New Obamacare Regulation Invites Whistleblower Complaints

reply to post by WaterBottle


Good stuff! Consider this GAO report that was released in the Summer following Obama's okey dokey on Obamacare. OSHA's whistle blower program was ineffective and poorly managed. Go Figure??

We found that OSHA has done little to ensure that investigators have the necessary training and equipment to do their jobs, and that it lacks sufficient internal controls to ensure that the whistleblower program operates as intended. More specifically, we found the following: (1) OSHA enhanced its whistleblower training, establishing two mandatory 2-week courses between 2007 and 2008, but has not ensured attendance or taken steps to ensure that investigators have necessary equipment to do their jobs; (2) OSHA lacks sufficient internal controls to ensure that the whistleblower program operates as intended due to several factors, including inconsistent program operations, inadequate tracking of program expenses, and insufficient performance monitoring. Program operations vary by region in significant ways, as exemplified by differing standards used to screen out complaints, and by some regions not having formally trained supervisors who approve investigation decisions. The whistleblower program's national office lacks mechanisms, such as access to accurate data and actual case files, to monitor compliance with policies and procedures. We provided a draft of this report to OSHA for its review and comment. In its response, OSHA concurred with two of our recommendations and cited ongoing activities in areas covered by the other three. OSHA also expressed concern with some of our findings.

So, let's let them head up the Obamacare whistleblower program... No word on whether any successful corrective action has been taken. Not that it matters...

www.gao.gov...

Learn something new everyday. OSHA is in charge of all whistle blowing complaints filed by NON Govt. workers. So, who do the govt. workers call to blow the whistle? Obama?

There needs to be a matching poster made up for the Supreme Court Decision under Roberts. Remember? That "victory" the White House was SO happy about?

The states have the right to disregard and ignore the Affordable Care Act in full or in part, based on the will of the people of that state, thanks for the Super Court. While making sure it was a TAX and not a "fee" or some other nonsense term they tried to use.....they insured NO state can be retaliated against, in any form, for failure to comply with or follow the terms OF the Affordable Care Act.

So.... I just had to note, while we're on about protections related to Obamacare. the BIGGEST protection of them all came not from Obama or Pelosi but John Roberts and his group of 9.

(Fortunately...Missouri is among the states who have chosen and then passed state Constitutional Amendment to remove all doubt, to decline participation in this crazy scam)

reply to post by jibeho

Learn something new everyday. OSHA is in charge of all whistle blowing complaints filed by NON Govt. workers. So, who do the govt. workers call to blow the whistle? Obama?

IDK. I think the government agencies automatically comply with the ACA.

Just so people see the irony in how Obama actively solicits whistleblowers and how it treats true whistleblowers.

Later this month six Americans will be honoured with a Ridenhour prize which celebrates truth-telling in the public interest.

They are a varied bunch. Eileen Foster helped expose systemic fraud at America's largest mortgage provider Countywide Financial. Lt Col Daniel Davis spoke out against the top brass's portrayal of US military actions in Afghanistan while he was still a serving soldier. Author Ali Soufan wrote The Black Banners, a history of Al-Qaida. The two makers of Semper Fi – a documentary about a Marine's investigation into the death of his daughter – gets a Ridenhour for film and Congressman John Lewis – a hero of the Civil Rights struggle – gets a courage award.

All spoke out even when the forces arrayed against them were large, powerful, or questioned their motives and patriotism. That should be something that the Barack Obama administration would celebrate. After all, this is a White House that once vowed to protect whistleblowers when it drew up its transition agenda. "Such acts of courage and patriotism, which can sometimes save lives and often save taxpayer dollars, should be encouraged rather than stifled," the document said as Obama prepared to take power.

But that was then. This is now.

Over the past three and a half years the Obama White House has instead shown a ferocious hostility to many whistleblowers and earned itself the ire of progressive columnists like Salon's Glenn Greenwald and whistleblower defence groups like the Project on Government Oversight and the Government Accountability Project.

Danielle Brian, of the PGO, has said the US department of justice in the Obama administration "sent a clear of message of fear and intimidation" to whistleblowers in the national security field. This is how the GAP's Jesselyn Raddack – herself a former whistleblower at the DoJ – put it: "While the Bush administration treated whistleblowers unmercifully, the Obama administration has been far worse. It is actually prosecuting them," she wrote recently.

To do that it is using the bluntest of tools: the Espionage Act, a first world war-era law intended to combat the threat from spies, not internal dissenters. So far six whistleblowers have been charged under the draconian law with the last one – CIA veteran John Kiriakou – being indicted on 3 April.

Every government has a right to protect its secrets. But one can also point to other areas where the Obama administration has shown a love of secrecy that should shame the Democrats who slammed President George Bush for a similar attitude.

For example, the Food and Drug Administration is being sued by current and former employees who say it started monitoring their private emails after they complained that approved medical devices might be risky. Or consider Obama's signing of a new defence law – called the NDAA – which critics have said defines illegal support of terrorists so broadly that journalists could be swept up in it by interviewing sources at radical groups. A group of writers and activists, including a Pulitzer prize-winning former New York Times reporter, have already gone to court in New York arguing the NDAA is chilling free speech around the globe.

Perhaps the Obama administration should perhaps remember who the Ridenhour prizes are named after. That is Ron Ridenhour, a Vietnam veteran who, while on active duty, investigated disturbing rumours of a terrible war crime by US soldiers. He then wrote to Congress to reveal an event that caused headlines around the world: the massacre at My Lai. Many in the Obama White House would agree that Ridenhour was a real American hero. But if he did what he did today, in Iraq or Afghanistan, just as Kiriakou has done, maybe they would prosecute him.

Lesson learned? If you're going to be a whistle blower. Just make sure that you are giving them what they ask for. Nothing else matters!!


www.guardian.co.uk...

reply to post by jibeho


There might be laws on the books currently to protect people -- but have you ever known someone that had to go through a wrongful termination lawsuit?

Time, energy and MONEY is required -- and in the end, you may or may not get very much back. Besides, who wants to keep working for a company you just sued because they fired you for blowing the whistle?

Depending on how large your job field is, you may or may not also be "black balled" from being hired by others. No one wants to hire what they might consider a, "trouble maker". Companies get very "creative" in ways to not interview you or give you a job, too.

reply to post by jibeho

I'm sorry but I kind of don't get what you're complaining about here. This is basically saying that if you have group health insurance (which you're probably paying a portion of the premium for) and that plan is not providing you with all of the benefits you're supposed to get for your $$, there's a mechanism for ensuring that you ultimately end up with what you're entitled to.

How exactly does that translate to a bad thing?

Originally posted by timidgal
reply to post by jibeho

 

I'm sorry but I kind of don't get what you're complaining about here. This is basically saying that if you have group health insurance (which you're probably paying a portion of the premium for) and that plan is not providing you with all of the benefits you're supposed to get for your $$, there's a mechanism for ensuring that you ultimately end up with what you're entitled to.

How exactly does that translate to a bad thing?

my 2 cents....
because it makes Obama look good, and big business look bad...we can't have that here, because...you know....it's obama.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Now a business owner has whole new ways to worry about a pissed off employee screwing them with Uncle Obama? Well.. like I said... I'd pull the plug and screw the jobs that get flushed with yet another business gone under. I know plenty who have done just that with measurable business in the last few months. These are the types of things driving it. Hail to the Community Organizer. What a genius we elected.

No offense, but this is somewhat funny because I can assure you that this will not incite any type of fear in any business owner's heart. We have already had laws on the books for decades that are supposed to protect workers' rights (i.e. Title VII of The Discrimination Rights Act of 1964, OSHA, ADA, FMLA, etc.) and these supposed "protections" fail the working man every single day - they're a joke and every employer knows it - so why would you think that this will be any different?

Originally posted by jibeho
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

Well said! How will the administration crack down on false reports by disgruntled workers? My bet is that they won't even try. Just another way to rock the system to its core for those who wish to do so. Will the new army of IRS agents be unleashed in the crackdown on employers? I smell an Audit apocalypse on the horizon. Every action in Obamacare has been created to serve multiple needs so far and I can clearly see how this will evolve...

Bingo - the premise is right but the outcome is wrong. I can assure you that there will be no crackdown on employers because like so many things in our political system (established long before Obama came on the scene BTW), it's all talk and no action... Just so you know, the law doesn't provide any mechanism whatsoever for the IRS to collect those penalties, so as of now, it's all a moot point anyway but most people don't realize that (no one realizes it except for the employers, that is...)..

Bottom line is that we can argue the symantics all day, but the end result is the same - the working man (or woman) ends up on the losing end of the stick...

Originally posted by timidgal

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Now a business owner has whole new ways to worry about a pissed off employee screwing them with Uncle Obama? Well.. like I said... I'd pull the plug and screw the jobs that get flushed with yet another business gone under. I know plenty who have done just that with measurable business in the last few months. These are the types of things driving it. Hail to the Community Organizer. What a genius we elected.

No offense, but this is somewhat funny because I can assure you that this will not incite any type of fear in any business owner's heart. We have already had laws on the books for decades that are supposed to protect workers' rights (i.e. Title VII of The Discrimination Rights Act of 1964, OSHA, ADA, FMLA, etc.) and these supposed "protections" fail the working man every single day - they're a joke and every employer knows it - so why would you think that this will be any different?

Exactly..... Why would it matter? Why add another snitch program and reporting procedure be needed? My whole point is that there are plenty of ways for people who feel wronged to report or inform on those they think wronged them. So... Pray tell, since you agree this is more or less worthless as an added program.......why bother having it?

My gripe is simply that every added snitch program is a step closer to a society where loyalty to the state ALWAYS comes before all other considerations. This isn't America as much as the Soviet.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
You know, for those who would see yet more ways to agree with and support the Great Controller In Chief we have leading this nation for a few years now, I'd ask this.

Were the hotlines, whistle blower options and rewards for fraud and bad conduct not already enough? Did we really need yet another publicly touted program to turn our society just a little further toward "Liberty for most and Justice by snitch"?.

Enough Enough Enough I say. We have police, we have regulatory enforcers (actually ordering guns and ammo to the oddest of agencies for that purpose now, too..?? ) and we have PLENTY of civil options for anyone in this nation to pursue. If all that isn't enough?? "Call us and we'll sue for you!!" billboards can be seen around every major city and population center across our country. I know from having seen a good many of them in person during my travels. It's obscene.

Into all this? We even need ASK what the problem is with MORE time, resources and effort spent for yet ANOTHER effort to see citizens play "Gotcha" on each other? Yeah... This is all very Soviet in appearance. We, the good Comrades, need supervised by our fellow Comrades. It's all for our own good, of course.....

Ummm - just because some of us are a little more educated about the healthcare reform law than others doesn't necessarily mean that we're die hard advocates of the "Great Controller in Chief". When did we stop accepting the premise that we had free will to assess and form an opinion on each separate issue? In my opinion, what you're insinuating (that you should either agree or disagree with EVERYTHING any particular politician does) is the root cause of what's polarized this country so much.

I'm trying to understand the impetus of your venom - is it the whole concept of whistle blowing or is it because this particular whistle blowing activity is a provision of a law that Obama's put in force? Would you be so against someone blowing the whistle on an employer who refuses to hire someone based on the color or his/her skin or because of a disability? Those are, in essence, whistle blowing activities as well by your definition, but I would hope we can agree that both examples would be morally wrong. In other words, is it the concept or the man you're so venomously against?

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

Originally posted by timidgal

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Now a business owner has whole new ways to worry about a pissed off employee screwing them with Uncle Obama? Well.. like I said... I'd pull the plug and screw the jobs that get flushed with yet another business gone under. I know plenty who have done just that with measurable business in the last few months. These are the types of things driving it. Hail to the Community Organizer. What a genius we elected.

No offense, but this is somewhat funny because I can assure you that this will not incite any type of fear in any business owner's heart. We have already had laws on the books for decades that are supposed to protect workers' rights (i.e. Title VII of The Discrimination Rights Act of 1964, OSHA, ADA, FMLA, etc.) and these supposed "protections" fail the working man every single day - they're a joke and every employer knows it - so why would you think that this will be any different?

Exactly..... Why would it matter? Why add another snitch program and reporting procedure be needed? My whole point is that there are plenty of ways for people who feel wronged to report or inform on those they think wronged them. So... Pray tell, since you agree this is more or less worthless as an added program.......why bother having it?

My gripe is simply that every added snitch program is a step closer to a society where loyalty to the state ALWAYS comes before all other considerations. This isn't America as much as the Soviet.

Why does the term "snitch" bother you so much and why would you choose that word in this type of instance? Don't you think there are instances where "snitching" is not only justified but necessary? And how does this translate to loyalty to the state? We're talking about private employers, many (but not all) of whom underpay their labor force while keeping the fruits of their employee's labor for themselves. Are you saying that we should just throw our hands up in the air and not even attempt to have some form of checks and balances within our society? Nothing sounds more like communist Russia to me than that premise...

Originally posted by jimmyx

Originally posted by timidgal
reply to post by jibeho

 

I'm sorry but I kind of don't get what you're complaining about here. This is basically saying that if you have group health insurance (which you're probably paying a portion of the premium for) and that plan is not providing you with all of the benefits you're supposed to get for your $$, there's a mechanism for ensuring that you ultimately end up with what you're entitled to.

How exactly does that translate to a bad thing?

my 2 cents....
because it makes Obama look good, and big business look bad...we can't have that here, because...you know....it's obama.

edit on 25-2-2013 by jimmyx because: (no reason given)

Lol - what a humorous way to state the obvious...

You're complaining about this?
Wow.
What is wrong with you people?
There is something seriously wrong with you.
It's a very weird hate obsession.

reply to post by timidgal


Well, on the first point, we can debate about education levels regarding the text and regulations or costs of The Affordable Care Act when or if we ever get into the particulars of the legislation itself. To me, as a Missouri resident, it's somewhat moot ...since my state literally OUTLAWED compliance with the Exchange idea the whole thing is based upon for making it work at all. Missouri and a number of others have thrown the ultimate whammy of a wrench into Obama's works. (That's what the Super Court did for the states)

Secondly, my 'venom' is simply a total lack of respect and disgust, not for a political party or Ideology, but for two very specific people on the ACA. Nancy Pelosi (Then Speaker of the House and speaker of the infamous "pass it to see what's in it" line) and Obama. They pushed it together like peas in a happy little pod as his very first priority out the gate in a new Presidential term. She did everything to craft it as, you may recall, Republicans were PHYSICALLY LOCKED OUT OF THE ROOMS where the discussions for it were taking place enough times to be openly reported and with some detail by Capital Hill reporters at the time. Those stories are still very easily found, dated to the period, if any would doubt how nasty passing that junk bill got.


Last, I use the term Snitch, because, well, it fits. We have Aunt Janet or one of her top minions on the TV almost DAILY now, warning about one threat or another and generally keeping everyone on edge below the ever present DHS slogan 'If you see something, say something'. We have the feds buying guns, ammo and crowd control tech like the stuff was on a blue light clearance sale and would never come again or something.

(We HIRE her and pay for her toys so SHE can worry about threats and WE don't HAVE to.....Yet she insists on making it a public participatory sport. )

Into that, yet one more encouraging way to go screw with fellow Americans by turning them into Uncle Sammy on perceived slights or injury or violation of this absurd Obamacare garbage.......as if yet another "outreach" to snitch was NEEDED. Obamacare sucks on the face of it...and probably why whole states have outright rejected it wholesale, in an almost unprecedented way. Having more "Whistleblower" garbage just adds to the 'sigh' factor.

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
reply to post by jibeho

 

There might be laws on the books currently to protect people -- but have you ever known someone that had to go through a wrongful termination lawsuit?

Time, energy and MONEY is required -- and in the end, you may or may not get very much back. Besides, who wants to keep working for a company you just sued because they fired you for blowing the whistle?

Depending on how large your job field is, you may or may not also be "black balled" from being hired by others. No one wants to hire what they might consider a, "trouble maker". Companies get very "creative" in ways to not interview you or give you a job, too.

So, how will it work when someone files a wrongful Obamacare implementation lawsuit?? The lawyers are going to love it. I can see the Bus ads and the commercials now.... Will people then sue when their employers drop coverage altogether and opt to take the fine option instead?

It all just ads to the ever growing cost of this monstrosity. Everything costs money.... and it just ads more unchecked authority under the Secretary of HHS. This just gets more absurd by the day...

It's very enlightening to realize that this is all okey dokey to a certain element of the population.

This is going to be a disaster for OSHA who's existing whistleblower program was already deemed ineffective and poorly managed by the GAO. I don't believe for a minute that they will be able to effectively handle the "claims" that are about to flood its system. Should be fun to watch the collapse....