothing in this record 
     to indicate that Mr. Eide would energetically enforce the 
     statutory protections of the FSLMRS, if confirmed as General 
     Counsel.
       The General Counsel of the FLRA operates, to a large 
     extent, without review by the members of the Authority or by 
     any court. If he refuses to pursue allegations of misconduct, 
     the injured entity has no other legal recourse. This broad 
     prosecutorial discretion makes the incumbent an extremely 
     powerful figure in the federal sector labor relations. It 
     should not be entrusted to one whose career has been devoted 
     to advocacy of diminution of statutory protections for 
     workers.
       NTEU therefore asks you to oppose the nomination of Peter 
     Eide to be General Counsel of the FLRA.
           Sincerely yours,
                                                Colleen M. Kelley,
     National President.
                                  ____

         American Federation of


                                 Government Employees, AFL-CIO

                                    April 9, 2003, Washington, DC.
     The Hon. Richard Durbin,
     Committee on Governmental Affairs,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Durbin: On behalf of the American Federation 
     of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, I am writing to express our 
     opposition to the nomination of Peter Eide to be General 
     Counsel of the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA).
       The General Counsel of the FLRA is, in effect, the chief 
     prosecutor of unfair labor practices. Over 80 percent of 
     unfair labor practices in the federal sector are filed by 
     unions. The General Counsel of the FLRA, therefore, is 
     primarily called upon to enforce the labor statute on behalf 
     of unions. Mr. Eide's career, for over the past decade, would 
     indicate that he is ideologically incapable of performing 
     this task.
       In this regard, our review of his resume clearly shows that 
     Mr. Eide has spent the last twelve years working for the 
     Chamber of Commerce as the chief architect of every Chamber 
     effort opposing every labor initiative. From his opposition 
     to Senator Edward Kennedy's ergonomics initiative to 
     promoting a diminution of Fair Labor Standards Act and Equal 
     Employment Opportunity protections, Mr. Eide's efforts have 
     been dedicated 100% of the time to opposing the labor 
     movement and worker-friendly statutes.
       Section 7101, the ``findings and purpose'' section of the 
     Federal Service Labor-Management Relations statute, states 
     that:
       ``(a) The Congress finds that--
       (1) experience in both private and public employment 
     indicates that the statutory protection of the right of 
     employees to organize, bargain collectively, and participate 
     through labor organizations of their own choosing in 
     decisions which affect them--
       (A) safeguards the public interest.
       (B) contributes to the effective conduct of public 
     business, and
       (C) facilities and encourages the amicable settlements of 
     disputes between employees and their employers involving 
     conditions of employment; and
       (2) the public interest demands the highest standards of 
     employee performance and the continued development and 
     implementation of modern and progressive work practices to 
     facilitate and improve employee performance and the efficient 
     accomplishment of the operations of the Government.
       Therefore, labor organizations and collective bargaining in 
     the civil service are in the public interest.''
       AFGE respectfully submits that Mr. Eide's entire adult 
     career is inexorably inconsistent and opposed to the stated 
     Congressional ``findings and purpose'' of Section 7101, and 
     his nomination should be opposed.
           Sincerely,
                                            Bobby L. Harnage, Sr.,
     National President.

                          ____________________