Lockheed: Sure, we’ll keep our workers in the dark about layoffs

posted at 8:41 am on October 2, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

To quote Glenn Reynolds, they told me if I voted for John McCain that the corporations would conspire with the government to keep the working class in the dark — and they were right! Normally, Democrats would demand that companies considering layoffs tell their employees about it.  In fact, Democrats passed a law requiring corporations to do so, the WARN Act of 1988, which they passed with veto-proof majorities and which became law without then-President Ronald Reagan’s signature.

These days, they’re pressuring companies to keep quiet about layoffs that will occur when sequestration kicks in, and Lockheed has buckled:

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.

The law requires any company with 100 or more employees to provide a 60-day warning ahead of planned layoffs.  However, both the Department of Labor and OMB insisted that it didn’t apply to the sequestration issue, because no one really believes that Congress will allow the automatic cuts to go through.  That can be said about other kinds of layoffs as well, including those that don’t hinge on the whim of elections and politicians.

The kicker for Lockheed came when the Obama administration indemnified corporations for keeping workers in the dark:

So the Office of Management and Budget went a step further in guidance issued late Friday afternoon. If an agency terminates or modifies a contract, and the contractor must close a plant or lay off workers en masse, the company could treat employee compensation costs for WARN Act liability, attorneys’ fees and other litigation costs as allowable costs to be covered by the contracting agency—so long as the contractor has followed a course of action consistent with the Labor Department’s guidance. The legal fees would be covered regardless of the outcome of the litigation, according to the OMB guidance issued by Daniel Werfel, controller of the Office of Federal Financial Management, and Joseph Jordan, the Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy.

Democrats have now gone from demanding the WARN Act to paying companies to violate it.  I guess the working class is only valuable when they serve as a talking point, eh?  They told me that if I voted for John McCain, the working man would get screwed by Washington and the board room, and … well, you know.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

This Administration continues to excel in violations of law.

GarandFan on October 2, 2012 at 10:32 AM

The Feds might have bought Lockheed’s silence but, according to a quick Google search, Virginia has its own WARN Act:

http://www.vec.virginia.gov/vecportal/employer/pdf/warnact.pdf

Woops that’s a federal one as well.

My father works at Lockheed though and I can tell you that they are aware of the situation and are talking about it.

blammm on October 2, 2012 at 10:34 AM

They are blatantly violating the law because they know the MSM has their back. This is truly stunning, not that the Zero admin is violating a law. But that the MFM is canning another story that makes their hero look bad. The media is guiilty of dereliction of duty. I always knew their obvious slant. But I have never witnessed malpractice like this before.

Minnfidel on October 2, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Please tell me why the Republicans have not filed a law suit based on the DOE’s promise to do something illegal and endangers taxpayers since we are on the line to pay.

katablog.com on October 2, 2012 at 10:43 AM

The most ironic thing about this is that it is all being done under the banner of minimizing waste. So to minimize waste they are just going to pay all the legal fees. Makes sense to me!

Deets on October 2, 2012 at 10:50 AM

I wouldn’t expect anything less from a manipulating liar like Obama. The man’s entire adult life is an act of manipulating and lying, his true beliefs and background a complete lie and fabrication.

OxyCon on October 2, 2012 at 10:50 AM

They may not know specifically but they know already in general. The rumor mill moves much faster than any media.

scboy on October 2, 2012 at 10:51 AM

The MSM damages their own credibility, once tthey lie, and it becomes known their importance goes to zero. I expect we will see thousands of newspapers and a number of networks shutter their doors. Liberalism the gift that keeps on giving, everything it touches turns to garbage.

stormridercx4 on October 2, 2012 at 10:51 AM

This is like a farmer telling his cows they aren’t headed to the slaughterhouse, while they watch the trucks back up to the cattle chutes. Just makes the farmer their killer AND now a liar.

The employees have already been “WARNed”. They talk amongst themselves and they know. All this says to the employees they are just pawns in Obama’s political games. So now the employees expect to get laid off AND lied to, when they only expected to get laid off before.

PastorJon on October 2, 2012 at 10:52 AM

What amazes me is the way these guys work around absolutes, I have always wondered about thieves, the amount of time and effort they place in stealing, they could make more money in legitimate jobs.

Politician’s, the amount of time and effort of working around laws so they can break them, why not just put that time and effort into writing good laws, writing laws that help the economy, and they would never have to worry about re-election…

I guess like thieves, they find the thrill of cheating, better than creating…amazing…

Clever fools…

right2bright on October 2, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Someone should remind Lockheed Martin that there is a very high possibility that there will be a new Sheriff at the DoJ at the point that enforcement of their dereliction would be decided.

2nd Ammendment Mother on October 2, 2012 at 10:55 AM

This is like a farmer telling his cows they aren’t headed to the slaughterhouse, while they watch the trucks back up to the cattle chutes. Just makes the farmer their killer AND now a liar.

The employees have already been “WARNed”. They talk amongst themselves and they know. All this says to the employees they are just pawns in Obama’s political games. So now the employees expect to get laid off AND lied to, when they only expected to get laid off before.

PastorJon on October 2, 2012 at 10:52 AM

The image came to mind of “relocation” of Jews in Germany…

right2bright on October 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM

One can only hope that Bob McDonnell, George Allen, Romney, and Ryan will all be hammering away at this for the next month. Not just the layoffs, but Obama’s dishonesty about them and the pressure that he’s putting on Lockheed, which is consistent with Mussolini-esque fascism.

ardenenoch on October 2, 2012 at 11:09 AM

This is scandalous. It’s not just that they’re violating the law, or paying off people who violate the law… They’re paying them off with OUR MONEY. The taxpayer is going to pay the fines so that workers won’t get notified about layoffs and take it out on Obama in the voting booth.

irishlad317 on October 2, 2012 at 11:29 AM

This development has me really irked. “The people’s president!” (as my lib boss likes to call him) My *ss…

Laws are only relevant when they benefit him.

lucyvanpelt on October 2, 2012 at 11:43 AM

With everyday that passes, the situation in this country becomes more hopeless…

PatriotRider on October 2, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Obama and his thugs just get more and more disgusting and despicable every day.

jqc1970 on October 2, 2012 at 11:48 AM

My father works at Lockheed though and I can tell you that they are aware of the situation and are talking about it.

blammm on October 2, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Yeah, the problem with trying to keeps something like this secret is you have to keep it secret, AND keep the news that you’re keeping it secret a secret, and so on.

Now there are 123,000 Lockheed employees who know about this… because they need to know.

I questioned this, I mean do you expect me to believe all the Lockheed employees read Hotiar or comparable?

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_10_01_2012_p0-501519.xml

But they might read Aviation Week…

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/enr/1001-sequestration.html

Or the Lockheed Martin website.

Yeah, this isn’t much of a secret anymore. And I’m guessing anyone who would have gotten a notice heard about it.

Oh, and anyone in a more “secure” program that wouldn’t have been cut by sequestration… doesn’t know that and also thinks they may be on notice. So there might be more harm than good here.

gekkobear on October 2, 2012 at 12:10 PM

How can this be legal?

Kenz on October 2, 2012 at 12:16 PM

If Lockheed had any balls they would have told the corrupt boob in the WH to pound sand. Not a peep from the effing uuuuunions!

ultracon on October 2, 2012 at 12:23 PM

Come on. If you work for Lockheed-Martin (or any defense contractor) these stories tell anyone with a pulse that “We’re telling you that we’re not going to tell you that you will be laid off. Happy New Year!”

Parabellum on October 2, 2012 at 12:26 PM


Lockheed: Sure, we’ll keep our workers in the dark about layoffs

Not anymore! Dead-from-the-neck-up administration…..

itsspideyman on October 2, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Great hypocrisy call out but, honestly, do we think employees of Lockheed don’t read the papers, watch television or, good heavens, even check a blog now and then?

It’s not exactly a secret to potentially threatened employees.

In fact, it’s possible that the Obama “not-thinking” tank should have left the issue alone. Notices going out to people who knew they were going to get them might have caused less of a wave than this “buy off” maneuver, which will get more attention than the notices themselves.

But, in the end, they can’t help themselves. Stupidity of the zealot, on any side of an issue, always compounds the disaster they fear — and often creates one where none existed.

IndieDogg on October 2, 2012 at 12:43 PM

“The people’s president!” (as my lib boss likes to call him) My *ss…

lucyvanpelt on October 2, 2012 at 11:43 AM

You’re right (the my a** part).

And so is your lib boss. BHO is the people’s president. Just depends on which people. I guess that’s where “cronies” come from.

After all, it takes two to crony (the new dance craze sweeping Washington).

IndieDogg on October 2, 2012 at 12:49 PM

The federal WARN law is pretty specific about layoff notice timing.

There’s a 60 day notice required for a mass layoff or plant closure, along with the requirement to fund retraining, unless the layoffs were for unforeseen business issues.

Now, given that Lockmart has announced and retracted its intent to issue the layoffs, I doubt they can make the claim that the layoffs were due to an “unforeseen business issue”.

http://www.edd.ca.gov/jobs_and_training/layoff_services_warn.htm

unclesmrgol on October 2, 2012 at 12:53 PM

How can this be legal?

Kenz on October 2, 2012 at 12:16 PM

“I will MAKE it legal.”
Emperor Palpatine

orbitalair on October 2, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Someone should remind Lockheed management that APPEASEMENT doesn’t work for corporations either.

I would have made them gen up and pass a new law before the notices were due. Surely Congress can amend a law legally.? Maybe a ‘waiver’?

orbitalair on October 2, 2012 at 12:59 PM

If the companies don’t lay off anyone (staggered layoffs are added together for Warn purposes) or close a plant for 60 days or more after sequestration, no problem. But I doubt that will happen – I’ve read layoffs already started at Northrop and Sikorsky. In any event, why would Obama bribe the companies (with our money) to not comply with Warn?

LASue on October 2, 2012 at 1:23 PM

They need to follow the law and give 90 day notices of pending layoffs. Obama does not have the authority to use taxpayer money to cover legal expenses, and he knows it.

Amazingoly on October 2, 2012 at 1:54 PM

People, people. Let’s not overreact. There is nothing illegal. Craven political manoeuvring? Yes. Illegal? No. Part of WARN allowed an equal amount of severance pay in lieu of days warned. Iow, if a company only gave 30 days warning, they had to append that with 30 days severance to comply with the 60 day benchmark. What happened here with the directive which applies to FARs and contracting officers is that if Lockheed complies with all other regs, they would get reimbursed for whatever it takes to comply with WARN. That end would depend on the customer. To whit if extending the contract for 60 days would be productive in that they could use a few more Widgets (expensive) before shutting down the plant, then that is what would happen. If the customer would rather shut down the plant ASAP and forego new widgits (cheaper), the customer just needs to pay the severance.

Again nothing illegal, but the admin exposed their corruption for all to see now. Rest assured that these employees are well aware and will vote accordingly. Yes, the admin acted stupidly. This won’t change the ignorant dem voters but is bound to sway the Indies at those at risk companies against Oboobi. Well played.

AH_C on October 2, 2012 at 2:33 PM

If Lockheed breaks the law, the should be barred of all government contracts. This would be willful disobedience of the law for political and financial gain and that is unacceptable under our federalist system.

savage24 on October 2, 2012 at 4:04 PM

Here’s the letter Lockheed should write:

Dear Employees:

This is not a

NOTICE OF LAYOFF per the

Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act

Normally we would be issuing such a notice, as layoffs are likely within 60 days due to the “sequestration” budget of the Federal Government. As this notice would come before the presidential election, November 6th, 2012, the Federal Government has asked us not to issue these notices and has indemnified us against the legal consequences of not doing so.

We just wanted to keep you informed of developments. Thank you.

servative on October 2, 2012 at 5:11 PM

Again nothing illegal, but the admin exposed their corruption for all to see now. Rest assured that these employees are well aware and will vote accordingly. Yes, the admin acted stupidly. This won’t change the ignorant dem voters but is bound to sway the Indies at those at risk companies against Oboobi. Well played.

AH_C on October 2, 2012 at 2:33 PM

If an agency terminates or modifies a contract, and the contractor must close a plant or lay off workers en masse, the company could treat employee compensation costs for WARN Act liability, attorneys’ fees and other litigation costs as allowable costs to be covered by the contracting agency—so long as the contractor has followed a course of action consistent with the Labor Department’s guidance. The legal fees would be covered regardless of the outcome of the litigation, according to the OMB guidance issued by Daniel Werfel, controller of the Office of Federal Financial Management, and Joseph Jordan, the Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy.

If there is nothing illegal then why the need to offer up covering costs of attorney’s fees and potential litigation?

What potential litigation would there be if this was on the up and up?

weaselyone on October 2, 2012 at 5:23 PM

Again nothing illegal, but the admin exposed their corruption for all to see now. Rest assured that these employees are well aware and will vote accordingly. Yes, the admin acted stupidly. This won’t change the ignorant dem voters but is bound to sway the Indies at those at risk companies against Oboobi. Well played.

AH_C on October 2, 2012 at 2:33 PM

of course all lockheed employees are aware of it all, the company sent communication to them 2 months ago, my brother in law received at least 4 or 5 emails and regular mail from his lockheed management on this topic, and they are in regular contact about the latest developments. and yesterday they had a meeting where they told him that they would not send any notices out in nov because nobody would be laid off before March 2013, it will be a gradual process if it happens, and at this point they have no idea which projects go and which stay. this will be determined in Jan if sequestration does get off. Lockheed is not breaking any law. They have plenty of time to send those notices out, between Jan and March. these hysterical people commenting without having any clue are pathetic really, not to mention that they are evidently after cheap politicizing of an otherwise serious matter for those involved, and nothing else. they are talking as if the lockheed employees are somehow in the dark about future lay offs and the only ones who know about this big, dirty ‘secret’ are the HA commenters…can it get any more ridiculous than this…

jimver on October 2, 2012 at 5:29 PM

Lockheed Martin (and its pre-merger incarnation, Martin Marietta) has quite the history of keeping its employees in the dark about impending layoffs. In August-September 1992 rumors stared flying around the plant about an impending round of deep layoffs. Management continued to deny that any layoffs were planned. In October of that year the first wave of layoffs happened. In January of 1993 the second wave occurred (catching me in it). When I came back to work for the corporation in March of 2002, I became immediately cynical about any denial by management of rumors of layoffs. Right now, with sequestration looming over our heads, management has been more forthcoming about what will happen next year…and it’s not pretty.

Moose Drool on October 2, 2012 at 5:37 PM

If there is nothing illegal then why the need to offer up covering costs of attorney’s fees and potential litigation?
What potential litigation would there be if this was on the up and up?
weaselyone on October 2, 2012 at 5:23 PM

Because if you read the WARN act, a company can be liable for severance pay, breach of contract lawsuits and any other legal fees due to the company mis-timing their layoff notices. All the omb did was inform contracting officers that such burdens will be borne by the govt contracts.

Part of why people are getting wound up over nothing is threefold. 1) the reporter writing these articles and 2) pundits commenting on them do not necessarily understand govt contracting. 3) we all hate the slimy Democrats and most of all Oboobi — but that doesn’t justify calling this illegal

AH_C on October 2, 2012 at 5:52 PM

This Administration continues to excel in violations of law.

GarandFan on October 2, 2012 at 10:32 AM

And so does every GOP member of Congress. Doing nothing when laws are by-passed at will they are as complicit. All the House has to do is stop funds to a particular program or agency. And yet, nothing has been done.

riddick on October 2, 2012 at 6:00 PM

I used to work for this slime ball company when it was Martin Marietta and after the merger with Lockheed. The management is infested with liars and back stabbers. When a project was ram rodded through to early completion the managers received huge bonuses while the assemblers, testers, and inspectors were screwed. After I was processed out after my fourth and last lay-off I folded my badge as many times as possible and as I was driving out of the parking lot I left tire tracks in the parking lot. I resisted the urge to give them the gesture that I thought they “Were Number One” but it was tempting

hamradio on October 2, 2012 at 6:07 PM

Edit. There were some good managers but they were mainly on the production floor.

hamradio on October 2, 2012 at 6:09 PM

hamradio on October 2, 2012 at 6:07 PM

Heh. Gotta love those union shops where they’re hiring in one door and laying off in another on the same day even. General Dynamics and LTV were like that. :)

AH_C on October 2, 2012 at 7:33 PM

A word of advice for any Lockheed-Martin employee, or a dependent of a Lockheed-Martin employee, be very careful of what you comment about that company on this thread. Their Ethics Police are very capable of hunting you down.

People who don’t work for that company do not know of the political correctness, the ethics office and policy, and political connections of the company. It is a dedicated company committed to its corporate survival and the employee can be walked out the door within minutes. First Amendment rights are not tolerated within the “gate.” Those rights are respected on Hot Air but not in that corporate culture.

As a former employee of the company, that they are tight with their customer for survival is without doubt. This does not mean that they have a fixed commitment to any political party. The company is dedicated to the defense of the country first in producing quality systems, then its customer base, then to political correctness.

This company is a mixture of three companies: GE Aerospace, Martin-Marietta and the former Lockheed aircraft company. From current internal sources, things are extremely tight within regarding revenue, contracts, and head count. They do have a Room 101; it’s the door, and it’s easy to find it.

This company has one of the best corporate lawyer staffs in country. It also has a very good reputation in protecting classified information and networks. The company reads the subject matter of employee emails and will be looking for the http of this thread as we speak. If this is spotted on an employee workstation, look out. If you’re going to comment, do it at home. The company now has smart ID badges that make one a walking wi-fi hot spot. They know when the employee is on their workstation and if one is not at the workstation the internal system knows where you are within a building.

Visions of Winston Smith’s workplace? “Yeeeep!”, and there are internal Julias ready to turn you in. Yes, this commenter knows a lot about his once career company.

Thistle on October 2, 2012 at 10:10 PM

Here Obama is using taxpayer money purely for his political benefit with this policy.

Asking contractors to break federal law and indemnifying them from financial consequences with taxpayer money is the height of political corruption and malfeasance.

Obama needs to be criminally charged and also sued making him personally responsible to payback any taxpayer money spent indemnifying contractors in this manner to benefit his campaign.

RJL on October 2, 2012 at 10:45 PM

Both the Department of Labor and OMB insisted that it didn’t apply to the sequestration issue, because they believe in magical unicorn farts that will stop any layoffs from happening.

Y314K on October 3, 2012 at 1:18 AM

Thistle on October 2, 2012 at 10:10 PM

This applies to nearly all defense contractors. They’re not the villians and most of their leadership are dedicated to delivering the best they can for the soldiers first.

That said, folks please pay attention to my earlier posts – what the admin did is not illegal — unbecoming, cynical snakes? Yes but not illegal. In essence the real sequestering will take place in March, not January in order to prevent the warning notices from going out in November. That is all.

AH_C on October 3, 2012 at 9:19 AM

Some organization needs to file a suit NOW and do that legal thing that gets it expedited. Be assured, Lockheed. The promise to compensate you for violating the law will be challenged. If Obama is elected and tries reprisal, you can fight that, but you will never regain your reputation as an honest broker.

And IF Republicans retain the House, you can be PDS that you will be called on to explain WHY you succumbed to an outright bribe to break a very clear law.

I’m quite disgusted. Perhaps Lockheed isn’t the calaber of contractor we should be entrusting our security and our warrior’s lives to.

Portia46 on October 3, 2012 at 9:20 AM

I know at least one of our former military-now-defense-industry employee friends who already knows the pink slips area coming. So I hope those folks continue to get the word out despite the admin’s efforts.

mubando on October 3, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Thistle on October 2, 2012 at 10:10 PM

Rumor has it that you do not want to work for this company if you have any choices. I begin to understand. Thank you and I’m sure the employees appreciate the warning.

I repeat: The management’s willingness to willfully break a very clearly-written law and the administration’s unlawful bribe and not so subtle threats will be investigated. Sounds like it’s a company ripe for whistle-blowers.

Portia46 on October 3, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Congress should be calling for Obama’s head on a platter. He is breaking the LAW. The laws Congress has passed.
Problem is we have NO Justice Department….
File Impeachment and force the son of a B to comply with the law.
Or file an action against Lockheed-Martin for failure to comply
But for GOD’s sake DO SOMETHING!!!!! GET THE HECK OFF VACATION AND GO TO WORK!!!

Delsa on October 3, 2012 at 12:50 PM

THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IS COMMITTING THE BRIBERY OF AN AMERICAN COMPANY. THE ADMINISTRATION IS COMPLICIT IN THE BREAKING OF LAWS AND USING TAXPAYER MONEY AS THE BRIBE!

I AM SICK OF THIS CRAP AND GLAD MY PARENTS ARE NOT ALIVE TO SEE THIS.

NEVER THOUGHT I’D SEE A TIME WHEN THE CONGRESS WOULD STAND BY AND DO NOTHING TO STOP THE WILLFULL BREAKING OF THE LAW BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

Delsa on October 3, 2012 at 12:58 PM

And Lockheed Martin goes along with the breaking of Federal laws. Those who work for this crime family must be really proud.

If you sit by and do nothing you are just as guilty.
Stank up and demand to know if you are being laid off after the election!

DEMAND IT from you benefactor!!!!

Because when you are cut loose and ask me to support you and your f’n company with my tax dollars, you’d better not tell me who you worked for!!!!

Delsa on October 3, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Lockheed Martin has always been a political animal. That’s how they have the bulk of the military aerospace contracts, even though they don’t generally have the better product. I know that Bohner doesn’t have any cajones, but if he did, I would suggest that he meet privately with LM and inform them that the Congress will not back obama’s flouting of the law and then promising to pay LM’s legal bills. He should promise them, that if they do this, the entire sequester will come out of their sales.

Old Country Boy on October 3, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Old Country Boy
 on October 3, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Portia46 on October 3, 2012 at 9:20 AM

Delsa on October 3, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Please read my and jimver comments above. Nothing illegal is going on. Shady, unbecoming and political? Yes. But not illegal. Problem is that many people just don’t understand govt contracting and certainly don’t understand just what the omb directive. Basically all they have done is to move the sequester date from 1 Jan 2013 to 1 Mar 2013. Where is the crime? Nothing but political machinations, but again, nothing illegal.

AH_C on October 3, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Let’s plot the two forks in the road on this issue: (1) the political; and, (2) the patriotic and technical commitments of the company Lockheed Martin.

I don’t have a problem with those heaping invective political criticism on LM; however, the patriotic and technical performances of Lockheed Martin systems that are in current deployment have met operational specification in the theaters of Iraq and Afghanistan. The political connotations towards LM are one thing; the dedication to reliability, maintainability, logistics, operational performance, and cost points of this company are beyond “rational” critique. Anyone wanting to challenge the legal team in Bethesda in reference to a charge of an ethics violation can send a letter of concern to those folks—and they will read it. The ethics network within LM is very efficient and thorough.

Notwithstanding emotive political critique, Cases in Point: the counter battery radar system was on time, within budget, and is on-line at this moment protecting infantry troops in Afghanistan. Customer satisfaction with ship borne (AEGIS), air borne (Hawkeye) and land based radar systems are without question. Not just the US, but many foreign allies also field LM land base radar systems. Who was the first to shoot a missile with a missile? It was an Aegis Combat System produced by LM in Moorestown, New Jersey, not China, and certainly not Russia. When a company has to compete with the likes of Raytheon and Northrop Grumman and wins its share of contracts based upon concept and cost model proposals, there is a technical superiority somewhere within that company.

To say of LMCO “though they don’t generally have the better product” is not easily proved. What system now protects the continental US and Europe against missile attack, especially after missile defense was pulled from Eastern Europe? Answer: It’s the Aegis Cruisers on patrol in the Pacific and Mediterranean Oceans. Every large platform sonar system in today’s surface fleet, which protects the Navy’s fleet carriers, was produced by LM in either Syracuse, NY or Manassas, Virginia. American designed and factory produced in the USA and not in some offshore sweatshop (and that’s why the systems cost so much).

The company is a stoically patriotic company with people who are “citizens” and pass background checks. The buffoonery of corporate politics is one thing, but, the company commander on the ground in Afghanistan under mortar attack has the confidence that that LM system when on line and deployed will plot the origin of the fired mortar and the counter-battery commander will have the data to whup-a$$. How is that confidence justified?: the dedication of all the aerospace employees of America in all the aerospace companies and not just LM’s. Yes, there are patriots left in America that a company commander can rely on.

LM is not a “benefactor.” The company demands employee ethical conduct and technical competency for the salary compensation and benefit packages it offers, unlike what the government demands of its direct employees. LM is not a “crime” family; it is a publically traded company on the stock exchange which probably many of the commenter’s 401K’s and IRA’s include.

“If you sit by and do nothing you are just as guilty”: hmmm, 123,000 hind ends sitting in LM offices throughout the world today, that’s a lot of seats to get moving on a political issue tied to employment, mortgages, and family economic survival. Good luck on that.

Personally annoyed and disappointed at LM’s “political” decision, regarding what goes on in the halls of corporate headquarters in Bethesda, Maryland, only an omniscient mind could fathom that conundrum and I can respect the frustration with the company’s decision commented herein.

AH_C, your analysis is also my take and close to lived experience on this LM issue.

Thistle on October 3, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Just in case the federal contract specialists missed it, you might want to read this: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/3/mccain-white-house-cant-buy-defense-contractors/

Lockheed caved and there’s a few people outside Obama-land who will not forget, including some very influential law-makers. This breaks not just the letter of the law but the intent.

BTW, a huge part of this whole scandal is that DoD (the “customer”) hasn’t issued any kind of list of exactly what will be cut under sequestration.

Portia46 on October 3, 2012 at 4:58 PM

Portia46 on October 3, 2012 at 4:58 PM

Portia, thanks for the article. However McVain is an idiot and has been ever since the academy. If it wasn’t for his granddad, be would have washed out. If you note the article,some congressmen have asked for the legal basis and they will get it. All things contracting is guided by the FAR and OMB writes the FAR. On one hand it is mere speculation as to which contracts will be axed. Basically the OMB has decreed that the WARN clock starts the day it is decided that program X will be axed. IOW if I have a contract worth $50 M over 5 years and ominous my 3rd year, on Jan 2, when I’ve been informed that my contract is terminated, I either turn my employees loose that day with a 60 day severance or I give the notice and terminate them on 2 Mar. The govt then “takes” back the un-expended contract funds. If Congress wants the sequestered to take effect immediately on 2jan with not one penny more expended, they need to get their butts back in DC, put it in writing and pass it as law so that the Did can start IDing the contracts to be axed before Nov 2. Anything else is posturing and in a court of law, I think the companies will prevail with the govt spending even more on “loser pays” court costs and fees

AH_C on October 3, 2012 at 5:54 PM

and ominous my 3rd year, on Jan 2, when I’ve been i

)
Hmmm. “Ominous” should be “on my”

AH_C on October 3, 2012 at 6:39 PM

Portia46 on October 3, 2012 at 4:58 PM

Yes, thanks for the link. Within it is an interesting sentence.

The gamesmanship that the White House is playing is in this quote from the Washington Times: “….To avoid that, the Pentagon and the OMB said late last week that the cuts are speculative and they won’t immediately cancel any contracts Jan. 2. They also said the federal government would pick up any costs or liability the companies faced by issuing pink slips without the required warning.” Implicitly, this means that the companies continue to receive milestone money on existing contracts and consideration on pending awards and the penalties of any subsequent layoffs will be deferred to the government. Milestone money =’s cash flow maintained. After all, the country has been without a federal budget for three years and the chickens are just now coming to the roost. However, this situation is in the hands of the corporate lawyers and not the contract managers. The pivot point in the above quote is the word “speculative.”

There is also another angle to this. LM contributes to the employees 401K’s in Lockheed Martin stock. The employee is then able to disburse the contribution into other investments after the assignment of the company’s portion to the employee. Massive layoff notices, and fear of the unknown, would cause employees to move out of the company stock and into safer investments. Private investors would notice this immediately. Wall Street is watching the stocks of all the major aerospace companies with a microscope this week. If 123,000 employees decide to move stock out of their accounts in a short period of time to protect the baseline of their 401Ks, the stock value would tank thus effecting management’s compensation values also. Is it a CEO cave in, or a stock value protection trade-off? The whole aerospace sector in the stock market is waiting to see who blinks first and who laughs last doesn’t count as victory or return on investment.

Note that I do not agree with the politics of sequestration between the contractor and the government. Trust the contractor first and don’t trust the government at all.

“The nature of government action is coercive action. The nature of political power is: the power to force obedience under threat of property expropriation, imprisonment, or death.”
—Ayn Rand, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal

This scenario is a nasty game and someone will come out of this with a ruined career. This is between the CEOs, who have testified before Congress together (where else would one see Lockheed Martin, Boeing, BAE, and Northrop Grumman agree on something?) and the president. CEOs are not the president’s favorite people because they are the standard bearers of private enterprise and property—they are the Howard Roarks he detests and envies.

Size of the bus is yet to be determined, or will one be necessary after November 6th?

Thistle on October 3, 2012 at 7:34 PM

After watching the debate tonight, this subject will probably become a moot point hopefully in January, 2013. My quote of “Size of the bus yet to be determined” has been updated to “Bus may not be necessary”.

Thistle on October 3, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Thistle on October 3, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Nice writeup. Agree that this all may be moot. That said, seeing how defense is enumerated in the constitution, I’m all for keeping the industry going “by hook or crook” (politically speaking) since it was Oboobi and the donks that willfully jeopardized the DOD when they should have been looking at the sacred but unenumerated cows for culling.

AH_C on October 4, 2012 at 3:14 AM

Just another item about federal contracts and how they can be maneuvered to circumvent the law, the Congress has the power of the purse and a simple amendment “no funds authorized/appropriated by this act shall be used to….”

Ask Oliver North about those prohibition amendments.

Lockheed? You guys have perhaps made a very bad bet.

Portia46 on October 4, 2012 at 9:30 AM

Comment pages: 1 2