U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

64–533 PDF 2011

POLICIES AND PRIORITIES AT THE 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION 

AND THE WORKFORCE 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, FEBRUARY 16, 2011 

Serial No. 112–6 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: 

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/house/education/index.html 

or 

Committee address: http://edworkforce.house.gov 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE 

JOHN KLINE, Minnesota, Chairman 

Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin 

Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ McKeon, California 

Judy Biggert, Illinois 

Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania 

Joe Wilson, South Carolina 

Virginia Foxx, North Carolina 

Duncan Hunter, California 

David P. Roe, Tennessee 

Glenn Thompson, Pennsylvania 

Tim Walberg, Michigan 

Scott DesJarlais, Tennessee 

Richard L. Hanna, New York 

Todd Rokita, Indiana 

Larry Bucshon, Indiana 

Trey Gowdy, South Carolina 

Lou Barletta, Pennsylvania 

Kristi L. Noem, South Dakota 

Martha Roby, Alabama 

Joseph J. Heck, Nevada 

Dennis A. Ross, Florida 

Mike Kelly, Pennsylvania 

[Vacant] 

George Miller, California, 

Senior Democratic Member 

Dale E. Kildee, Michigan 

Donald M. Payne, New Jersey 

Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey 

Robert C. ‘‘Bobby’’ Scott, Virginia 

Lynn C. Woolsey, California 

Rube ́n Hinojosa, Texas 

Carolyn McCarthy, New York 

John F. Tierney, Massachusetts 

Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio 

David Wu, Oregon 

Rush D. Holt, New Jersey 

Susan A. Davis, California 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, Arizona 

Timothy H. Bishop, New York 

David Loebsack, Iowa 

Mazie K. Hirono, Hawaii 

Barrett Karr, Staff Director 

Jody Calemine, Minority Staff Director 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on February 16, 2011 ....................................................................... 1 

Statement of Members: 

Barletta, Hon. Lou, a Representative in Congress from the State of Pennsylvania, question submitted for the record ............................................... 14 

Kline, Hon. John, Chairman, Committee on Education and the Workforce 1 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 3 

Questions submitted for the record ......................................................... 8 

McCarthy, Hon. Carolyn, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of New York, questions submitted for the record ....................................... 14 

Miller, Hon. George, senior Democratic member, Committee on Education 

and the Workforce ......................................................................................... 4 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 6 

Rokita, Hon. Todd, a Representative in Congress from the State of Indiana, question submitted for the record ....................................................... 14 

Statement of Witnesses: 

Solis, Hon. Hilda L., Secretary, U.S. Department of Labor .......................... 15 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 19 

Responses to questions submitted and additional materials furnished: 

Responses to questions ...................................................................... 71 

‘‘Project Labor Agreements,’’ 2007, Internet address to .................. 111 

‘‘Labor Analysis and Report on Feasibility for a Project Labor 

Agreement on the I-287/Cross Westchester Expressway 

Project,’’ June 17, 1999 .................................................................. 111 

‘‘Labor Analysis and Report on Feasibility for a Project Labor 

Agreement Covering Construction and Renovation of the Jacob 

K. Javits Convention Center,’’ April 2007 .................................... 152 

‘‘Workforce Investment Act Formula Obligations Program Year 

2009,’’ July 1, 2009-June 30, 2010 ................................................ 183 

‘‘Workforce Investment Act Formula Spending Program Year 

2009,’’ July 1, 2009-June 30, 2010 ................................................ 193 

(1) 

POLICIES AND PRIORITIES AT THE 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Wednesday, February 16, 2011 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

Washington, DC 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:03 a.m., in room 

2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. John Kline [chairman 

of the committee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Kline, Petri, Biggert, Platts, Foxx, Roe, 

Thompson, Walberg, DesJarlais, Rokita, Bucshon, Noem, Ross, 

Kelly, Miller, Kildee, Payne, Andrews, Woolsey, Hinojosa, McCarthy, Tierney, Holt, and Davis. 

Staff Present: James Bergeron, Director of Education and 

Human Services Policy; Kirk Boyle, General Counsel; Casey 

Buboltz, Coalitions and Member Services Coordinator; Ed Gilroy, 

Director of Workforce Policy; Marvin Kaplan, Professional Staff 

Member; Barrett Karr, Staff Director; Ryan Kearney, Legislative 

Assistant; Brian Newell, Press Secretary; Molly McLaughlin Salmi, 

Deputy Director of Workforce Policy; Ken Serafin, Workforce Policy 

Counsel; Linda Stevens, Chief Clerk/Assistant to the General 

Counsel; Loren Sweatt, Professional Staff Member; Joseph Wheeler, Professional Staff Member; Aaron Albright, Minority Deputy 

Communications Director; Tylease Alli, Minority Hearing Clerk; 

Daniel Brown, Minority Staff Assistant; Jody Calemine, Minority 

Staff Director; Brian Levin, Minority New Media Press Assistant; 

Jerrica Mathis, Minority Legislative Fellow; Celine McNicholas, 

Minority Labor Counsel; Richard Miller, Minority Senior Labor Policy Advisor; Megan O’Reilly, Minority General Counsel; Julie 

Peller, Minority Deputy Staff Director; Meredith Regine, Minority 

Policy Associate, Labor; and Michele Varnhagen, Minority Chief 

Policy Advisor and Labor Policy Director. 

Chairman KLINE. A quorum being present, the committee will 

come to order. 

Allow me to begin today’s hearing by welcoming Secretary Solis 

to the committee. 

Madam Secretary, we are thrilled to have you back. You are no 

stranger to this committee. We want to be very respectful of your 

time and try to keep it moving along here. Many of us had the 

pleasure and honor of serving with you when you were our colleague. We are glad to see you back here today as the Secretary. 
2 

The Department of Labor is an agency whose size and mission 

have expanded dramatically in recent years. Today it administers 

more than 180 Federal laws, affecting 10 million employers and 

125 million workers. The Department’s policies are present in virtually every American workplace, and it has a duty to ensure those 

policies represent the best interests of both workers and employers. 

Many of the challenges the country faced 1 year ago are still at 

the forefront of our economic concerns today. Getting the economy 

moving and the American people back to work remain pressing national priorities. Clearly, we have a lot of work to do. 

Nearly 14 million workers are unemployed. The administration 

had promised that the $814 billion stimulus bill would keep unemployment below 8 percent. The Department of Labor received almost $5 billion in the so-called stimulus funds; yet, for 21 consecutive months, the national unemployment rate has been at or above 

9 percent. Nearly a million individuals have become so discouraged 

with their search for work they have abandoned the workforce entirely—a number that has shown little improvement since the Secretary was last before this committee. 

Two years of pouring taxpayer money into the economy has produced these results. Madam Secretary, we believe this is unacceptable. 

Recently, President Obama issued an Executive order that requires a comprehensive review of the rules and regulations on the 

books and their consequences for economic growth. It comes not a 

moment too soon. We are willing and eager partners in that effort. 

Promoting job creation and American competitiveness will be a 

leading priority for this committee. I believe that is what the American people sent us here to do. 

As we look for ways to encourage investment and hiring, we are 

mindful that our workplaces require certainty. Workers and their 

employers need simple and fair rules of the road that promote 

health, safety, and accountability. They do not need a bureaucracy 

that continues to grow in size and complexity and that stifles the 

freedom and innovation our economy desperately needs to grow 

and prosper. 

That is why your presence here today, Madam Secretary, is extremely important. Over the last 2 years, we have seen the administration adopt a number of workforce policies that I believe threaten job creation and economic opportunity. Initiatives such as 

project labor agreements and ‘‘high road’’ contracting are clearly 

designed to favor big labor at the expense of small businesses. 

The President recently wrote in the Wall Street Journal that, 

quote, ‘‘Small firms drive growth and create most jobs in this country. We need to make sure nothing stands in their way,’’ close 

quote. Yet the administration continues to pursue policies that disadvantage small businesses and their ability to create new jobs. 

The administration has also rolled back commonsense disclosure 

requirements that allow workers to understand how their union 

dues are being spent, denied workers access to high-quality investment advice regarding their 401(k) plans, and adopted an approach 

to workplace safety that focuses on punishing employers rather 

than promoting prevention. 
3 

I question how these changes improve the competitiveness of our 

workforce. These policies are not new policies, and neither are our 

concerns. I raise them again in light of President’s recent Executive 

order and with the hope the Department will take a second look 

at these and similar policies that hinder economic growth. 

As I noted earlier, this committee intends to be a partner in the 

effort to find and remove roadblocks to job creation, and I can assure you we will do our part. 

I am also interested to hear in more detail your Department’s 

budget priorities for the next fiscal year. I can assure you a number of my colleagues have questions, as well. You are aware, as we 

all are, of the fiscal crisis we face as a nation. Every dollar spent 

at the Federal level must be accounted for and justified before it 

is spent. I look forward to learning more about the way in which 

you intend to spend taxpayer resources in the months ahead. 

We have a lot of ground to cover in just a few short hours, 

Madam Secretary, and so I will turn now to my colleague, George 

Miller, the senior Democratic member of the committee, for his 

opening remarks. 

[The statement of Chairman Kline follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Hon. John Kline, Chairman, 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

Allow me to begin today’s hearing by welcoming Secretary Solis to the committee. 

The secretary isn’t a stranger to Congress or this Committee. I appreciate the time 

you have taken to be with us today and look forward to your testimony. 

The Department of Labor is an agency whose size and mission have expanded 

dramatically in recent years. Today, it administers more than 180 federal laws affecting 10 million employers and 125 million workers. The department’s policies are 

present in virtually every American workplace, and it has a duty to ensure those 

policies represent the best interests of both workers and employers. 

Many of the challenges the country faced one year ago are still at the forefront 

of our economic concerns today. Getting the economy moving and the American people back to work remain pressing national priorities. Clearly, we have a lot of work 

to do. 

Today nearly 14 million workers are unemployed. The administration promised 

that an $814 billion stimulus bill would keep unemployment below 8 percent. The 

Department of Labor received almost $5 billion in these so-called stimulus funds. 

Yet for 21 consecutive months the national unemployment rate has been at or above 

9 percent. Nearly one million individuals have become so discouraged with their 

search for work, they have abandoned the workforce entirely—a number that has 

shown little improvement since the secretary was last before this committee. Two 

years of pouring taxpayer money into the economy has produced these results. 

Madam Secretary, this is unacceptable. 

Recently, President Obama issued an executive order that requires a comprehensive review of the rules and regulations on the books and their consequences for economic growth. It comes not a moment too soon. We are willing and eager partners 

in that effort. Promoting job creation and American competitiveness will be a leading priority for this committee. I believe that is what the American people sent us 

here to do. 

As we look for ways to encourage investment and hiring, we are mindful that our 

workplaces require certainty. Workers and their employers need simple and fair 

rules of the road that promote health, safety, and accountability; they do not need 

a bureaucracy that continues to grow in size and complexity and stifles the freedom 

and innovation our economy desperately needs to grow and prosper. 

That is why your presence here today, Madam Secretary, is extremely important. 

Over the last two years we have seen the administration adopt a number of workforce policies that threaten job creation and economic opportunity. 

Initiatives such as project labor agreements and high road contracting are clearly 

designed to favor Big Labor at the expense of small businesses. The president recently wrote in the Wall Street Journal that ‘‘Small firms drive growth and create 

most new jobs in this country. We need to make sure nothing stands in their way.’’ 
4 

Yet the administration continues to pursue policies that disadvantage small businesses and their ability to create new jobs. 

The administration has also rolled back commonsense disclosure requirements 

that allow workers to understand how their union dues are being spent; denied 

workers’ access to high-quality investment advice regarding their 401(k) plans; and 

adopted an approach to workplace safety that focuses on punishing employers rather than promoting prevention. I question how these changes improve the competitiveness of our workforce. 

These policies are not new policies and neither are our concerns. I raise them 

again in light of the president’s recent executive order and with the hope the department will take a second look at these and similar policies that hinder economic 

growth. As I noted earlier, this committee intends to be a partner in the effort to 

find and remove roadblocks to job creation, and I can assure you, we will do our 

part. 

I am also interested to hear in more detail your department’s budget priorities 

for the next fiscal year. I can assure you a number of my colleagues have questions 

as well. You are aware, as we all are, of the fiscal crisis we face as a nation. Every 

dollar spent at the federal level must be accounted for and justified before it is 

spent. I look forward to learning more about the way in which you intend to spend 

taxpayer resources in the months ahead. 

We have a lot of ground to cover in just a few short hours, Madam Secretary. And 

so I will now turn to my colleague George Miller, the senior Democratic member 

of the committee, for his opening remarks. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you for holding this hearing. 

And we welcome the Secretary back to the committee and to the 

Congress. Secretary Solis appeared a year ago to discuss the 

strengthening of the economy and improving the lives of American 

workers. We agreed that our most important priority was to get 

America back to work, jobs that pay fair wages, jobs that are safe. 

Madam Secretary, you have made great progress in this area. In 

particular, I applaud your efforts to make sure that our Nation’s 

workforce is more responsive to the local economic conditions so 

that workers can be trained and find new jobs. 

And when Americans go to work, they should be paid fairly and 

according to the law. On this front, the Department has played a 

critical role in securing over $300 million in unpaid wages to workers. When you came to this office, the Department of Labor was 

lying to those workers. They were telling them that those businesses went out of business, that those businesses had moved, that 

those businesses had gone bankrupt. All of those were lies, and 

those workers didn’t get the money for the hours that they worked. 

This is a big change, and thank you so much for securing the fairness in the workplace for those workers. 

I am very pleased that the Department has moved quickly to respond to the Upper Big Branch mine explosion and other workplace 

tragedies. Workers are safer on the job, and unscrupulous employers are held more accountable for putting their employees in danger. 

However, all of this progress is now threatened. The House is 

now debating the Republican spending bill that will reverse this 

course. Too many Americans are still struggling with the fallout of 

the worst financial crisis in more than a half a century. That is 

why job creation and repairing our economy must remain at the 

top of the agenda. 

Central to this mission are millions of American workers and 

local businesses that utilize the Workforce Investment Act employ-
5 

ment and training services each year. Unfortunately, the Republican spending bill eliminates these vital services all across the 

country. 

In fact, starting in April, if these cuts pass, every one of the 

3,000 One-Stop centers will be closed. It will be closed to employers, it will be closed to the community colleges, it will be closed to 

workers, it will be closed to their families. Millions of Americans 

looking for training and looking jobs, inquiring about the benefits, 

will be locked out of those centers, will be locked out of that opportunity. This at a time when fewer Americans are being recalled to 

the job they had before than in any other recession in this country’s history. 

These workers, their families need the training opportunities, the 

retraining opportunities, so that they can be employed in their local 

community. Local workforce boards made up of businesses, community colleges, and other leaders will be unable to respond to the 

local employment conditions. In light of the chairman’s previous 

statements in support of this important program, I hope he would 

agree that totally eviscerating WIA is shortsighted and unwise. 

Finally, when Americans go to work, their jobs should be safe. 

Unfortunately, the Republican spending bill would slash worker 

health and safety. 

Last April, 29 coal miners never returned to their families from 

their shift deep in the West Virginia mountain. In the wake of this 

tragedy, this committee learned the lengths that some mine owners, like Massey Energy, would go to to avoid improving chronic 

safety problems, including criminal behavior by them and their employees. 

Once we learned the extent of this gaming of the system, we ensured that the Department of Labor had sufficient resources to stop 

them. The spending plan on the floor today would once again allow 

mine owners to game the system, to create a backlog, and to avoid 

the responsibilities of the law to keep their workers safe, putting 

those lives at risk. 

This tragedy and other workplace disasters are a reminder that 

the action or inaction of Congress or the regulatory agencies can 

directly affect the lives and the health of our citizens. That is why 

the Republican plan to slash the Occupational Health and Safety 

Administration is so chilling. 

Madam Secretary, under the Republican plan, OSHA will have 

very few options when making significant cuts to worker health 

and safety. There would be thousands of fewer workplace hazard 

inspections. OSHA would be cut to 1974 staffing levels. 1974—a 

great year, the year I entered Congress—we would go back to those 

staffing levels, although there are almost 65 percent more workers 

in this country than there were then. 

There will not be enough investigators to conduct the fatality and 

accident investigations needed. And the funding of OSHA’s Web 

site would be zeroed out. A Web site that provides employers the 

access to guidances, to compliances, to enforcement and information that they rely on every day—every day—would go dark. 

Workers are not cogs in a wheel. They are fathers, mothers, sons, 

and daughters. They deserve basic health and safety protections. 
6 

We have seen what happens when you rely on self-certification, 

voluntary compliance, and inadequate protections: Upper Big 

Branch mine explosions happen; the Deepwater Horizon, from the 

rogue safety company of British Petroleum; the Texas City explosion, of British Petroleum; the Imperial Sugar explosions that 

caused these sons, daughters, husbands, wives their lives. 

By statute, the Department of Labor is tasked to, quote, ‘‘foster, 

promote, and develop the welfare of wage earners in the United 

States to improve their working conditions and to advance their opportunities for profitable employment.’’ For too long, that mission 

was forgotten. But you have made progress, Madam Secretary, in 

restoring the mission in the last 2 years. Unfortunately, the Republican spending bill will turn this progress on its head. 

No one is in favor of wasteful spending. No one is in favor of special interest loopholes or the outdated government regulations that 

don’t work. None of that is favored by anyone on this committee. 

But instead of identifying real government waste, like subsidies to 

big oil or tax cuts to billionaires, the Republicans have decided that 

all of the spending cuts will fall on middle Americans and their 

families, their time at the workplace and their time seeking in education and training. 

That is not a recipe for success of this economy in the future 

globalized world. Our workers and our safety and our Nation’s economic competitiveness can ill-afford these unwise cuts. 

And I yield back the balance of my time. 

[The statement of Mr. Miller follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Hon. George Miller, Senior Democratic Member, 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

Good morning. I would like to welcome back our former colleague Secretary of 

Labor Hilda Solis to the committee. 

Secretary Solis appeared a year ago to discuss strengthening the economy and improving the lives of American workers. We a agreed that our most important priority was to get America back to work. Jobs that pay fair wages. Jobs that are safe. 

Madame Secretary, you have made great progress in these areas. 

In particular, I applaud your efforts to make our nation’s workforce programs 

more responsive to local economic conditions so that workers can be trained and find 

new jobs. 

And, when Americans go to work, they should be paid fairly and according to the 

law. On this front, the department has played a critical role having secured $313 

million in unpaid wages for workers. 

I am also pleased that the department has moved quickly to respond to the Upper 

Big Branch mine explosion and other workplace tragedies. Workers are safer on the 

job and unscrupulous employers are held more accountable for putting their employees in danger. 

However, all of this progress is threatened. The House is now debating a Republican spending bill that will reverse this course. Too many Americans are still struggling with the fallout of the worst financial crisis in more than a half a century. 

That’s why job creation and repairing our economy must remain at the top of our 

agenda. 

Central to this mission are the millions of workers and local businesses that utilize Workforce Investment Act employment and training services each year. Unfortunately, the Republican spending bill would effectively e eliminate these vital services all across the country. 

In fact, starting in April, if these cuts pass, every one of the 3,000 One-Stop career 

centers will begin to close. Millions of Americans looking for training, looking for 

jobs, or inquiring about benefits would be locked out. Local workforce boards made 

up of businesses, community colleges and others leaders will be unable to respond 

to local employment conditions. 
7 

In light of the chairman’s previous statements in support for this important program, I hope he would agree that totally eviscerating WIA is short-sighted and unwise. 

Finally, when Americans go to work, their jobs should be safe. Unfortunately, the 

Republican spending bill would slash worker health and safety. 

Last April, 29 coal miners never returned home to their families after their shift 

deep in a West Virginia mountain. 

In the wake of this tragedy, this committee learned of the lengths that some mine 

owners like Massey Energy would go to avoid improving chronic safety problems. 

Once we learned the extent of this gaming of the system, we ensured that the Department of Labor has sufficient resources to stop them. 

The spending plan on the floor today would once again allow mine owners to game 

the system and put miners’ lives at risk. 

This tragedy and other workplace disasters are a reminder that the action or inaction of Congress or the regulatory agencies can directly affect the lives and health 

of our citizens. That’s why the Republican plan to slash the Occupational Safety and 

Health Administration is so chilling. 

Madame Secretary, OSHA will have very few options other than making significant cuts to worker health and safety. There would be thousands fewer workplace 

hazard inspections. OSHA would be cut to 1974 staffing levels, even though there 

are 65 percent more private sector workers today as there were in 1974. There will 

not be enough investigators to conduct the fatality and accident investigations needed. And, funding for OSHA’s website would even be zeroed out. 

Workers are not cogs in the wheel. They are fathers, mothers, sons, and daughters. They deserve basic health and safety protections. 

We’ve seen what happens when you rely on self-certification, voluntary compliance and inadequate protections. Upper Big Branch happens. Deepwater Horizon 

happens. Imperial Sugar happens. 

By statute, the Department of Labor is tasked to ‘‘foster, promote, and develop 

the welfare of the wage earners of the United States, to improve their working conditions, and to advance their opportunities for profitable employment.’’ For too long, 

that mission was forgotten. 

But you have made progress in restoring that mission in the last two years. Unfortunately, the Republican spending bill will turn this progress on its head. 

No one is in favor of wasteful spending or outdated government regulations that 

don’t work. Instead of identifying real government waste—like subsidies for big oil 

or tax cuts to billionaires—House 

Republicans have decided to cut on the backs of working people and students. 

Our workers’ safety and our nation’s economic competitiveness can ill afford these 

unwise cuts. 

I yield back. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentleman. 

I am sorry here. Let me get back on track. 

Pursuant to committee rule 7(c), all Members will be permitted 

to submit written statements to be included in the permanent 

hearing record. And, without objection, the hearing record will remain 14 days to allow questions for the record, statements, and extraneous material referenced during the hearing to be submitted 

for the official hearing record. 

[The information follows:] 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 

Questions Submitted by Hon. Carolyn McCarthy, a Representative in 

Congress From the State of New York 

1. I think the Department of Labor has done a great job on a variety of fronts, 

and I commend you for your commitment to American workers. 

Today’s worker is much different than the worker of past. There are different 

workplace demographics and different expectations for both employers and employees. There are surveys out there that conclude that women are now nearly 50% of 

the U.S. workforce, yet still barriers exist for them. One of the issues I have been 

most active on is breastfeeding, and what concerns me is the lack of federal attention to the issue. 

Last Congress, I introduced a bill, the Exemplary Breastfeeding Support Act 

which would have helped to implement programs in support of breastfeeding. I was 

pleased that the healthcare reform law includes language requiring employers to 

provide reasonable break times and private space for nursing mothers on the job. 
15 

Can you tell us a little bit about the implementation of this provision and its importance to fostering a fair and equal workplace? 

2. I wanted to reiterate the concern my colleague Rep. Biggert had brought to 

your attention regarding your Department’s proposed rule expanding the definition 

of a fiduciary. As you mentioned, ERISA law has not been looked at in more than 

30 years, and I do not deny that the Department of Labor should look into the law 

and its merits. However, as a member who both sits on this Committee as well as 

Financial Services, I implore you to work with your counterparts at the SEC and 

CFTC who have made proposals in this realm as result of the passage of DoddFrank last Congress. I firmly believe that ambiguity in this sector and a lack of dialogue will ultimately hurt consumers, so please keep me briefed as to your conversations with your counterparts, and I look forward to working with you on the issue. 

Chairman KLINE. It is now my pleasure to introduce our distinguished witness, who really needs no introduction. 

Secretary Solis was confirmed as the Secretary of Labor on February 24th, 2009. 

You were one of the very first in the new administration. 

Prior to her confirmation, Secretary Solis served as a Member of 

Congress, and we were proud to have her as a colleague. She represented the 32nd District in California from 2001 to 2009. She is 

a graduate of California State Polytechnic University and got her 

master of public administration from the University of Southern 

California. 

Madam Secretary, welcome back. You know the light situation 

here. I will confess to you up front that I am not going to pay much 

attention to the light for your testimony. We want to hear everything that you have to say. 

I will, though, for the benefit of my colleagues, say that I will be 

paying attention to the lights as we get into our question-and-answer, and I will probably have to remind you at least once. 

But we are pleased to have you here. And the floor is yours, 

Madam Secretary. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. HILDA L. SOLIS, SECRETARY, 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Secretary SOLIS. Thank you very much, Chairman Kline and 

Ranking Member Miller and members of this committee. I want to 

thank you for inviting me to come testify before you today. And, 

yes, it is a delight to be back here amongst former colleagues and 

to be in this committee room where, when I began my work here 

in the Congress, this was the committee that I served on. And 

much has changed since then. 

But I know that oftentimes we may agree and agree to disagree 

on issues. So I hope that, with that hope in mind, that we will continue to work on those issues that the American public wants us 

to focus in on, and that is the economic recovery and providing better opportunities for all of our working families here in America. 

Let’s just remember how deep and devastating the recession was 

when President Obama took office. That was about the time when 

I took over the reins at the Department of Labor. There were more 

than 4.4 million jobs that had already been lost since the start of 

this recession. We saw job losses in almost every sector of our economy, but especially in manufacturing, which lost about 1.2 million 

jobs. 
16 

We are getting our economy back on track with 11—11—straight 

months of private-sector job growth, adding 1.1 million private-sector jobs last year alone, in 2010. In addition, we are encouraged by 

the job growth we are seeing in our Survey of Households, including self-employment and hiring by new startup businesses. 

Just this last month, I reported that nearly 600,000 more Americans were employed compared to the previous month, causing the 

unemployment rate to fall from 9.4 percent to 9 percent. But we 

still, as you know, have a long way to go. That is not an acceptable 

rate. 

I know the House will consider a fiscal year 2011 continuing resolution this week. We look forward to working with Congress to cut 

spending and to cut the deficit. But to win the future, we cannot 

cut in a way that will undermine our ability to out-educate, outinnovate, and out-build our economic competitors. And many of the 

proposed cuts would do just that. 

The budget of the President, announced on Monday, is a responsible plan that shows how we can live within our means, just like 

a household, and invest in the future. It makes tough choices to cut 

spending and to cut the deficit, and puts us back on a path to fiscal 

sustainability. 

At the Department of Labor, we are working to get Americans 

back to work by providing job seekers the skills necessary to land 

the good-paying jobs for the future, especially in those high-growth 

sectors like health care, IT, and clean energy. 

The health-care sector alone has added an average of about 

22,000 jobs per month over the last year. And the Bureau of Labor 

Statistics projects that health-care jobs will experience the largest 

job growth of any industry over the next decade. 

Even in the manufacturing sector, as you can tell, that is also 

coming back. And all you have to do is point to the automobile industry. Just last month, our economy added 49,000 manufacturing 

jobs, with 20,000 of those jobs exclusively in the automobile industry. 

I have seen this revitalization myself. In fact, last week, I visited 

the GM Hamtramck plant in Detroit that makes the Chevy Volt, 

and the Chrysler-Jeep assembly plant in Toledo, Ohio. I spoke to 

several autoworkers and management who take great pride in assembling this innovative, fuel-efficient vehicle. I saw amazing results of the administration’s investment in the automobile industry. 

DOL’s investments are making a difference in workers’ lives to 

train them for the 21st century. In Florida, we invested in training 

a construction worker who needed renewable energy skills to be 

competitive. With the DOL-funded program, he now has an industry-recognized solar photovoltaic degree and better jobs opportunities. 

In Minnesota, we linked Jay Booker, a Job Corps student who 

earned a technology skills degree at Humphrey Job Corps Center, 

with a job at the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport, where he has now 

a bright future in the transportation industry. I believe Jay was 

able to come here to visit us today and is here at our hearing, 

right? 

Do you want to be recognized? 

I believe he is your constituent, Chairman Kline. [Applause.] 
17 

Secretary SOLIS. In addition, as you can tell from the white jackets in back of me, there are also a number of students from our 

local Job Corps, the Woodland Job Corps Center, who are visiting 

us today. 

On-the-job training programs actually let workers earn while 

they learn. You can imagine a more direct link between training 

and job that is a model that we know works. 

Our National Emergency Grant, something that I believe some 

of the Members here know of, provide a rapid response to your constituents in a large-scale manner, especially when there is job loss, 

a big plant closure or mass layoff, or even a natural disaster. 

In Fremont, California, our $19 million went in a NEG to the 

NUMMI plant through the National Emergency Grant program, 

which helped to provide assistance to over 4,000 autoworkers. They 

were provided with training and re-employment services that they 

desperately needed to look into new careers. 

Our Trade Adjustment Assistance program provides similar help 

for trade-impacted workers. It is vital that Congress take action to 

extend the TAA extension, which helped thousands—tens of thousands of workers. When I was in Michigan and Ohio just last week, 

I heard firsthand what an essential lifeline the TAA program is. 

Our job-training programs are essential to winning the future for 

our country. We must have a workforce that is trained to meet the 

needs for employers. That is why reauthorizing the Workforce Investment Act, know as WIA, is such a high priority. We know that 

the current system isn’t perfect, but it serves many different populations with good, targeted programs. Reauthorization will present, 

I believe, an opportunity to promote innovation, build on strengths, 

and address challenges. 

At DOL, we not only train workers to get new and better jobs, 

but we protect them once they are on that job. We ensure that 

workers are paid wages and overtime that they earned. During the 

past 2 years, Wage and Hour recouped nearly $400 million in back 

wages in over 52,000 cases that impacted nearly 400,000 workers. 

This is not just good for workers, but it is also good for business. 

In this difficult economy, no employer can afford to compete 

against a company that cuts corners or breaks the law. 

For example, all poultry processors are supposed to pay workers 

for the time spent putting on and taking off their protective gear. 

We learned, however, that the biggest companies in the industry, 

like Pilgrim’s Pride and Tyson Foods, were not living up to their 

responsibility. It is not fair to ask a small poultry processor to do 

what the big guys wouldn’t do. That is why I am proud that the 

Wage and Hour division’s successful settlement of cases came to a 

conclusion with Pilgrim’s Pride and Tyson. 

We all agree that every job in America should be a safe job. We 

are partnering with employers to provide compliance assistance 

and to ensure that they have the tools and incentives necessary to 

make good health and safety decisions. 

In 2010, more than 26,000 small- and medium-sized businesses 

that employed more than 1.5 million workers received assistance 

from OSHA’s On-Site Consultation Program free of charge. We are 

also enhancing our dialogue with small business about the impact 

of OSHA regulations. And we are continuing our dialogue with all 
18 

businesses. That is why my fiscal year 2012 budget funds OSHA’s 

Voluntary Protection Program to continue that program’s important mission. 

While we work with the business community to keep workplaces 

safe and minimize the regulatory burden, we will continue to aggressively enforce our safety and health laws against those employers who refuse to play by the rules and put workers at risk. 

One dangerous industry where we have focused our resources 

happens to be in the construction industry. We had more fatalities 

in that industry than any other in the private sector in 2009. Last 

year, we held an OSHA National Action Summit conference in 

Houston to discuss what more we can do to prevent vulnerable 

workers and especially construction workers from fatalities. 

But too many employers in the construction industry still don’t 

get it, like C.A. Franc Construction Company in Washington, Pennsylvania. This roofing contractor refused to take steps to protect its 

workers from falls. In 2010, Carl Beck, a 29-year-old employee with 

two children, fell to his death when his employer denied him the 

safety equipment he desperately needed. 

OSHA cited these egregious violations, which will deter other 

similar violations and level the playing field. Other roofing contractors who provide fall protection for their workers shouldn’t have to 

compete against unscrupulous employers who don’t play by the 

rules. 

This past year, at the Mine Safety and Health Administration, 

known as MSHA, we have done some extraordinary things there. 

And I am immensely proud of what they have been able to respond 

to. MSHA is using every tool at its disposal to reform the behavior 

of repeat violators. 

Since April, MSHA has conducted more than 200 impact inspections across the country. These impact inspections, which began in 

force last April following the explosion at the Upper Big Branch 

mine in West Virginia, involves mines that merit increased agency 

attention and enforcement due to their poor compliance with our 

vital mine safety and health laws. 

MSHA also, for the first time in its history, sought a Federal 

court injunction to protect miners. The law makes it very difficult 

to get an injunction, but we thought this extraordinary remedy was 

necessary to protect miners from the egregious conditions at the 

Freedom Energy Mine located in Kentucky. 

MSHA is also upgrading its regulations strategically to implement what we have already learned from the Upper Big Branch 

disaster. MSHA issued an emergency standard on rock dusting and 

proposed revamping the pattern-of-violation standards. 

MSHA will continue these efforts, but we need to do more to reform the behavior of the worst of the worst in the mining industry. 

We don’t need to wait for the report from the Upper Big Branch 

investigation to know that we need new mine-safety legislation as 

soon as possible. In fact, long before the report on the Sago disaster, President Bush signed the MINER Act into law. And I hope 

we can work together on a new mine-safety legislation. 

And in order to fulfill our mission at DOL, it is critical that we 

have a strong working relationship with the business community. 

The business community creates the jobs, not DOL, not the Federal 
19 

Government. We need to strengthen our economy, and we have to 

know that we can provide workers with the skills that they need 

for these new jobs. 

Just last week, I had a few meetings with business leaders that 

illustrate our effort to work with the business community. I met 

with Jim McNerney, the CEO of Boeing. We have a strong partnership with him, and discussed ways to improve our training programs to better serve their needs, including having company personnel help create curriculum for training programs and teach 

some of those courses. I also met with 25 members of the American 

Sustainable Business Council, and they agreed to work with us, 

with our One-Stop system, in their hiring efforts. 

In addition, our veterans employment administration has forged 

relationships with the National Chamber of Commerce, as well as 

small regional chambers. We are working with them to, quote/unquote, ‘‘hire a vet.’’ It is an initiative to help our veterans and 

transitioning service members to find good jobs. 

These are but a few of many examples that we are working on 

cooperatively with the business community. 

We at the Department of Labor do our best every day to create 

economic opportunities for employers and working families. And I 

hope I have shown you that we are making a difference in the lives 

of many of your constituents and workers throughout this country. 

I look forward to working with you to ensure that we have good 

jobs and safe jobs for everyone. 

Thank you. 

[The statement of Secretary Solis follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Hon. Hilda L. Solis, Secretary, 

U.S. Department of Labor 

Chairman Kline, Ranking Member Miller, and Members of the Committee, thank 

you for inviting me to testify. It is wonderful to be back among my friends and 

former colleagues. I am also so glad to have the opportunity to speak with the many 

new members of the Committee. We have a lot in common. I too once was a freshman member of Congress on this Committee. I sat where you now sit so I can 

empathize with the need to quickly get up to speed on the vast jurisdiction of this 

Committee—including the many programs and services that the Department of 

Labor provides for your constituents. I look forward to all of the hard and good work 

we will do together to help working families across America. 

I hope you know that my offer to work with you is genuine. Since I came before 

this Committee last year, much has changed here in Washington and in the nation. 

What has not changed is the desire the American people have for us to work together to address the many challenges facing our nation’s working families. Undoubtedly, we will not agree on every issue. But I hope we can agree on many and 

that we can also agree on the end goal—to continue to help bring our country out 

of the recession with a stronger economy and better opportunities for all working 

Americans. Only if we make a commitment to this shared goal and pool our energies 

towards achieving it do we have any hope of success, because the challenges that 

remain for American workers are still formidable. 

I am happy to report that we have already taken some important, and big, first 

steps towards addressing these challenges, including returning many Americans to 

the workforce. 

But we cannot build a solid foundation for the future while ignoring the millions 

of Americans who are still out of work. We have to start where we are. 

Our economy has clearly made significant progress toward recovery over the last 

year. Let us remember just how deep and devastating the recession was when President Obama took office. By January end of 2009, 4.4 million jobs had been lost since 

the start of the recession in December 2007. We saw job losses in almost every sector of the economy, but especially in the manufacturing sector, which lost 1.2 million 

jobs between the beginning of the recession and the time President Obama took of-
20 

fice. Last February when I testified, the best I could say about the jobs picture was 

that the rate of job loss slowed. 

Today, we have much progress to share. In January, the economy added 50,000 

private sector jobs. We have now had 11 straight months of private sector job 

growth, adding 1.1 million private sector jobs in 2010. In addition to the jobs we 

are seeing added in our survey of businesses about their payroll, our survey of 

households is showing even more encouraging news. Last month nearly 600,000 

more Americans were employed compared to the previous month causing the unemployment rate to fall from 9.4% to 9.0%. While we still have a long ways to go, 

Americans are showing perseverance and are finding jobs and creating new jobs 

through self-employment and entrepreneurship. 

We still need to see more job creation in order to continue to bring down the unemployment rate and to address the problem of the long-term unemployed. More 

than 6 million Americans have been jobless and looking for work for over six 

months. Special challenges arise for people who have been out of work for so long. 

The Administration is working aggressively to continue to grow the economy, accelerate job creation, and address the special needs of the long-term unemployed. My 

role is to ensure that workers have the tools they need to succeed and feed our 

building economic recovery. 

You have asked me here today to discuss my priorities for the Department of 

Labor in the coming year. In his State of the Union address, President Obama spoke 

of the need to maintain America’s leadership in a rapidly changing world so that 

our economy is competitive—growing and working for all Americans. To do so, he 

is putting forward a plan to help the United States win the future by out-innovating, out-educating, and out-building our global competition. At the Department 

of Labor, we are working hard to prepare America’s workforce to meet this challenge. My goal is to help foster an economy in which good jobs are available for everyone and American workers are prepared with the skills necessary to be productive in these jobs throughout their lifetime. This means jobs that can support a family. Jobs that are sustainable. Jobs that are safe and secure. Jobs that can lift up 

the middle class. In short, my highest priority is to get Americans back to work in 

good jobs. And we must make these investments while also making difficult choices 

that will put our nation on a sustainable fiscal path. 

The best way to describe my priorities for achieving this goal is to look at the Department’s accomplishments from the past year. We have made a great start and 

I plan to continue our good work. 

Preparing Workers for 21st Century Jobs 

We know that the skills needed to succeed in today’s economy are different than 

they were in the early 80s, or even the mid-90s. Going forward, we must continue 

to increase the skills of workers at every level. The roots of this recession are deep 

and complex. The nation and the world that is emerging from the recession are different from the nation and the world that entered it. The key to American competitiveness lies in its workforce being poised to fully participate in the 21st Century 

economy. That is why this Administration is committed to advancing the skills and 

education of all workers, and connecting them with potential employers. If we want 

to get as many people as possible into productive careers that can carry them 

through their working lives, and to ensure that America has the labor force we need 

to be competitive in a global economy, we have got to increase the skill level of our 

workforce and link job training programs directly with good job opportunities. 

As you all probably know, I am a big believer in the promise of the health care 

and clean energy sectors of the economy. These, and other high growth sectors, will 

provide the jobs of the future. I am proud of the investment that the Department 

has made in training workers across the country for these 21st Century jobs. In the 

health care sector, our nation needs more registered nurses, nursing aides, home 

health aides and medical assistants to care for our families. The Bureau of Labor 

Statistics (BLS) projects that health care jobs will experience the largest job growth 

of any industry over the next decade. 

In his State of the Union address, the President called for 80 percent of America’s 

electricity to come from clean sources by 2035, including wind, solar, nuclear, clean 

coal and natural gas. He is also putting forward measures to ensure that the U.S. 

is the first country to put one million advanced technology vehicles on its roads. 

These commitments, coupled with private sector investments, will expand our clean 

energy economy, producing more green jobs. And with BLS’ new definition of ‘‘green 

jobs,’’ the federal government, states and cities, large corporations and small businesses can now better target and track their investments in the green economy. Employers will need skilled workers to develop, build and maintain the systems that 
21 

harness our country’s supply of renewable energy and potential for energy efficiency, 

a particular emphasis of DOL’s recent job training efforts. 

The Department’s investments in the clean energy economy have focused on three 

goals: 

1. enabling states to develop needed partnerships and plans to better align their 

workforce and state energy policies leading to employment; 

2. building the capacity of established job training providers to train workers for 

clean energy jobs; and 

3. directly supporting education and training services for a diverse community of 

American workers either seeking entry into or retraining for new and emerging jobs 

in the clean energy economy. 

Workers across the country are now actively participating in health care, clean 

energy and other in-demand job training programs. They are learning skills and receiving credentials needed to move up career ladders in a rapidly changing economy. 

Workers are also being connected with employers in these growing industries and 

in-demand occupations in their local communities. We are seeing the impact of Department of Labor programs in cities and towns all across the country. 

In Detroit, a struggling single parent of two small children completed a DOLfunded training program and almost immediately was hired as a contractor for DTE 

Energy, Detroit’s largest utility company. Since securing employment, this worker 

has already been promoted to supervisor and sees an opportunity in higher education to pursue a degree in engineering. And DOL programs are helping incumbent 

workers expand their skills as well. A construction worker in Florida, previously at 

the top of his profession, soon found himself unqualified when solar panel installation and renewable energy skills became a requirement. He participated in a DOLfunded program and now has an industry recognized Solar Photovoltaic (PV) degree. 

Similar successes are occurring in training for other high growth fields, particularly health care. In the District of Columbia, a 26 year-old, African American 

woman, residing in a neighborhood where unemployment is 30 percent, received 

DOL-funded training for employment in the health care sector. I am pleased that 

this trainee graduated from the program and is now employed as a home health 

aide. Because of her training and credentials, she was able to become self-sufficient 

and has the skills to advance in her new career in the growing health care sector. 

Our collaboration with the nation’s community colleges is another aspect of our 

focus on preparing workers for the jobs of the future. That is why we are collaborating with the business community and community colleges on programs to provide 

the relevant training that industries are looking for, and will surely need more of, 

as we pave the way to recovery. As a former trustee on a community college board, 

I know first hand the transformative power these institutions can have in the careers and lives of young and older students. Community colleges ensure that individuals obtain the credentials they will need for good jobs. Since 2005, the Department has invested over $485 million in over 250 community colleges and related organizations through the Community-Based Job Training Grants. By the end of FY 

2010, these grants provided training to over 171,000 individuals, of whom over 

72,000 earned a degree or certificate. And it is just as critical that employers who 

understand the needs and the skills desired in their specific industries are working 

directly with community college faculty to develop relevant curricula and 

coursework that prepare workers to succeed in good, safe jobs. 

On January 20th, we announced the availability of $500 million for the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) Community College and Career Training Grants. These 

competitive grants will provide community colleges and other eligible institutions of 

higher education with funds to expand and improve education and career training 

programs suitable for workers who have lost their jobs or are threatened with job 

loss because of trade with other countries. These training programs must be timely—training must be completed in two years or less—and the overarching goals of 

these grants are to increase attainment of degrees, certificates, and other industryrecognized credentials and better prepare the targeted population, and other beneficiaries, for high-wage, high-skill employment. The program will also encourage 

community colleges to develop innovative methods, use data, and replicate evidencebased practices to improve student outcomes and efficiency. For example, grants will 

support the delivery of online education that can allow students balancing the competing demands of work and family to acquire new skills at a time, place and pace 

that are convenient for them. We are working with our colleagues at the Department of Education as we prepare to award and administer these grants. 

Developing the skills of our nation’s youth is also critical to ensuring that our 

workforce is ready to succeed in the future. After all, today’s youth are tomorrow’s 

workforce. The Department has some great success to build on in the coming year. 

Through our YouthBuild program, we are providing disadvantaged youth with the 
22 

knowledge and skills required to fully participate in the economy of the 21st Century. As part of the Recovery Act, we awarded 47 of the 62 Green Capacity Building 

job training grants to YouthBuild programs. These grantees were able to purchase 

equipment and provide certifications for their instructors to support energy efficiency and renewable energy industries. These Green Capacity Building grants have 

enhanced the capacity of these YouthBuild grantees, by allowing them to serve more 

than 2,750 young people through the program. One great example is the ARCH 

Training Program here in D.C., where YouthBuild students assembled solar suitcases that were sent to Haiti and were used to power medical equipment in areas 

with limited, or no electrical power. 

Similarly, our WIA Youth program is building a better future for deserving young people and our nation. State and local areas used close to $1.2 billion in Recovery 

Act funds to create robust, high-quality programs that served 414,256 youth, including more than 350,000 served during the summers of 2009 and 2010. These young 

people participated in summer employment opportunities in clean energy, weatherization, solar installation, retrofitting, and health care occupations. These employment opportunities allowed young people to gain job experience that will help them 

succeed both in higher education and in the workforce. 

Take, for example, a young woman who was homeless and trying to escape an 

abusive boyfriend. She ended up in a shelter in Boston that put her in touch with 

the Action for Boston Community Development’s (ABCD) Health Career Explorations Program. The ABCD program included workshops on self esteem and job 

readiness that prepared her to take on the challenge of participating in a home 

health aid certification program and a CPR/First Aid certification program. Her 

drive and determination helped her land a paid summer internship in the Radiation 

Department at the Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital. Once at Beth Israel, she found 

out about the different professional development opportunities available to her. One 

of these programs was the Medical Interpreters Program. Thanks to the discounted 

price available to her as a hospital staff member and the sponsorship from the 

ABCD Youth Explorations program, she was able to take advantage of this program. 

The WIA youth program really changed this young woman’s life by preparing her 

for a career in the growing field of health care. 

Our Job Corps program has a long history of preparing disadvantaged youth for 

a successful transition into the workforce and we should all be proud of the program’s accomplishments. As with all of our job training programs, we are shifting 

Job Corps to focus on 21st Century jobs. For example, this year Job Corps partnered 

with the National Healthcareer Association (NHA) to pilot a training and certification program for an Electronic Health Records Specialist job track. As our country 

shifts to greater use of digital media and paperless recordkeeping, the demand for 

qualified health record specialists is growing rapidly. The NHA partners with over 

1,300 educational institutions through the country to prepare students for national 

health care-related certification exams. Our pilot, which will run through April of 

this year, involves a total of approximately 500 full-time students at nine Job Corps 

centers, including those in many of your home states, such as Virginia, Ohio, New 

York, Florida, Pennsylvania, and Nevada. 

Our Job Corps program does not just help young people in our nation’s cities. We 

are also in rural areas, training students for jobs that make sense in their communities. For example, in Representative Noem’s district, we are serving South Dakota’s youth for employment throughout the state. Twenty-one year-old Nick Andrews 

was looking for real world bricklaying experience, and he found lots of it while restoring the Mount Roosevelt Friendship Tower in South Dakota’s Black Hills region. 

Andrews is a student at the state’s Boxelder Job Corps Civilian Conservation Center. He joined other center students and a stone mason in an 11-week facelift of the 

tower, created to honor President Theodore Roosevelt’s support of conservation. The 

restoration was funded by the Recovery Act in an effort to restore the monument 

for public use by next July, its 90th birthday. ‘‘It is nice to give back to the public,’’ 

he said about his restoration efforts, adding that at Job Corps, ‘‘I learned responsibility and leadership skills.’’ 

Chairman Kline, I hope one day you have the opportunity to meet Jay Booker, 

a Job Corps student in your state of Minnesota, who has turned the technology 

skills he earned in Job Corps into a job at the Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport. Jay 

came to Job Corps with a high school degree and a desire to better his life. At the 

Hubert H. Humphrey Job Corps Center in St. Paul, he received advanced training 

to prepare him for a career in the transportation industry. He is now a productive, 

positive contributor to the economy of your state. 

While the Department is focused on the jobs of the future, we also understand 

that workers who are laid off cannot wait until the future to get a paycheck. We 

are doing everything we can to get workers into jobs quickly. From the first sign 
23 

of a layoff to starting a new job, the Department is helping your constituents and 

all Americans navigate the world of job search, education and training, resume writing, and interviewing, thus reinventing their vision of a better future. Our staff also 

help unemployment insurance claimants with income support needed to help pay 

their rent, put food on their table, and provide the necessities of life for their families. In fact, 23 million unemployed workers received $150 billion in unemployment 

insurance benefits in 2010. We should remember that those workers have an ongoing responsibility to look for new employment while they are receiving unemployment insurance benefits. And, that these benefits help not only those who receive 

them, but help our entire economy. This year we released a study commissioned by 

the Bush Administration that found that every dollar of unemployment benefits 

leads to $2 spent in the economy, keeping even more Americans in jobs. 

We are looking at new strategies for shortening the period of unemployment for 

unemployed Americans. DOL hosted a national Reemployment Summit for approximately 800 state and local practitioners in December to highlight successful practices, tools, and techniques that are connecting unemployed workers to jobs. Looking 

ahead, DOL will be funding state models to build a common front door to the workforce system that is supported by integrated registration, common customer records, 

and electronic tools and social networking solutions to finding jobs or job training. 

When large-scale, unexpected economic events have occurred in your states, our 

National Emergency Grants (NEGs) have been there to provide a rapid response to 

the crisis. Significant dislocation events include business closures, mass layoffs, or 

realignment and closure of military installations as a result of the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) initiative. National Emergency Grants help displaced 

workers adapt in a changing economy. As many of you know, these grants temporarily expand the service capacity of Workforce Investment Act Dislocated Worker 

training and employment programs at the state and local levels. National Emergency Grants provide resources to states and local workforce investment boards to 

quickly help laid-off workers get rehired by offering such services as skills assessments, career counseling, job placement and training to increase occupational skills. 

Grant funds can also provide supportive services to participants, such as transportation subsidies, child care and income support in the form of needs-related payments. 

I would like to share with the Committee one example from California that best 

illustrates how National Emergency Grants can extend a helping hand to workers 

and communities hit hard by economic disaster. In late 2009, it became clear that 

the New United Motors Manufacturing Inc. (NUMMI) plant and several of its suppliers were going to go out of business. The closure of the 5 million square foot plant 

in Fremont, California presaged economic devastation for the Fremont community. 

More than 4,300 workers at NUMMI and several of NUMMI’s suppliers were at risk 

of unemployment, with nowhere to go, as NUMMI was the only automotive plant 

on the West Coast. 

The Department worked with the California Employment Development Department on a National Emergency Grant to help NUMMI workers get the training and 

employment-related services they so desperately needed. Within two months of the 

NUMMI closure in April of last year, I announced the investment of a $19,042,012 

National Emergency Grant for the training and re-employment of displaced NUMMI 

plant workers and their suppliers’ workers. I made the announcement at the 

NUMMI Re-employment Center, surrounded by those NUMMI workers who would 

benefit from the grant. The NUMMI grant covers an estimated 4,350 workers across 

29 counties. Additional Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) funds are available to 

pay the costs of vocational re-training, which typically is the most costly component 

of dislocated worker re-employment assistance. I am happy to report that as of early 

December 2010, over 4,300 of these dislocated workers had been enrolled and are 

being served. In fact, the NUMMI Re-employment Center (NRC) classes are filled 

to capacity, and the NRC is looking for alternative classroom facilities to meet the 

demand. The scope of services to these dislocated workers project-wide includes 

needs assessment, counseling, re-employability plan development, vocational retraining, including on-the-job training, and job placement assistance. 

NUMMI workers are embarking on every type of new career at a wide array of 

companies. For example, Ray Morimoto worked at a NUMMI supplier at Injex Industries as a manufacturing engineer. After being dislocated due to the NUMMI 

plant closure, Ray enrolled at the San Jose NUMMI Career Transition Center 

(NCTC), work2future. Ray expressed frustration and constant worry in the beginning of his training and job search but kept a consistent, hardworking attitude. Ray 

attended case manager and job developer appointments to seek advice and guidance 

and used the NCTC computer center for job search. In addition, Ray participated 
24 

in the Advanced Transportation Technology & Energy, Energy Efficiency Management Program at West Valley College to enhance his marketability. 

Ray called NCTC to tell the staff that he had applied for a job posting from 

work2future for Chromasun, a solar thermal start-up company, had a successful job 

interview, and received a job offer for a Lead Manufacturing/Quality Engineer position including benefits and a salary of $80,000 per year. Shortly after Ray was 

hired, he assisted Chromasun with the recruitment and hiring of other highly qualified NUMMI colleagues. The NUMMI workers are finding good jobs. While they made on average $30.97 

per hour last April when NUMMMI closed, in their new jobs they are making an 

average of $26.35. That is approximately 85% of their former wage, which is excellent, considering current economic conditions and competitiveness for employment 

in the Northern California area. We have National Emergency Grant successes like 

NUMMI in many of your states. 

Our NASA-related National Emergency Grant is another example of the Department’s commitment to getting involved early and in a comprehensive manner when 

workers lose their jobs and their families and communities are in need. I am sure 

that we all read with interest in the newspaper when NASA announced that it was 

retiring the Space Shuttle. The National Emergency Grant program played a key 

role in easing the transition of the affected aerospace workers in the Central Florida 

area. The Brevard Workforce Development Board was awarded a $15 million National Emergency Grant in June 2010 to help aerospace workers affected by the 

phasing out of the Space Shuttle and Constellation programs to transition into other 

occupations. The grant allows Brevard Workforce and its partners to continue the 

work they are already doing to help aerospace workers transition into new employment when the Shuttle and Constellation programs end. To date, $7.8 million of the 

$15 million NEG has been released to the Brevard Workforce Development Board. 

The National Emergency Grant focuses its training dollars largely on creating onthe-job training (OJT) opportunities with area businesses from Brevard and counties 

from the surrounding Central Florida Region. The grant also provides occupational 

classroom training opportunities. These training opportunities are geared toward 

eventual long-term employment for the transitioning aerospace workers, thus aiding 

the region’s aggressive economic development effort to help create and sustain jobs. 

Training is targeted at those industries that show the most promise of providing 

workers with good long-term career prospects in the region: biotechnology, environmental, biomedical, automotive, electronics, telecommunications, geospatial systems, 

health care, aviation, IT, modeling and simulation and commercial construction. 

The change in NASA’s schedule for ending the Space Shuttle Program has kept 

the NASA workers on the job for a while longer than we had anticipated. That delay 

has given the area workforce agencies extra time to hire and train additional staff 

and reach out to area employers to find where the jobs will be when the Shuttle 

program ends. As of mid-January 2011, Brevard Workforce Development Board secured 148 OJT slots with an average hourly wage of $31.43. We will continue to 

look for the communities that need this kind of help from the Department in the 

coming year and will provide the same excellent level of service to those communities, wherever they are. 

As we did last year, in the coming year we will focus on ways to train workers 

that help meet their long-term needs, while also addressing their immediate needs. 

Many workers simply must find ways to support themselves and their families while 

seeking training and the Department has done much to meet the needs of these 

workers. We are advancing and building on ‘‘learn and earn’’ models—such as onthe-job training, Registered Apprenticeship, and transitional jobs—that provide 

earnings while increasing employability, skills, and opportunities for advancement, 

particularly for disadvantaged populations. We also will emphasize accelerating 

learning strategies for low-income and low-skill workers, such as offering basic skills 

and English language proficiency with career or technical skills training. 

The on-the-job training model is one that fits our times. It has tremendous support from both business and labor because it delivers much-needed training and a 

paycheck for workers, while helping to defray some of the employer’s costs of providing that training. In our OJT programs the employer is reimbursed for a percentage of the wages paid to the worker in training. Participants have a chance to ‘‘learn 

and earn,’’ gaining skills while getting paid. 

For employers, OJT offers the unique opportunity to offset initial training costs 

to fill positions while building the company’s productivity as the participant learns 

the job. An OJT arrangement can be the impetus for an employer to create the job 

opportunity now instead of waiting for higher economic growth. For the long-term 

unemployed, OJT gets them back into the job market earning a paycheck and refreshing their work skills. We have had great success so far. In an economy where 
25 

employers are reluctant to hire, OJT is unique among WIA services in that it places 

the worker directly with the employer, providing the employer with reimbursement 

for the extra costs of training. And WIA participants who receive OJT typically experience a higher rate of job placement than other participants. In June of last year, we announced $75 million in Recovery Act funds for OJT 

National Emergency Grants. Those funds went to 41 states, the District of Columbia, and three federally recognized Native American Tribes. These National Emergency Grants, or NEGs, are a one-time funding source to support on-the-job training 

for the long-term unemployed, especially in areas disproportionately impacted by 

the recession. For example, in your home state of Oregon, Representative Wu, under 

the $2,119,166 OJT NEG that the state received, a total of 14 OJT projects have 

been established, including some in very rural areas, where the recession has taken 

a significant toll on small businesses. 

During 2010, the Department provided intensive guidance and assistance to our 

grantees to ensure that they would be good stewards of the money awarded to them. 

Our efforts included an OJT toolkit website, which has been met with very favorable 

reviews from our workforce partners, and an all-grantee meeting in August. We 

have also assisted grantees in the planning process so that they design OJT projects 

that will maximize job placement. This enhanced and necessary planning process 

went beyond even the extensive oversight that DOL already conducts for most National Emergency Grants because of the unique nature of the OJT program and the 

public workforce system’s limited recent experience implementing OJT on a broad 

scale. I am looking forward to seeing the fruits of our efforts this year when the 

grantees have fully implemented their programs and the results start coming in. I 

hope you will share with me any stories you hear from your constituents about the 

impact of these grants. 

I would also like to share with you some information about the success of our Registered Apprenticeship program, which I know is important to many on the Committee. Registered Apprenticeships, like OJT, are ‘‘earn while you learn’’ opportunities. In 2010, more than 100,000 workers entered into a Registered Apprenticeship 

program. This equates to over 100,000 individuals entering or returning to work, 

with over 400,000 active apprentices continuing to earn and learn in over 20,000 

apprenticeship programs nationwide. In addition, more than 50,000 program participants completed their apprenticeships and received a nationally recognized credential that is portable and provides a path to the middle class. Our apprenticeship programs are serving all segments of the economy. Although many people associate apprenticeship programs with unions, in fact, only 19% of the federally registered apprenticeship programs that the Department oversees are joint labor-management 

programs. Finally, I am especially proud of the fact that the Office of Apprenticeship 

recently recognized Wind Turbine Technician as the first new green occupation to 

be added to the official list of apprenticeship occupations—another example of how 

we are working across the Department to best prepare workers for the 21st Century. 

For a newly unemployed or underemployed worker, navigating the world of job 

searching, education and training opportunities, and federal support programs can 

be daunting. The Employment and Training Administration (ETA) has developed 

virtual tools that make it easier for unemployed workers to get the assistance they 

need to get back to work. For example, we launched an exciting new electronic tool 

on Labor Day called mySkills myFuture which makes it easy for unemployed workers to determine how their current background and experience qualify them for 

other potential jobs. Users are able to view local job postings and locate training 

and education providers in their area. They are also able to find descriptions, salary 

information and common job tasks associated with the new occupations they are 

considering. Since its launch in September of last year, mySkills myFuture has received more than 398,000 visitors. 

I am also excited about a new career exploration tool called MyNextMove that 

launched on February 3. MyNextMove.gov provides the public with a more userfriendly tool that simplifies the information that individuals need in order to make 

informed career decisions. It’s written at a reading level that makes accessible to 

everyone the wealth of existing information on the skill requirements and other 

characteristics of occupations available in the Occupational Information Network 

(O*NET). 

We have also worked with the White House to upgrade the Worker ReEmployment Portal to provide unemployed workers, including those who have exhausted 

their unemployment benefits, all the information they need in one place. The site 

offers a single source for information on jobs, career training, unemployment benefits, and assistance with necessary services such as food, health care, and utility 

payments. Since its launch, in December 2010, the site has had more than 67,000 
26 

visitors. We also are seeking ways to take advantage of on-line learning technology, 

for example virtual platforms, to reach as many workers as possible with training 

programs that increase skills and attainment of industry-recognized credentials. 

I am also extremely proud of the work the Department of Labor is doing to help 

our nation’s Veterans. Our Veterans’ employment and training programs are part 

of a larger effort to provide a smooth transition process for assisting Veterans, 

transitioning Service Members and their spouses as they seek to identify and secure 

productive civilian opportunities. By promoting priority of service for Veterans in 

the One-Stop Career Center system, we ensure that over 1.6 million Veterans receive the training and employment assistance they need to obtain good jobs. Our 

homeless programs help nearly 18,000 Veterans in their efforts to reintegrate into 

the workforce. We provide transition assistance to 127,000 Service Members and 

spouses as they move from the military into civilian careers. Our Veterans Employment and Training Service is collaborating with the Vocational Rehabilitation and 

Employment Service of the Department of Veterans Affairs to ensure that Veterans 

with disabilities receive the training and employment assistance that will enable 

them to achieve their career goals. The Department is proud to assist our heroes 

who have served our nation well. 

All of the foregoing job training initiatives benefit from the extensive policy analysis, research and technical assistance activities performed by the Office of Disability Employment Policy—or ODEP as we call it. Job training and job placement 

initiatives, as well as the labor standards enforcement activities that I will highlight 

in a moment, are made more effective because of the knowledge resources that 

ODEP provides on how to enable people with disabilities to have access to—and receive the benefits of—these services. 

Assuring a Fair and High Quality Work-Life Environment 

While it is easy to forget in the midst of a recession, merely having a job is not 

always enough. We want these to be good jobs that pay fair wages, keep workers 

safe, and provide basic benefits. The Department’s enforcement agencies, including 

the Wage and Hour Division, help inform workers of their rights and employers of 

their responsibilities. This is not just good for the workers. It is also good for businesses. Detecting and remedying labor violations protects law-abiding firms from 

unfair competition against those who flout the law and cut corners by paying workers less than they are owed. 

The Department’s Wage and Hour Division has made great strides in assuring 

that workers’ rights on the job are respected and that employers who break the law 

do not have an unfair advantage over the vast majority of employers who play by 

the rules. In the two years under my leadership at the Department, Wage and Hour 

has secured impressive amounts of back wages for workers across the country. 

When an employer in your district violates the Fair Labor Standards Act by not 

paying the required minimum wage or overtime, that employer is taking money out 

of the pockets of your constituents. Consider that Wage and Hour was able to recoup over $10 million in back wages for over 16,000 workers in the state of Pennsylvania since 2009. In Tennessee, Wage and Hour’s work on over 1,400 cases resulted 

in almost 10,000 workers receiving $7.9 million in back wages. Throughout the 

country, Wage and Hour has recouped nearly $400 million in back wages, assessed 

over $18 million in civil monetary penalties in over 52,000 cases and impacted nearly 400,000 workers. 

I do not want to leave the impression that these cases are just about moving numbers between columns in a ledger. The numbers I have cited represent workers who 

have been harmed by employers who violate the law and the difficulties that honest 

employers face trying to compete in industries and geographic areas where Fair 

Labor Standards Act violations are rampant. For example, conditions in the garment industry have long pushed contractors to cut corners with respect to wages, 

hours and employment conditions. Wage and Hour and other state and federal enforcement agencies had tried for years to make a difference in this industry, without 

much success. 

Instead of targeting contractors, who are often small businesses, Wage and Hour 

is focusing on manufacturers, often larger employers, by invoking the long-ignored 

‘‘hot goods’’ provision of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The ‘‘hot goods’’ provision 

prohibits the movement of goods in commerce that have been manufactured in violation of the law. Manufacturers and retailers who do business with unscrupulous 

contractors put at risk their ability to make good on promised orders. This pressure 

on the manufacturers and retailers encourages them to create compliance programs 

for their contractors and subcontractors and has the potential to reform the whole 

industry—without the Department having to investigate thousands of businesses. 
27 

In California, we used this strategy successfully to secure $158,952 for 110 garment workers who worked for Angel’s Finishing, Inc.—a contractor of the high-end 

clothing manufacturer, Joe’s Jeans. These garment workers were working extremely 

long hours finishing high-end jeans that were later shipped throughout the U.S. and 

sold at exclusive department stores such as Macy’s, Neiman Marcus, Dillard’s, 

Bloomingdale’s, Saks Fifth Avenue, and Nordstrom. Angel’s Finishing was paying 

workers on a piece-rate basis without regard for minimum wage and overtime pay 

for all hours worked (for example, they forced employees to work off the books on 

weekends). 

This was a clear case of a company enjoying profits on the backs of vulnerable 

workers who were not paid the proper wages. Following this investigation, the Department pursued an action that prohibited the shipment of goods produced by Joe’s 

Jeans contractor until all back wages had been paid. When Angel’s Finishing refused to make the workers whole, Joe’s Jeans was forced to step forward and accept 

liability for its contractor’s violations. In addition to paying the full amount of back 

wages, Joe’s Jeans was also required to conduct periodic monitoring of its contractor 

for wage and overtime law compliance, as well as education and outreach efforts, 

and to discuss the financial terms of its contracts to ensure the contractor’s financial 

ability to comply. By pursuing this case and other similar cases in the garment industry, the Wage and Hour Division has helped level the playing field for all lawabiding employers in the industry and more workers are getting the pay they are 

entitled to by law. 

When employers cheat workers out of their wages, these workers pay lower taxes 

to the Treasury than they would have paid. Employers in turn pay lower taxes on 

those wages, which means that vital programs like unemployment insurance are inadequately funded and available for workers. Without strategic enforcement, this 

underground economy is allowed to thrive and we all lose. 

Throughout the past year, Wage and Hour focused on finding strategies for best 

leveraging the Department’s resources to transform industries and level the playing 

field for all employers. Wage and Hour has found that aggressively enforcing the 

law when industry leaders disregard it can have a beneficial effect throughout the 

industry. For example, Wage and Hour reached settlements with Tyson Foods and 

Pilgrim’s Pride, the country’s largest poultry processors. These processors had failed 

to pay workers for the time they spent putting on and taking off protective and sanitary gear they needed to wear in the workplace. The settlements require these processors to pay all of their production employees for all of this work in all of their 

facilities. You can imagine that it would be difficult to convince a small poultry processor to pay its workers for this time when the industry giants were not. As a result 

of Wage and Hour’s successful enforcement actions, vulnerable workers and small 

businesses throughout the poultry industry are better protected. 

Wage and Hour is also tasked with protecting youth on the job. I am so pleased 

to share with you a real success story that has made a difference in the lives of 

many of your constituents. In 2009, Wage and Hour found egregious child labor and 

other labor-related violations in the blueberry fields of New Jersey, North Carolina, 

and Michigan. In addition to assessing penalties, Wage and Hour took a comprehensive approach to ending the dangerous practices it had uncovered. Our staff met 

with farm groups, community organizations, and state and local agencies to be sure 

that employers understood their obligations and that workers understood their 

rights. 

When Wage and Hour went back into the blueberry fields in 2010, there were no 

children working unlawfully in those fields. Representative Walberg and Representative Woolsey, as the new Chair and raking Member of the Workforce Protections 

Subcommittee, I am sure you are both pleased to know that we are succeeding in 

preventing children in Michigan from working under dangerous and unlawful conditions on your state’s commercial blueberry farms. Again, I am proud of the Department’s thoughtful use of resources to transform an industry that was abusing American workers. 

In addition to this great work to change industry practice so that workers and 

their wages are protected, the Department’s Wage and Hour Division is also playing 

an important role in assuring high quality work-life environments. Achieving worklife flexibility is another priority of mine, which includes enforcement of the Family 

and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). As you know, the FMLA entitles eligible employees 

to unpaid, job-protected leave for certain family and medical reasons. Some of the 

most compelling stories we have about our enforcement efforts come from workers 

who were reinstated in their jobs with back wages after the Department intervened 

in support of their rights to FMLA leave. For example, Wage and Hour received a 

complaint from a woman in Georgia who was battling cancer. She was out on unpaid medical leave and recuperating from a major surgery, preparing for another. 
28 

Her employer cancelled her health insurance just before the 2nd surgery and was 

preparing to terminate her. Not only was the surgery postponed, but without insurance she could not afford to see her doctors or get her prescriptions filled. After the 

Wage and Hour Investigator explained the terms of the FMLA to the employer, the 

employer agreed to reinstate the worker and restore her health insurance in time 

for the surgery. 

The Wage and Hour Division recently assumed another responsibility related to 

work-life flexibility, enforcing the new break time for nursing mothers law, ensuring 

women who choose to breastfeed their infants have the ability to continue to do so 

even after they return to work. We are working expeditiously to ensure both nursing 

moms and employers have the guidance they need to not only invoke their rights 

and comply with the law, respectively, but also make the appropriate arrangements 

that work both for the nursing mother and the employer. The Department’s role in 

this effort will undoubtedly help nursing moms achieve a balance between their jobs 

and caring for their children, and help employers retain good workers at great economic benefit to them and the workforce overall. 

The President’s FY2012 budget establishes a $23 million State Paid Leave Fund 

within the Department of Labor that will provide competitive grants to help states 

that launch paid-leave programs that are affordable for employers and workers. Addressing work-life balance is a priority of this Administration and benefits workers, 

employers and families. We look forward to working with Members of the Committee on work-life balance proposals and funding for programs that help workers 

be productive and successful in our economic recovery. 

At my Department of Labor, we will hold accountable anyone who treats workers 

unfairly, whether they are employers or unions. I am extremely proud of the work 

that the Office of Labor Management Standards has been doing to protect union 

workers. Consistent with our theme of pursuing the worst of the worst, OLMS has 

increased its criminal convictions each year since I came to the Department. In 

2008, OLMS enforcement efforts resulted in 103 convictions; in 2009 121 convictions 

and in 2010, 130 convictions. Despite these difficult budgetary times, our budget request for OLMS is level with our request for last year. 

The Department’s Office of Federal Contact Compliance (OFCCP) is also protecting workers and strengthening our economy by opening the doors of opportunity 

for all of workers. Over the past two years OFCCP has negotiated conciliation agreements on behalf of more than 34,250 workers, resulting in more than $19 million 

in financial awards and over 3,600 potential job offers for workers who have been 

subjected to discrimination. Of particular note is an agreement recently reached 

with federal contractor Green Bay Dressed Beef that includes a $1.65 million settlement for 970 women who were subjected to hiring discrimination. The agreement 

also netted 248 potential job offers. As the economy shows signs of growth, OFCCP 

continues to ensure that American companies leverage the benefits of hiring a welltrained and diverse workforce. To these ends, its focus is on strengthening enforcement, implementing regulatory reform and broadening outreach. 

Ensuring Workplaces Are Safe and Healthy 

Another goal that I hope we all agree on is to ensure that every job in America 

is a safe job. Even in a recession, no worker should have to risk his or her life to 

bring home a paycheck. Our worker safety and health agencies—OSHA and 

MSHA—are on the front lines protecting workers from workplace hazards. Even 

though we have made incredible progress in protecting workers on the job since 

these two agencies were established decades ago, it is still wholly unacceptable that 

nearly 4,400 workers died last year on the job and over 3 million were seriously injured. 

One of my top priorities for OSHA in the coming year is to continue its outreach 

to vulnerable workers, such as young workers, minorities, older workers, and workers with low literacy skills who work in low-wage and high-risk industries with little 

or no access to information and resources on preventing injuries and illnesses. When 

I came before the Committee last year, I shared with you our plans for a National 

Action Summit for Latino Workers Health and Safety in Houston. I am happy to 

report that we held the summit last April in Houston and it was a remarkable success. We welcomed representatives of business, labor, faith-based and community organizations. OSHA is continuing its extraordinary outreach efforts this year. 

OSHA’s work on the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill response in the Gulf states was 

a great example of this broad-based outreach effort in action. During the peak of 

the operations, more than 47,000 men and women were involved in responding to 

and cleaning up the oil spill each day. This included more than 42,000 response and 

cleanup workers employed by BP and its contractors, 1,600 members of the National 

Guard, and more than 2,400 federal employees. Many workers faced potential expo-
29 

sure to weathered oil, oil byproducts, dispersants, cleaning products, and other 

chemicals used in the cleanup process. Depending on their assignments, these workers also faced potential hazards from extreme heat, slips, falls, material handling, 

electrical hazards, and more. OSHA initiated outreach to scores of community organizations representing a wide range of workers and to employers providing the clean 

up services. OSHA distributed over 50,000 health and safety publications in three 

languages to workers in the Gulf. In addition, OSHA worked closely with employers, 

including BP, to ensure that workers had the appropriate protective equipment, adequate training, and information about heat stress in particular. The result was a 

remarkably safe experience for the workers participating in the clean-up effort. 

Of special note, when I came before you last year, I reported on the largest fine 

in the history of OSHA levied on BP. I have an important update on that case. Since 

OSHA issued the BP fine—which it issued only after it found that the company had 

not fulfilled its promise to abate hazardous conditions after a horrendous and preventable accident at its Texas City Refinery that killed 15 workers—OSHA has been 

working closely with BP to reform its safety practices at the refinery. As part of the 

settlement of a large portion of the BP fines, OSHA and BP agreed on specific steps 

that BP would take by March of 2012 to address the safety hazards at its facility 

and reform its safety practices. In addition, the settlement allows OSHA to monitor 

BP’s compliance to see that it eliminates the types of conditions that caused the disaster. I consider this agreement a model of how OSHA can work with business to 

transform the culture of safety for the benefit of all involved 

Another way OSHA is working with business to reform the culture of safety is 

through its Alliance and compliance assistance programs. As many of you probably 

already know, the President’s budget for 2012 requests continued funding for the 

Voluntary Protection Program—a welcome development in the business community. 

OSHA will also continue to fully support its On-site Consultation Program. I hope 

you have all heard from small businesses in your districts that have benefited from 

this program. In 2010, more than 26,000 small and medium-sized businesses that 

employ over 1.5 million workers received on-site assistance from OSHA’s On-site 

Consultation Program free of charge. 

These cooperative programs and outreach efforts are providing the Agency with 

information on safety and health practices and improve our ability to communicate 

with industry and hard-to-reach workers. As a result, OSHA is able to operate more 

effectively and responsively. 

In addition to the comprehensive economic feasibility reviews we conduct, OSHA 

has taken several steps in recent weeks to enhance our dialogue with small business 

about the impact of OSHA regulations. For example, in response to the concerns 

raised by the small business community to OSHA’s proposal to reinstate an additional step for recording musculoskeletal disorders on the OSHA injury logs, OSHA 

temporarily withdrew the proposal from Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

review, and it is now working with the Small Business Administration’s Office of 

Advocacy to meet with small business owners and other stakeholders to discuss 

their concerns. OSHA’s focus—protecting workers on the job—will never change, but 

we are open to talking to all who have good ideas about how to get there. 

While we work with the business community on minimizing the regulatory burden, I want you all to know that OSHA will continue to aggressively enforce our 

safety and health laws against those employers who refuse to play by the rules and 

who put profits above their workers’ lives. Often, strong enforcement is the only option to get the attention of recalcitrant employers. Moreover, strong enforcement 

protects business by creating a fair market for them to compete in. The vast majority of employers in our nation care deeply for their employees and spend their hardearned revenue on running a safe workplace. We cannot sit by while they are forced 

to compete with employers who unlawfully cut corners on safety. 

OSHA took action when workers in Pennsylvania were put at risk while working 

for CA Franc Construction in Washington, PA—a roofing contractor who refused to 

take even the most rudimentary steps to protect its workers. CA Franc repeatedly 

refused to allow workers to use fall protection when they worked on steeply pitched 

roofs. In 2010, employee Carl Beck fell to his death. He was 29 years old and left 

behind two children. It must have caused Mr. Beck’s family endless anguish and 

grief to know that fall protection equipment was available on the roof with Mr. 

Beck, but the owner of CA Franc would not let him use it. OSHA issued citations 

to CA Franc for its egregious violation, and the owner pled guilty to a criminal 

charge related to Mr. Beck’s death. 

You can be sure that going forward, OSHA will continue to protect your constituents from these kinds of hazards, while working with employers in your districts 

who want to play by the rules. 
30 

The dangers of mining are well documented. However, we should not and must 

not accept a certain number of fatalities in our nation’s mines every year as inevitable. The heart-breaking events at Massey Energy Company’s Upper Big Branch 

(UBB) mine in Montcoal, West Virginia last year, remind us that we must stand 

firmly and defend the right of every single miner to a safe and healthy workplace, 

in recognition of our commitment to the principle that they need not risk their lives 

each day for a paycheck at the end of the week. 

The past year at MSHA has been an extraordinarily challenging one. I am, however, immensely proud of the work that our Assistant Secretary Joe Main and the 

whole team at MSHA have done to both respond to the UBB disaster and to continue the critical day-to-day work of the agency. All of us at the Department of 

Labor appreciate the support that we received from my good friend George Miller 

as Chairman of this Committee at the time of the disaster and in its aftermath. In 

addition, we appreciate the recent comments from you, Chairman Kline, recognizing 

the steps that MSHA has taken to strengthen enforcement since last April 5th. 

MSHA has undertaken extraordinary measures to ensure that it is using every 

tool at its disposal to reform the behavior of repeat violators. Since April 2010, 

MSHA has conducted more than 200 impact inspections across the country. These 

inspections target mines that merit increased agency attention and enforcement due 

to their poor compliance history or particular compliance concerns. The results of 

these impact inspections are cause for serious concern. While some of the operators 

pursued in our impact inspections have taken remedial actions to clean up their operations, MSHA continues to issue citations to a significant number of these operators for violations of the most basic and necessary safety standards. The results of 

the inspections demonstrate that despite MSHA’s stepped up efforts and the memory of the UBB tragedy, intransigence persists in some corners of the mining industry. 

Last year, for the first time, MSHA sought a federal court injunction under Section 108(a)(2) of the Mine Act. The lawsuit was filed against Freedom Energy Mining Company’s Mine No. 1 in Kentucky. The egregious conditions in that mine led 

us to believe that the mine operator was engaged in a pattern of violation of the 

mandatory safety and health standards under the Mine Act, which constituted a 

continuing hazard to miner health and safety. In fact, the operator of the mine 

agreed that it could not comply with health and safety standards at that mine and 

ended production at the mine. The lawsuit was successfully resolved when MSHA 

and Massey, the Freedom Energy operator, agreed to a court order that requires 

Massey to ensure the safety of miners during the shutdown process and protects the 

livelihood of the displaced Freedom miners. 

MSHA has also revamped the Pattern of Violation (POV) program to make it 

more effective and recently published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to make additional changes in the POV process. In addition, MSHA is moving forward with 

measures to improve rock dust standards to prevent explosions and to encourage operators to find and fix violations before they harm miners. We are using the funds 

provided to the Department in the supplemental appropriations bill to reduce the 

backlog of contested cases before the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission. 

Looking forward, I can assure you that MSHA will continue its impact inspections 

and its strategic and comprehensive use of all of its enforcement powers. Furthermore, in 2011, we will conclude the investigation into the cause of the UBB disaster 

and will share whatever additional lessons that tragedy has to teach us. We have 

learned much already, from our post-UBB efforts, and first and foremost, have 

learned that if we want to truly change the behavior of the worst of the worst in 

the mining industry, as I am sure we all do, MSHA needs additional tools. This 

Committee has a proud history of standing up for miners and being a vigilant protector of their safety and health. I look forward to working with all of you in the 

coming year on using the lessons of UBB to give MSHA the tools it needs to better 

protect miners. 

Finally, I would be remiss if I did not bring the Committee up to date on MSHA’s 

campaign to finally end the scourge of black lung disease in coal country. Last year, 

MSHA published a proposed rule to reduce miners’ exposure to respirable coal mine 

dust. This year, MSHA is moving forward with public hearings on the proposed rule 

and will continue its comprehensive strategy to end Black Lung which, along with 

the proposed rule, includes enhanced enforcement, collaborative outreach and education and training to help prevent this terrible disease. 

Securing Retirement and Health and Welfare Benefits 

My definition of a good job encompasses not only fair pay and safe conditions, but 

also fair benefits and a secure retirement. The Department’s Employee Benefits Se-
31 

curity Administration (EBSA) works to protect the security of retirement and other 

employee benefits for America’s workers, retirees and their families and to support 

the growth of our private benefits system. In fulfilling that role, EBSA oversees approximately 708,000 private sector retirement plans, approximately 2.8 million 

health plans, and a similar number of other welfare benefits plans that provide benefits to approximately 150 million Americans. These plans hold over $5 trillion in 

assets. 

This year, EBSA took many important steps to help the many who fear that they 

will never achieve a secure retirement. For those Americans who must rely on 

401(k)-type plans to finance their retirements, the Department proposed a new rule 

to improve the transparency of 401(k) fees to ensure that their hard-earned savings 

are not unwittingly being eroded by unreasonable fees. In addition, we extended a 

helping hand to workers and retirees who need better information about how to 

manage their plan investments. Our proposed rule on investment advice will make 

the whole process of choosing investments more transparent and comprehensible. 

We hope to make these rules final in 2011. 

When your constituents’ hard earned retirement savings or other benefit plan assets are put at risk, EBSA’s enforcement resources are put to work. In 2010, EBSA 

had tremendous success in protecting employee benefits through both civil and 

criminal enforcement actions. EBSA achieved total monetary results in Fiscal Year 

2010 of $1.05 billion. Although EBSA always tries to pursue voluntary compliance 

or civil enforcements actions first, when necessary we will use our criminal authority. In 2010, EBSA closed 281 criminal investigations that led to the indictment of 

96 people. 

In fact, this year EBSA initiated a Criminal Enforcement National Project to target the worst abusers of the trust given to those who administer benefit plans. The 

Project pursued people like Gary Merritt, Vice President of Bemcore, Inc., a company located in Ohio. When a Bemcore employee left the company and sought to 

move the balance of his 401(k) account at Bemcore to an IRA, Mr. Merritt instead 

deposited this employee’s life savings into a Bemcore account and then spent the 

money. Mr. Merritt pled guilty to one count of embezzlement. 

As with all of our worker protection agencies, EBSA tries to finely calibrate the 

type of action needed. Our Office of Participant Assistance is dedicated to providing 

compliance assistance, education and outreach for workers, retirees and their employers. In 2010, our Benefits Advisors helped more than 370,000 participants and 

employers and recovered over $164 million through informal negotiations. One example in Chairman Kline’s home state of Minnesota shows how Benefits Advisors 

are helping your constituents. When a resident of Northfield, Minnesota contacted 

our Benefits Advisors about his employer’s denial of his application for the COBRA 

subsidy provided for in the Recovery Act, the Benefits Advisor brought together the 

participant and the employer to work out the problem. The Benefits Advisor was 

able to determine that the denial was inadvertent—due to an administrative error. 

Together they fashioned a solution that allowed the participant to apply his overpayment to future premiums. EBSA will continue to protect your constituents as 

zealously in the coming year using all of our tools—from compliance assistant to 

criminal enforcement—according to the common sense of our professionals. 

I also intend to continue to look at issues facing defined benefit plans and proposals to help these plans keep their commitments to workers and retirees. Defined 

benefit plans play a critical role in the retirement security of millions of Americans 

by providing workers the ability to have a secure and dignified retirement. The 

President’s Budget proposes to strengthen the defined benefit system by shoring up 

the solvency of the Federal agency that acts as a backstop to protect pension payments for workers whose companies have failed. More than 1.5 million workers and 

retirees already look to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) for their 

benefits and PBGC insures plans covering 40 million others. The Budget would give 

the PBGC Board the authority to adjust premiums and directs PBGC to take into 

account the risks that different sponsors pose to their retirees and to PBGC. This 

will both encourage companies to fully fund their pension benefits and ensure the 

continued financial soundness of PBGC. 

Enhancing Accountability 

Another top priority for the Department in the upcoming year is to continue our 

commitment to the highest level of accountability. I see three main facets to our 

commitment to accountability: transparency, evidence-based decision making, and 

fiscal responsibility. In his State of the Union address, the President made clear 

that now is the time to make the hard choices to reduce our deficit without sacrificing the investments we need to win the future. Through smart budget choices and 
32 

rigorous program evaluations, we can ensure that public funds are being used wisely and effectively. 

Our commitment to transparency can best be seen in how we set our strategic 

plan and regulatory agenda. We embarked this year on an unprecedented outreach 

effort to inform our strategic planning process. We directly engaged Congress, our 

career staff, stakeholders, and the general public in the process. This outreach effort 

was multi-layered—not just posting a one-time notice. We conducted listening sessions in the field, held web chats, posted the draft Strategic Plan on our website, 

and solicited public comments to a dedicated email address. In addition, our staff 

sat with congressional staff to talk through an early draft of the plan and invite 

their input into the process. These efforts started early and continued throughout 

the strategic planning process. The result is strategic goals that are about workers, 

accountability, and doing what works. These goals reflect the desires of the American people and they guide everything we do. 

There has been much in the news lately about the efficiency of the regulatory 

process and the wisdom of particular regulations. I have no doubt we will this morning and in the future have a healthy debate about the Department’s regulatory 

agenda and particular regulations we have promulgated. I welcome that exchange. 

What is beyond debate, however, is the extent of our efforts to engage a wide swath 

of the public in our regulatory process. The Department of Labor goes above and 

beyond the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act to ensure that the 

public has a voice in our process. We are the only Department in the Executive 

Branch that has held public webchats for every regulatory agenda we have published in this Administration. To date, more than 17,400 people have participated 

in our webchats. That includes reporters, advocates for workers, business owners, 

and congressional staff. During these chats, the public has a chance to pose hard 

questions directly to our Assistant Secretaries about why they are or are not proposing to regulate in a particular manner. Anyone who tells you that we only talk 

to one segment of society or our doors are closed to a certain group is not paying 

attention. 

We are not afraid of scrutiny at the Department of Labor. That is because we are 

constantly scrutinizing ourselves. We have adopted a rigorous self-evaluation program of which I am extremely proud. By using data and evidence to drive our budget development and program planning, while constantly evaluating the impact and 

outcomes of our work, we ensure that our collective efforts are as effective as possible. This year, we have brought on board a Chief Evaluation Officer, Jean Grossman. Dr. Grossman is helping us plan and design rigorous evaluations to measure 

the impact of our programs and build knowledge of what works and what doesn’t. 

She is also working closely with our program offices to make sure evaluation and 

data collection are carefully considered as we execute our programs. 

We are emphasizing outcome measures that will tell us by how much we are actually improving the lives of American workers. For example, our worker protection 

agencies will now focus on developing strategies that leverage our interventions to 

create a deterrent effect, reporting on compliance levels for all workplaces covered 

by our laws, not just those that are investigated in a given year, and looking for 

evidence that workers are in fact safer each year. 

In addition, we are not assuming that just because we have done something before it is necessarily the best way to accomplish our goals. We are committed to improving how we do our job. That is why the President’s budget includes almost $300 

million in Labor’s budget for the Workforce Innovation Fund, which would be funded through 8 percent set-asides from the Youth, Dislocated Worker, Adult, and Employment Service formula programs. Programs within the Department of Education 

would also contribute to the Innovation Fund with the goal of promoting collaboration and the development of bold systemic reforms to improve program delivery and 

outcomes for individuals. If our Innovation Fund grantees can find better ways to 

achieve our workforce training and education goals, we will happily adapt our programs to take advantage of these new ideas. 

Accountability also means being cognizant of the difficult budgetary times in 

which we find ourselves. As I have mentioned, I have sat where you now sit so I 

know how seriously you take your responsibility to ensure that the Executive 

Branch is wisely spending the money you vote to give us. We have looked for duplication in our programs and cut where necessary. For example, last year we eliminated the Employment Standards Administration, which created an unnecessary 

layer of bureaucracy and interfered with the effectiveness of its component programs. The President’s budget includes many difficult choices. The funding of the 

Workforce Innovation Fund is an example of having to make tough choices. When 

first proposed in the FY 2011 budget, these innovations were largely funded by additions to the budget. This year, the proposal is largely financed out of current re-
33 

sources, by shifting resources from an underutilized, slower-spending set-aside within the Workforce Investment Act (WIA). In this way, we are putting our money 

where our beliefs are. 

Tough budget times also require that we look for more and better partners in our 

work to leverage and align resources to support working families. ETA is leading 

our efforts in this area. ETA will work closely with the Department of Education 

in particular to ensure that training and education policies and procedures are coordinated to help students and workers access all the services they need to obtain 

good jobs and avoid any duplication of effort between the two Departments. We also 

are working with the Departments of Health and Human Services, Interior and Agriculture on new opportunities for disadvantaged youth for summer employment 

that open up pathways to further education and career success. ETA also has an 

active partnership with DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. 

Together these offices are leveraging investments made in information technology 

to help workers address the mismatch between skills needed and the skills available 

in the workforce by accessing sophisticated online training. Partnerships must not 

only be at the federal level, and so we are also working closely with partners at 

every level of the workforce system. For example, through a collaborative federalstate workgroup, ETA has developed a new vision and framework for connecting UI 

claimants to workforce services and getting them back to work as soon as possible. 

Moving Forward Together 

As I mentioned at the outset, I believe the American people are counting on us 

to work together. I hope in my testimony you will find many areas where we can 

all agree that the Department is doing its job of training and protecting American 

workers and leveling the playing field for employers who play by the rules. In addition, I believe that there are legislative areas in which we can come together to improve the Department’s programs. 

Reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act remains at the top of my list 

of legislation that should be able to garner bipartisan support. It has in the past 

and it should again in the current Congress. The reauthorization process presents 

a unique opportunity to promote innovation in the public workforce system, build 

on its strengths, and address its challenges. We can help more workers gain a foothold in the middle class by making sure that they have the skill set to succeed in 

the 21st Century. The Administration’s goals for the reauthorization of the WIA include: 

1. Streamlining service delivery—providing easy access and clear information to 

individuals and employers in need of service; 

2. One-stop shopping for high quality services—One-Stop Career Centers should 

provide access and referral to comprehensive employment, training, and education 

services across different programs and better utilize technology to improve customer 

service; 

3. Engaging employers on a regional and sectoral basis—training programs are 

often most effective when they are developed on a regional basis reflecting the labor 

market or on a sectoral basis focusing on a particular industry; 

4. Improving accountability—performance measures must be designed to hold programs accountable for better results, without creating incentives to deny services to 

those most in need of assistance, and results should be made available in a transparent way to all; and 

5. Promoting innovation—WIA should promote the funding of new and creative 

practices and support the replication of those practices that are successful throughout the workforce system. 

We stand ready to provide assistance to the members of this Committee from both 

parties as you move forward with your efforts in this area. 

As I mentioned earlier, I believe that we can find a way to pass a bipartisan mine 

safety bill. It has been done before and we it owe it to the memory of the lost UBB 

miners, their families, and those who go into the mines every day to do it again. 

The full resources of MSHA and my office are available for any assistance we can 

provide. 

Conclusion 

We at the Department of Labor come to work every day to do our best to create 

economic opportunities for the American people. I hope I have shown you that we 

are making a difference in the lives of your constituents and workers throughout 

the country. We are: 

Providing job seekers the skills necessary to land good paying jobs of the future 

and linking employers looking to hire with Americans looking for work; 
34 

Ensuring that every employer takes responsibility for the safety and health of all 

their workers and leveling the playing field for employers who want to do the right 

thing; and 

Fighting to make sure that workers are paid the hourly and overtime wages they 

have earned, that they do not encounter discriminatory barriers to work, and that 

they get the health and retirement benefits for which they bargained for. 

These goals may seem basic and modest, but for American workers they mean a 

life of dignity and security. We will undoubtedly have a vigorous debate about how 

best to achieve these goals, but if we can agree that we all want to end up in the 

same place—in a country with a robust economy that works for everyone—our debate will be constructive and civil. I look forward to working with you and together 

ultimately ensuring good jobs for American workers. 

Chairman KLINE. Thank you very much, Madam Secretary, for 

the testimony. 

Thank you for encouraging a Minnesotan to escape the Minnesota winter and join us here, a very smart move. I know that in 

my home in Lakeville, Minnesota, we have more snow than we 

have seen in over 15 years, and it is doggone cold. So, very smart 

move. 

We have had some discussion here—the ranking member talked 

about it in his comments. We are engaged, as you know, Madam 

Secretary—you mentioned it—in a great debate on the floor here 

in the House about where we can cut money. And many of us think 

we need to cut substantially in order to get at the runaway government spending and reduce the deficit and, as you said, get the business community back to creating jobs, not the government. 

In this debate, we are determining priorities, and we are going 

to have differing views about what should be cut and so forth. And 

I think that is a very healthy exercise that we are engaged in. But 

budgets do have an indication of where priorities might be set, and 

so I want to address your budget, if I could, for just a minute. 

You have indicated your pride, and I think justifiably, in the 

work that the Office of Labor-Management Standards does on behalf of workers. And yet, when I looked at the budget, you keep the 

budget for OLMS about the same level that it had back in 2010. 

Yet, on the other hand, your budget increases funding for the Bureau of International Labor Affairs by, according to my notes here, 

almost $9 million. 

How do you justify providing new grants to labor organizations 

in foreign countries as being more important than funding the only 

organization, the only office that you have in the Department 

whose job it is to protect union workers here in America? It seems 

to me to be an imbalance. How did that come about? 

Secretary SOLIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

What I would say to you is that our funding level has actually, 

in the last 2 years, gone up back towards 2001 funding. It is actually now being proposed at a level funding amount. So we really 

have not decreased. 

What has happened is we have actually become a leaner, if you 

will, meaner machine. And we have actually been able to conduct 

more audits, election investigations. In fact, on an average, I would 

say that, in terms of indictments and convictions, we are actually 

much higher than we were in the previous 2006 and 2009 average. 

And I have those figures for convictions: 130 in this fiscal year, 

2010, and during fiscal year 2006 and 2009, it was 119. 
35 

We are working more effectively. We are also monitoring elections, which I know is a big item of concern to many people, and 

especially with respect to how elections are conducted by unions. 

And I am happy to say that, in this instance, in 2010, we actually 

conducted 145 investigations and, in the prior year, 2006 to 2009, 

there were only 127. So we have done a remarkable job with limited funding that we have been given by the Congress. 

And I would say to you that we are really looking at enforcing 

the most egregious types of efforts. And let me just share with you, 

former secretary-treasurer of an ATU local in New York was convicted of stealing nearly $2,170 by conducting unauthorized ATM 

withdrawals and failing to deposit incoming receipts payable to 

local bank accounts. 

I would say to you also something that we are doing—we monitored elections in Puerto Rico. OLMS negotiated a voluntary settlement agreement with the union called UITICE, an independent 

union in Puerto Rico, after discovering that they hadn’t held an 

election of an officer in 12 years. Quite remarkable for us to have 

to expend staff in that way. 

Your second question about ILAB, what I would say to you there 

is, because we are now at a point, I believe, in this administration 

looking at fair trade agreements and how we work collectively with 

partners that we have been working with in the past years, we are 

trying to establish better standards so that workers, for example in 

Central America, will have some monitoring tools on a tripartite 

level with the ILO, with the government of that country, as well 

as the business community. 

So let me give you an example. In a country like Nicaragua, they 

have a big textile industry. There has been a potential agreement 

to help begin a program that we call Better Work that actually 

started in the previous administration. It has been ongoing now for 

more than a decade. And what they do is try to level the playing 

field in terms of providing support for those individuals that are 

working in that workplace, many of whom are women, vulnerable 

women; taking youngsters out of that industry so you don’t abuse 

children, you know, you are not trafficking or not using children to 

compile the materials that are eventually going to be brought back 

to the U.S., in many cases, or the world. And it is a discussion to 

have people then focus in on how you can lift the standard of living 

of people who live in that country so there won’t be a magnet to 

attract them to come to our country. 

So it has different purposes and one that, I believe, has bipartisan support. And I would hope that we can continue to engage. 

If it is necessary for me to have my Under Secretary come and 

speak to you and staff about it, I would be more that happy to do 

that, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman KLINE. Thank you very much, Madam Secretary. 

We must have messed up the clock here. I couldn’t have used up 

5 minutes already. Could I have done that? 

Mr. MILLER. It seemed like a lifetime to me. 

Chairman KLINE. Seemed like only seconds to me, because the 

Secretary was very engaging, Mr. Miller. 
36 

So I did want to follow up a little bit more on OLMS, but we 

have other Members on both sides who want to ask questions. So 

I will yield to Mr. Miller. 

You are recognized. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you very much. 

And, again, Madam Secretary, thank you for your testimony. I 

believe that you do outline a remarkable record. 

I would assume some of this foreign money also is in anticipation 

of the passage of some trade agreements. I may not agree with 

them, but it sounds to me like they are on their way. And the implementation of that for the business community and the employee 

community is very important. 

One of my concerns—and others will touch on the overall issue, 

but—is the impact of closing down One-Stop centers on our veterans. I know, I think, in your budget, there is additional money— 

or I don’t know if it is your budget or the veterans budget—to help 

reintegrate our returning troops into the economy of this country 

and into the workplace. 

Many of them left straight from high school to go to Iraq and to 

go to Afghanistan and are now coming back and seeking skills in 

trades that they may not have acquired in the military or they 

have and they want to build on those skills by going here. And one 

of the big integration points that has been successful, apparently, 

is using the VETS money, the V-E-T-S money, to take those vets 

to the One-Stop centers and give them full exposure to the training 

opportunities, to the employment opportunities that exist in their 

communities, you know, where they came from, where their homes 

are. 

But I am making the assumption, I am asking you, in April, 

should these cuts go into place that are slated to go—this is a continuing resolution, so it would happen in March—that, in April, 

those One-Stop centers would be shut down. I assume that they 

shut down for the vets also. 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, it would impact a great number of people, 

including those vets that have one of the highest rates of unemployment, especially the returning vets from Iraq and Afghanistan. 

And they are the youngest. Their unemployment rate hinges 

around 11 percent. 

We have tried to roll out programs more aggressively to identify 

opportunities, working with the Chamber of Commerce here in 

Washington, D.C., on a national level, to try to encourage employers to immediately hire up these returning vets and create that opportunity. 

Mr. MILLER. I think this would be very unfortunate. I had the 

honor, 2 night ago, of having dinner with a former Navy Seal, who, 

himself, was shot 27 times, survived, has recovered, and is now 

working with a foundation. And they are taking seriously injured 

Navy Seals and reintegrating them into college or the workplace. 

And it is rather remarkable. The other soldier that was with us 

was a Navy Seal who was injured and took a direct shot to the 

head. He is now going to be enrolling in college, through a lot of 

hard work, to become a history teacher. That is what he always 

wanted to do as a youngster. 
37 

And the point is this: that, as we realize the trauma of the trauma that our veterans have received in terms of brain injuries and 

others, as time goes on, we are also finding out that there are more 

opportunities to reintegrate them over time as we are able to work 

with their injuries. And employment, obviously, is key. Many of 

these veterans are returning to their families. 

And the One-Stop centers have been a place where, instead of 

having this veteran having to run from place to place to try to sort 

out the resources to provide the training, that is the key to the 

One-Stop centers. And I just think we should be very concerned 

about the idea that the lights are going to go out in that One-Stop 

center in April. 

Let me turn to another subject, and that is, again, this idea 

that—in the hearings we had at the beginning of your administration was this whole question of employees not being paid for the 

work that they do and, really, the Department of Labor becoming 

a handmaiden for some of those employers, by covering for them 

and lying to the employees who were seeking wages that there was 

no question that they were due. 

And I see that—you know, I said $300 million. It appears to me 

that it may be closer to $400 million. 

Secretary SOLIS. Yeah. 

Mr. MILLER. And I look just in your testimony, you say in Pennsylvania you recovered over $10 million in wages for over 16,000 

workers. In Tennessee, it was $7 million for 1,400 cases. Throughout the country, you say $400 million, impacting about 52,000 

cases. 

I mean, this is almost—I hate to say it—it is a little bit like an 

epidemic that was going on here, because there was no price to be 

paid for running out on the wages. And I just wonder, are you able 

to continue that kind of prosecution on behalf of these employees? 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, actually, we will be impacted if there are 

cuts made to our budget. It would also mean that we would have 

to dislocate a lot of the new investigators that we brought on board 

in the past 2 years. So we are looking at approximately anywhere 

from 300 new investigators that we hired up in the last 2 years to 

conduct compliance as well as outreach and, more importantly, 

helping those vulnerable workers who oftentimes aren’t even aware 

that, in some cases, they are even misclassified. And that is another problem that we are trying to address. 

But the fact of the matter is that this is a problem. And it hurts 

our economy. It hurts those legitimate businesses that actually pay 

overtime, minimum wage, that pay into the workers’ comp system, 

the disability system. That is money that is robbed by other workers and folks that have to end up paying for that through other 

types of taxes that are increased because people are utilizing services that should have been paid correctly by an employer to begin 

with. 

What we are trying to do is level the playing field, inform workers, but also have more compliance with business, in particular 

small businesses, who may just not understand what the rules are. 

And it is really trying to create a sense that the Wage and Hour 

division can be more of a help and not always the heavy hand here. 

And, in the past, as you know, that wasn’t the case. People would 
38 

call and make complaints; people on our side would not handle 

those complaints unless they were the bigger cases that came 

about. 

What we are doing now is strategically using our resources also 

to look at industries where we see that there are patterns of abuse. 

I gave you one example in the construction industry. We have problems there with people not being paid appropriately over time. And 

when there are injuries there and they are not covered and they 

are misclassified, they go to the emergency room, guess who picks 

up the tab? We do, the taxpayer. 

That is why it is important to go after these industries that are 

not playing by the rules and undercut our economy and then go directly to those vulnerable workers, abuse them. And, in many 

cases, because they may not be documented, they purposely abuse 

that population. 

So we are trying to clean that up, while also making the businesses comply with the laws. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you. 

Chairman KLINE. Thank you. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mrs. Biggert, you are recognized. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for having 

this hearing. 

And thank you, Madam Secretary, for being here. 

I have a question concerning something that you and the Department of Labor proposed in October of 2010, and that was a rule 

that would amend the 35-year-old definition of who can be considered an ERISA fiduciary. And I do think that this proposal expands 

the universe of people who owe fiduciary duties to ERISA plans by 

broadening the concept of rendering investment advice for a fee. 

And I hope that this doesn’t happen, but I think that it does increase liability and the cost of advice and reduce choice for plan 

sponsors and participants and IRA account owners. And you have 

had a comment period, and there is going to be a public hearing 

in March. 

But my concern really is that, after the President recently announced an effort to ensure regulations do not cause undue burdens on businesses and on customers, the Department redrawing 

the fiduciary lines at the same time that the SEC is considering 

proposing new rules under the new Dodd-Frank financial services 

law for broker-dealers in this area. 

Now, I also serve on the Financial Services Committee, and yesterday Chairman Schapiro from the SEC was there, and I asked 

her this question, too. Have you considered the possibility that conflicting standards could result from the SEC and from the Department of Labor? 

And I would think that it would really make sense to coordinate 

efforts with the SEC. And I asked Chairman Schapiro if you two 

had gotten together to discuss this issue, and I would like to know 

your response. 

Secretary SOLIS. Sure, thank you, Congresswoman. 

As you know, the standard, set definition of a fiduciary was actually established about 35 years ago. So it is somewhat outdated 

when you look at the new kinds of plans that we have, for example, 

401(k), which has dramatically changed—— 
39 

Mrs. BIGGERT. But, really, if you would just answer the question 

first. 

Secretary SOLIS. Yes. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Have you and Chairman—— 

Secretary SOLIS. My staff has. My Assistant Secretary for EBSA, 

Phyllis Borzi, has been working with them. So, yes, all the way 

through, we are working with them in dialogue. And I know that 

we are going have a planned comment forum in March, March the 

1st, so there will be more opportunity to hear from everyone, all 

the stakeholders. And we are working very closely with the SEC. 

Yes, that is an affirmative. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. So would you possibly submit a follow-up communication addressing how the proposed rule would interact with the 

authority granted the SEC under Dodd-Frank? 

Secretary SOLIS. To the extent that I can give you as much information, I would be happy to do that and have my Assistant Secretary respond, absolutely. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Okay. Thank you. 

Then, you know, as people are really taking more ownership of 

their savings—I think we actually have people trying to save more 

money now—investor education has become even more critical. And 

the Department’s proposal appears to make it more difficult to provide investment education without substantial risk that the activity would later be determined to constitute fiduciary advice. And 

this would restrict access to much-needed investment education 

and guidance. 

How can we ensure that the Labor fiduciary rule and the ongoing 

efforts in the SEC are aligned and help offer investors more, and 

not less, education and guidance on planning for retirement? 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, I have the belief that what we are attempting do in this administration is really provide more opportunity, more transparency, and more options for the particular individuals that would benefit from these types of plans, and making 

sure that the fiduciary—that there is a responsibility in making 

sure that that information is transparent and that there is no conflict of interest. That is what the purpose of this particular rule is, 

to look at that, to make sure that it is unbiased investment advice. 

And I know that creates some possible concerns by the industry 

itself, but this is something that I believe consumers are owed. And 

because we have found in the last few years that there have been 

problems in this industry, this is a way of helping to address that 

information and make it more transparent. 

And I definitely will work with you. I would like to follow up 

with you and with my staff. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you. 

I yield back. 

Chairman KLINE. Thank you. 

Mr. Kildee, you are recognized. 

Mr. KILDEE. I thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Madam Secretary, about 30 years ago, the merchants in the largest mall in my district called me to come out and have a meeting 

with them. They begged me not to increase the minimum wage. 

They said that the minimum wage would ruin many of them if that 
40 

were to happen. I disagreed with them and came back and voted 

for the increase in the minimum wage. 

But within a year, less than a year, they called me for another 

meeting and pushed me to vote for the appropriations for the TAA, 

because the TAA requires an appropriation, and the Appropriations 

Committee was rather slow on that. And they were rather angry 

that we were not pushing. And I told them, you know, I was pushing it very, very hard. And we did, indeed, increase the TAA, or 

appropriate the money for it. 

They could see the link between, themselves, minimum wage and 

their profit, by they could not see any link between workers having 

purchasing power and their success. 

Can you tell that, in addition to how individual workers are 

helped by TAA, how the economy is helped by the TAA? 

Secretary SOLIS. Thank you, Congressman Kildee. 

The TAA program, as you know, was not passed by the Congress, 

and, therefore, it is expired, at this point. Unfortunately, we have 

come up with a decision that says that we believe we can still move 

forward, but we are going to need legislation to help restore that 

program. 

What happened since 2009 is that we actually were able to help 

certify workers, over 400,000 in the year 2009, and that approximately allowed for 170,000 workers, who may not have been eligible, to be eligible for TAA, especially during this recession, because 

we had the additional ARRA moneys available. 

TAA provides, also, a safety net for health care. So many people 

that lose their health care because they lost their job, because their 

job went overseas or was outsourced, provides a safety net in terms 

of COBRA, so people could have assistance. They also, in some 

cases, get a wage. And they also get training assistance. 

And I have seen it work very well in places that have been hardhit, whether it was in Florida, for example, with the discussion 

about closure of NASA and that particular industry, helping to provide a safety net for people who had to start looking for new jobs 

or people that were dislocated. 

The perfect example that I look to is in my own home State, in 

Fremont, with the NUMMI plant, the auto plant that was closed 

there, Toyota; 4,200 workers lost their jobs. We were able to help 

provide, in cooperation with the local workforce investment boards 

there, to come together and help these people find training, but 

also be able to draw down some assistance so that they wouldn’t 

be forced out of their homes or could continue to pay rent for where 

they were staying. 

This is a tremendous help for many people who have been impacted. I would urge the Congress to think seriously of passing and 

restoring the TAA program. It has been around for many years, 

and it has had bipartisan support. So I am not quite understanding 

why we haven’t been able to do it, but I hope that we can work 

together on that issue. 

Mr. KILDEE. Thank you very much. 

What effect will the draconian cuts, particularly in OSHA, have 

on the economy? 
41 

And what effect will it have on the Web site? You know, knowledge is power, and the more power that the worker has, the more 

he or she can help themselves access certain programs. 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, Congressman, what it would immediately 

do is push off us promulgating any new standards. That is number 

one. There could be a potential layoff of the new staff, many of the 

new staff that we brought in 2 years ago as a result of ARRA funding. So we are looking at, perhaps, possibly, the range of 415 new 

hires and investigators that were brought into OSHA. That would 

include 200 inspectors and 17 whistleblower investigators that 

would also be impacted. In addition, that would also mean 8,000 

fewer workplace hazard inspections conducted by States. That is 

not the Federal Government. And, in addition, it would also, overall, throughout the country, impact about 18,000 fewer inspections 

in total. That is just to give you an indication of what would happen there. 

With the elimination of the Web page, as you asked, that also 

would cut off, I think, a lot of assistance that is provided for millions of workers but also for small businesses that look for compliance assistance. I think that is the second-highest-rated Web site 

that is used by the public in the Federal Government, is what I am 

told by my Assistant Secretary of OSHA. 

Mr. KILDEE. Thank you, Madam Secretary. 

Chairman KLINE. Thank you. The gentlemen’s time has expired. 

Dr. Roe? 

Mr. ROE. Thank you. 

Thanks for being back. 

Madam Secretary, how many times have you met with the President one on one to discuss labor and jobs issues since you have 

been in office? 

Secretary SOLIS. I have met with him several times, in fact. 

Mr. ROE. One on one, where you discussed the labor issues of 

this country, not in a group, a large group? Where you went in 

with your staff and met with the President individually? 

Secretary SOLIS. I think that I would tell you that I have had 

several opportunities to talk to him when we have been in private 

locations, when we are visiting. 

Mr. ROE. But, not to interrupt you, but, I mean, to have a meeting set up where you are going to discuss labor issues with the 

President of the United States. 

Secretary SOLIS. We have had—we have had several meetings. 

Mr. ROE. The second question I have is, the Federal Government—there is an article in USA Today—the Federal Government 

spends about $18 billion a year on 47 different job-training programs run by 9 different agencies. And all but 3 programs overlap 

with others to provide the same services to the same population, 

according to the GAO—this is not me, but this is GAO—and found 

that little is known about the effectiveness of the programs because 

half haven’t had a performance review since 2004, and only 5 have 

ever had a study to determine whether job seekers in the program 

do better than those who don’t get in the program. 

So it would be like, you know—have you done anything to pare 

down this huge, enormous bureaucracy into something more manageable? 
42 

Now, we certainly know that there are programs that work. And 

I think you can show they do. But I will bet you there are programs that overlap that don’t work, that don’t give you much bang 

for your buck. 

So have you done an overall review of the Department of Labor 

and looked and say, how can we put these together to be more efficient? It doesn’t sound like it has happened. 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, I would tell you that, yes, it is happening. 

And we conduct reviews and evaluations internally of our programs. And the minute I became Secretary, I asked for reviews of 

all of our training programs. 

And, as you can understand, this will now be my second year, 

but we are looking at trying to make sure that we catch things that 

we know—for example, if there are problems with acquisition of 

equipment or things of that nature, things that haven’t appropriately been conducted, or training that perhaps may have not 

been reported accurately by our contractors—— 

Mr. ROE. We have 47 programs that overlap. And it is confusing. 

I have been a mayor of a city and trying to figure out what we can 

use. 

Have you looked at that and done away with any of them and 

said, these are just not effective, they don’t work, and let’s combine 

into WIA or something that does? 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, I would say that not all of the training 

programs that you are talking about are under the Department of 

Labor. But we have made an effort to work and coordinate, for example, with programs that deal with summer youth. And I know, 

at many levels, the locals have a lot of responsibility, also, for helping to implement the money that goes to the State or goes to the 

local county or the city. 

And trying to minimize duplication a big priority for us. That is 

why we have a whole new evaluation—a chief evaluation officer 

that is also looking to see how we could make strategic movements 

and amend some of our resources. 

But I think this is where WIA reauthorization really comes in. 

Because I do believe we can streamline, I do believe we can do a 

better job and, kind of, look at how we structure that program so 

that we don’t miss the boat, that we really connect to the employers and the businesses and make sure that we are not duplicating 

our activity. 

Mr. ROE. A year from now, are we going to be here—could we 

have this meeting a year from now and say there has been coordination of these agencies? Because I think there is a lot of redundancy in these. 

And I will go to the next question I have. I have been an employer for over 30 years, and I worked and—was on the pension 

committee. So I am very familiar with ERISA, and did this for 

about 30 years. 

And here, as an employer, are some of the frustrations that we 

have. It is when you—and the President said he wanted to cut 

down the rules and regulations, and I could not agree more with 

him. We have OSHA, and we have TOSHA, which is Tennessee’s 

department. We have workers’ comp, ERISA, Family Medical 

Leave Act, Affordable Care Act, Department of Labor, Medicare, 
43 

Medicaid. I mean, all these things have burdensome rules, and it 

makes it almost impossible to run your business. 

And back to Ms. Biggert’s comment a minute ago, I think it is— 

in the financial sector, they are having the same problems we are, 

not knowing whether to follow the SEC rules, whether to follow 

ERISA rules, what to follow. So it is the confusion in these different agencies that don’t coordinate. 

And these rules I have just gone through here, I could give you 

example after example about how it cost our business money. And, 

quite frankly, I look at OSHA as a heavy-handed organization. 

And, I mean, I view them as somebody not to help me but that can 

hurt me and not improve safety in my shop. 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, Congressman, I would say to you that one 

of our goals is providing for retirement security through our EBSA, 

you know, agency there. And what we have been able to do is—one 

is emphasize participant assistance, so that is to give information, 

transparency for people who participate in the programs, but also 

enforcement, because we know that there is a lot of fraud, quite 

frankly. And I think that the public realizes that we have to have 

tools to be able to detect when there is fraud and abuse. 

And that is pretty much where we are coming from. And I would 

very much like to have the opportunity to ask my Assistant Secretary, Phyllis Borzi, to come in and meet with you personally to 

talk about any of these issues where you might have concern. 

Mr. ROE. Thank you. 

I yield back. 

Chairman KLINE. Thank you. 

Mr. Payne? 

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much. 

It is really a pleasure to see you here. And, you know, I commend 

you for the outstanding work that you have been doing. 

And I think that it is important that our Nation continues to protect its workers. You know, we are the top nation in the world because we have a concern about people. And I think that many of 

the laws, although business people say how intrusive they are because, you know, an OSHA inspector will come in and say, ‘‘This 

employee should have on earplugs because it is more than 85 decibels,’’ is a nuisance. 

I think that, unfortunately, many businesses feel their only responsibility is to their stockholders or to their investors. Therefore, 

they must make the most profit that they must do. And, therefore, 

they are going to take the shortcuts. 

And I think that, you know, if you get into the philosophy of government, John Locke and Jean Rousseau, they talk about whether, 

you know, you have to impose constraints on people. Because if you 

allow business to simply have a system where everything goes, 

then we get back to the way it was with the robber barons and 

when we had children working in factories and people working 12 

and 14 hours without overtime. 

So, unfortunately, because business—and I am not a 

businessperson; I have been a worker—but, evidently, 

businesspeople feel that we shouldn’t have taxes, shouldn’t have 

regulations, we ought to do what we want to do, because our responsibility is to the bottom line. 
44 

And I can appreciate that. As a union person, my whole argument was, I think we should protect workers against things that— 

as a matter of fact, we are having more deaths in the construction 

industry in the New York-New Jersey area than we have had in 

the past years. 

We have faulty equipment. We have had equipment that people 

knew was inappropriate, and deaths have come about. So when we 

hear about how we can’t make a dollar in the U.S. because of all 

of these labor and government constraints, I think that the thing 

is being blown out of proportion. 

Let me just ask a quick question about community college programs. We have heard a lot of discussion about employers who are 

struggling to find workers with skill sets required for today’s challenging job markets in spite of high unemployment rates. As a result, nontraditional students, which includes adults and dislocated 

workers, are enrolling in community colleges at record rates, making up the largest pool of students in such schools. 

Yesterday, representatives from a community college in my district shared their excitement for the current competitive grant program for community colleges from your department. Can you expand on these opportunities, as well as the Department’s overall 

strategy for helping community colleges meet the educational and 

training needs for students and employers to improve job growth? 

Secretary SOLIS. Thank you, Congressman Payne. 

We have, in the past few weeks, put out a solicitation for grants 

for TAA career community college opportunities. And that money 

has been set aside to help provide for expansion and retention for 

programs at community colleges that partner with businesses. So 

every aspect of the program has to include an employer, and it has 

to look at programs that are worthy of expansion. 

So we hear oftentimes of the impaction of programs occurring in 

the nursing industry, where you have so many candidates that 

want to get into nursing but there aren’t enough slots. I have heard 

heartbreaking stories of people who had to wait 5 years to get into 

a nursing program at their community college. 

And, with this money, it will help to drive that expansion, so 

that capacity building, acquisition of equipment can be handled. 

And new areas that need to be expanded, so high-tech, renewable 

energy, those sources of new fields in the green sector can also be 

expanded. That is, I think, a shot in the arm for community colleges, especially right now. 

I look at my own State of California, where there is a budget crisis and where the first hits are going to be lodged at the community colleges. Every State that participates will receive an amount 

of money, but it has to go through the community colleges. And 

they should partner with other groups that are nontraditional, 

community-based as well. They can partner also with, obviously, 

businesses through the WIA boards. 

But it is an opportunity, I think, for people to begin that discussion and to really make decisions at the local level, not be driven 

by the Federal Government, but what is needed at the regional 

level. So, say there is an opportunity to create lithium batteries in 

Ohio, and there is a community college system that knows they 

have a need for the equipment. They have a class size, but they 
45 

need to expand that more because there is a big need. Those are 

opportunities that are going to benefit the local participants, but, 

more importantly, be able to grow to capacity. 

And I think, again, that is an important program. And I hope 

that the Congress will understand that we need to preserve that 

program. Because my understanding is that there have been proposals to cut back in the fourth year of funding for that program. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Walberg? 

Mr. WALBERG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, Madam Secretary, for taking our questions and 

our concerns, as well. 

I represent a district in Michigan right next-door to where you 

had the opportunity to tour the GM plant. I have a Chrysler proving grounds. I have probably the newest and finest GM plant in 

Delta Township, up near Lansing, in my district, that I believe 

makes the cars people want to buy there. 

But we also, in my district, have 11.7 percent unemployment, on 

average. In several counties in my district, there is upwards of 15, 

16 percent unemployment still. So, truly, it is an issue where there 

has to be concern about employee safety, but also employee employment and the success of businesses that are enabled by having reasonable and understood regulation that goes through. 

And so, Madam Secretary, OSHA recently pulled back two proposals, as you know, a noise standards and musculoskeletal disorder proposals, citing the need for more study on how these proposals would affect small businesses and to better understand, as 

they said, how these would impact business. 

The question I would like to ask first for you to respond to is, 

can you explain how these proposals were put forward without 

clear understanding of the harmful economic impact on businesses 

and, I would hasten to quickly state, concurrently on employees as 

well, with little to show for improved worker safety? 

Secretary SOLIS. Thank you, Congressman Walberg. 

I would say to you that the reason why we pulled both regs back 

is because we know—we heard, we had a lot of comments from the 

business communities, as well as from other stakeholders, and we 

felt, again, in our best interest, that we take our time with getting 

more information from those groups that would be affected. I think 

that is the right thing to do—— 

Mr. WALBERG. Forgive me. I guess the key question is, if, indeed, 

you came to the conclusion that we needed more time and needed 

to take more care, why wasn’t that the first order? 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, we do take in comments. And it is not to 

say that we close those comments off. But I would tell you that we 

are making every effort to make sure that we work with the Small 

Business Administration advocacy office, as we plan to do, and 

have more comment from the public. 

So it is actually taking a step in a direction that will allow for 

more thoughtful discussion from all stakeholders and from employees, as well. Because we equally get a lot of concerns and letters 

from people who feel that we should be moving forward. So we also 

have a lot of, how could I say, interest on the part of those employees that feel, why are we not taking action when we know that 
46 

there are certain issues out there that are impacting them currently on the job. 

Mr. WALBERG. Thank you. 

Secondly, last year, the Department rescinded the final regulations concerning union financial reporting on Form LM-2. That was 

promulgated by the past administration. And, as I understand it, 

the rescinded rule would have increased the information provided 

by large unions on Form LM-2 that they are required to file about 

parties buying or selling union assets and the compensation of 

union officers and employees, and it would have required considerably more detail and itemization in these categories than under the 

2003 rule. 

And so, can you explain to me why the Department rescinded the 

final LM-2 rule issued by the prior administration and how that 

doesn’t mean less information and less transparency for rank-andfile union members about how their dues are spent? 

And I ask that with the context that, since 2001, OLMS, using 

information from LM-2, 900 convictions and $93 million of court orders were issued in restitutions to workers. And that is a concern. 

And that is their benefit. So I am concerned that we would rescind 

those rules. Why? 

Secretary SOLIS. We rescinded that rule because we found that 

it was duplicative in nature, and we were already receiving information that was already fulfilling its purpose. So there was no 

need to burden and provide more paperwork for information that 

was going to be made public anyway. And that is, quite frankly, 

our position. 

And I would tell you that, even though we have restructured the 

OLMS office, I did talk about the fact that we have actually been 

able to indict more individuals, bring more criminal prosecutions, 

and conduct, I think, a more robust, concentrated effort, where we 

are really looking at the bad actors. And I mentioned some of the 

folks that we were successfully able to prosecute—some, I mentioned earlier, in New York. There was a case also in New York, 

CWA Local. Someone there, a former president of CWA in fact, was 

guilty of embezzlement; $200,000 to $400,000 was taken. And we 

were able to handle some of these very large cases. 

So I don’t think we have pulled back from our enforcement. What 

we are doing is trying to make sure that we have a level playing 

field, that all have access to information. And transparency is first 

and foremost in our mind. 

Mr. WALBERG. Thank you. 

I yield back. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Andrews? 

Mr. ANDREWS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Madam Secretary, we are very proud that a young woman who 

sat at the kitchen table, worried about how to pay for her education, now sits at Cabinet table. We are very proud of you and 

proud of your service to our country. 

Let’s say that a constituent of mine runs a supermarket, hired 

a teenager this morning, 17-year-old, and had a question about 

what he was able to have her do, as far as duties in the store with 
47 

respect to certain worker-safety standards. Could that supermarket 

owner call your department and get an answer to that question? 

Secretary SOLIS. Absolutely. And we are encouraging it, in fact. 

Mr. ANDREWS. And so, they wouldn’t have to hire an attorney or 

they wouldn’t have to spend money on something; that there is a 

Web site, I assume, that they could go to with some of that information? 

Secretary SOLIS. Our OSHA division, I think, has done a terrific 

job in making information accessible to everyone, in fact, for, in 

particular, business owners, small business, grocery types, many 

are immigrants. Many don’t have a good command of the English 

language. So we also provide information and tools to them in their 

language that is more accessible and more appropriate, for them to 

understand our laws. 

Mr. ANDREWS. I know this, frankly, is the Korean-American grocer in Camden, New Jersey, that I represent. It is the bodega and 

many others. There is a Polish market in one of my communities— 

Lithuanians. 

Now, I understand that the budget on the floor today would cut 

nearly $100 million from OSHA’s budget, almost a 40 percent cut, 

because you have to cut that by September 30th. So, in other 

words, if this becomes law, you would have to cut about 40 percent 

of what you spend in OSHA to get to the end of the year. 

Would there be somebody to answer that call from the supermarket owner this morning if you had to do that 40 percent cut? 

Secretary SOLIS. I think, well, if that happens, we are not going 

to have that Web site available and that information, and we definitely will have fewer staff available to—— 

Mr. ANDREWS. But my understanding is that one of the cuts that 

is proposed, which is the technology and information account, is the 

account from which the Department’s Web site is run. 

Secretary SOLIS. That is correct. 

Mr. ANDREWS. So you wouldn’t have the personnel to update and 

run the Web site. 

Secretary SOLIS. That is correct. 

Mr. ANDREWS. What other kinds of changes would it mean if you 

had to reduce your budget by 40 percent between now and the end 

of the year? What would it mean to the taxpayer who is sitting at 

home watching you testify today? 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, I think you would being seeing that there 

may be more injuries taking place. And, obviously, that has a cost 

to business, for the business owner but also for society if they are 

not given coverage, if there is no insurance or health insurance 

available. That also would have a devastating impact. 

Mr. ANDREWS. I assume that you get a number of complaints, I 

am sure, that are not valid, that perhaps a person who has a 

grudge against her employer, his employer calls and make an accusation, and you go out and look at it and find out that there is 

nothing wrong. I assume what would happen is you wouldn’t be 

able to investigate those claims as quickly as you do right now. Is 

that right? 

Secretary SOLIS. That is correct. And I would tell you that one 

of the things that happens with OSHA is that, in many cases—and 

you don’t hear about this regularly—is that we will sit down and 
48 

we will negotiate with the business owner. And oftentimes it 

doesn’t lead to a particular citation or penalty because there was 

or will be corrective action. If they participate also in our consultation or our programs that provide compliance assistance, we will 

look at that favorably. So those are things that the business community may not be aware of. 

Mr. ANDREWS. Let’s pursue that for a moment. Let’s say that 

there is what—and Mr. Kline will want to pay attention; this is a 

lawyer’s phrase coming—a de minimis violation, where someone 

in—— 

Chairman KLINE. Is that Latin or Greek or—— 

Mr. ANDREWS. It is Latin. 

Chairman KLINE. Oh, Latin. Okay. 

Mr. ANDREWS. Yes, it is. It is Latin. It is high mass. 

But let’s say there is a de minimis exception. Notice is not posted 

on a bulletin board or something of that nature. It is your practice, 

as I understand it, to try and negotiate that out and perhaps just 

write a letter saying, ‘‘Please put the notice up.’’ 

Would you have the personnel to have those negotiations as frequently or as quickly? 

Secretary SOLIS. Probably not. 

Mr. ANDREWS. Which I assume would lead to worse outcomes. 

I just want to make the point that a reckless cut like this obviously has a severe impact on the Department, and that is regrettable. But it has an impact on the public: on the supermarket 

owner who wants to make that call, on the worker who is working 

in unsafe conditions, on the employer who has been wrongfully accused and wants to get the matter resolved more quickly, or the 

employer who maybe wants to have a negotiation so you don’t turn 

a molehill into a mountain. 

And my sense is that the cuts that have been proposed would 

really impair what you are trying to do. We are going to do what 

we can do to make sure that you don’t have to deal with them. 

Thank you, Madam Secretary. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentleman. 

Dr. DesJarlais? 

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Good morning, and thank you for being here. 

It was great that you bring us good news, at the beginning of the 

hearing, that we have 600,000 new jobs to report. Can you tell me 

how many of those were private-sector and how many were government? 

Secretary SOLIS. I would tell you that, on the payroll survey, we 

reported that there were about 50,000 jobs. And that is based on 

the payroll figures. 

The household survey that I am talking about, the 600,000, are 

actual calls that the Bureau of Labor Statistics makes in a week 

and they call into different households. And what happens there is 

we are finding that people are attesting to their self-employment. 

That is, they gave up on an employer hiring them, and they are 

starting their own business. 

That is why I think it is also important to make sure that we 

have training available so people can start up their businesses legitimately and know how to do it and have a business plan and understand what the tax structures are. 
49 

But, secondly, I would say that what we are finding also is that 

those 600,000 people came on-line, in terms of having jobs. They 

weren’t employed before. Some of them also had two jobs. You find 

that there are people that had, say, a second job during the holidays, working at a department store, they gave up that job and 

now are working full-time at the job that pays them a lot better 

salary. 

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Okay. 

Secretary SOLIS. So we are seeing that transition that is occurring right now. Some of that will play itself out as we go through 

and readjust our numbers. And every month they have actually 

been going up when they are readjusted, almost 10,000 to 20,000 

jobs additionally, that were lost originally when they were not calculated, that now get put back in by the BLS. 

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Okay. Thank you. 

Turning to MSHA, recently a media outlet examined a December 

22nd, 2010, MSHA press release highlighting 22 impact inspections. In the release, Assistant Secretary Main was quoted saying, 

‘‘MSHA’s impact inspection program is helping to reduce the number of mines that consider egregious violation records a cost of 

doing business.’’ 

At least two of the mines were erroneously placed on the list, 

which MSHA attributed to coding and clerical errors. If the Department believes that regulation by shaming is one way to achieve 

workplace safety, what is the Department prepared to do when it 

makes mistakes like this? 

Secretary SOLIS. I would say that what we have attempted, 

under our Assistant Secretary there, Joe Main, is to really take a 

good view at where those most egregious coal-mine operators are 

and try to get to those places, so that we can also give those folks, 

the operators, information about what safety plans they have in 

place, where we see hazards, and try to prevent that. 

We actually have a new tool that is available. We call it the precontest safety tool. And what it allows is for cases to be settled in 

a preconference mode before there are actual penalties or citations 

issued. And that is a good tool that is just coming about because 

of what happened at the Upper Big Branch explosion, where 29 

miners were killed last year, April the 5th. 

Mr. DESJARLAIS. How many people work for MSHA? 

Secretary SOLIS. I would say we about roughly maybe 400. I 

could be off, give or take. But it is not as big an agency as you 

would think. But they are working more strategically. 

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Does the agency fund itself with its fines that 

are levied? 

Secretary SOLIS. Those fines help to provide for—I would have to 

get back to you, to give you how that breakdown is. 

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Okay. I have had some complaints from my district that that occurs, and sometimes they actually have said what 

they see is kind of a good-cop/bad-cop-type situation, where an 

agent will come in and they will say, ‘‘Well, you know, I am the 

easy guy.’’ And they will only fine him a little bit. But when you 

get the guy next week, he is tough, and he will fine them a lot. So, 

you know, if that is true, that may not be the greatest policy, at 

least in terms of the miners. 
50 

Do you know, when there is an accident like the one you spoke 

of in Virginia, does MSHA view that as a failure on themselves, or 

is it always the mine’s fault when you have a tragic accident? 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, I could only speak to the time that I have 

been on board and as long as my Assistant Secretary has been in 

place there. And what we have attempted to do, as I said, is really 

go out and do these impact studies to look at the more egregious 

mines, but also trying to extend more information to those other 

mines, the metal mines also, that—— 

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Excuse me, I am sorry to interrupt. I know we 

are running out of time. Have we seen a pretty significant decrease 

in accidents, mining safety records over the past decade with intervention? 

Secretary SOLIS. I would is say that, over the course of the last 

2 years, that we have helped to provide more prevention. Because 

I believe there is that culture that is changing, in fact, because of 

what happened at the Upper Big Branch. I believe that more mines 

are being more proactive. 

And we are trying to standardize what our inspectors do, as well, 

so you don’t have that incident that you said, where someone comes 

in one day and charges a fine that is less or higher. We want conformity, and so we are doing our very best to make sure that all 

our field investigators have the best training and that we are working with industry to do that. There are a lot of good actors out 

there, and we want their stories to be told, as well. 

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Thank you for your time. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentleman. 

Ms. Woolsey, you are recognized. 

Ms. WOOLSEY. Thank you very much. 

In response, Madam Secretary, to what happens with the OSHA 

and MSHA fines, it is my understanding that these fines go directly into the U.S. Treasury and the agencies do not even touch 

them. 

And I would like to say as an aside, the fines are so minimal, 

they wouldn’t have covered anything anyway, unless we brought 

those fines into the 21st century. 

Well, what a relief it is to have you here with us, Secretary Solis, 

and have you at the helm of the Labor Department, a department 

that is responsible for fairness and safety for workers—and, by the 

way, responsible for supporting businesses, because you are so obviously dedicated to improving and making sense out of the concerns of our workers and our employers regarding work-life concerns and regulations. Thank you very much. You have brought 

some clarity to us today. 

I thought and I felt really confident in the last Congress that we 

were on our way to bringing OSHA and MSHA into the 21st century, working with your department and with the House and the 

Senate. But now, and particularly this week when we are debating 

the Republican continuing resolution in the House, I fear that 

these spending cuts that we have been talking about, most of us, 

this morning would have an absolutely devastating effect, particularly on the health and safety of our workers. 

I don’t know how we can bring OSHA into the 21st century if we 

don’t have the wherewithal to make it happen. In fact, my concern 
51 

is that we may be backing ourselves into the early 20th century 

and we will have gone nowhere by the end of this Congress. 

So, in order to maybe make me feel better, if you can possibly— 

some of the issues we were working on last year, and we learned 

so much in our hearings and we got such good input from outside 

of the Congress and from the Department of Labor—where can we 

go with bringing OSHA into the 21st century and enacting a more 

vigorous law to protect our workers? 

Where are we going with the misclassification of independent 

contract workers, so we can level the playing field for the employers that actually play by the rules? 

And how are the mine safety laws coming into effect? 

I mean, is there a way we can do this? One, if we don’t cut your 

budget 40 percent? I mean, that is the obvious answer. We can’t 

do that. But how are we going—can we work together in a bipartisan way to make these things happen? 

Secretary SOLIS. Congresswoman Woolsey, I think at the beginning of my statement I said that I am willing to work across the 

aisle to achieve the goals to help provide for a recovery, but also 

underscoring the importance of having worker safety and protections in place. 

It is going to be difficult, given the proposals that have been presented by the Congress to cut back so dramatically. I hope that we 

can come to some agreement on what should be done. 

And I do believe that the path that we are going down with respect to MSHA, all the success that this committee has had—I 

mean, we had an on-site hearing out in West Virginia after the 

Upper Big Branch mine explosion, and I thought there was a good 

level of discussion, hearing not only from people that were in the 

industry but also some of the causes of that. 

And I think that it is the job of the Congress to help us move 

legislation so that we can rectify where there are problems, where 

we have violators that actually skirt the law and are able to game 

the system and, thus, create a bigger backlog. And they contest 

many of those violations. We never are able to get to them. In fact, 

we got assistance from you, the Congress, to have a supplemental 

fund to help address that backlog, but I am here to tell you that, 

even with that, it is not enough. And if we cut that back, then it 

will eliminate the casework that we are doing even now, as it reflects the ongoing investigation with the Upper Big Branch. 

So there are consequences to what we do. I would hope that we 

could work with the chairman here and also with folks in the Senate that are interested in addressing MSHA. 

And then, secondly, on the misclassification, there are scores and 

scores of details about how people are not appropriately told that 

they are misclassified. They find out perhaps at the end of the tax 

period or they find out when they are injured that they have not 

been receiving appropriate information so they could make those 

adjustments to have health-care coverage or to know who is paying 

in for their workers’ compensation if they get injured on the job. 

We know that this is something that goes across all industries, 

misclassification. And it hurts because it doesn’t provide the type 

of revenues that the Federal Government and State governments 

are robbed of that help to provide these structured programs that 
52 

help to keep people safe and provide assistance that people so sorely need. So that is a big initiative on our part. 

And I would just say, with Wage and Hour, it would devastate 

if there are further potential cuts there, because we done such, I 

think, a good job in targeting, with the limited resources, to go 

after those industries where we know there are the most egregious 

violators and people that really do need to have the information. 

It isn’t just going after the business; it is also empowering the employees to understand what rights and protections they have in 

place. 

Chairman KLINE. The gentlelady’s time has expired. 

Mr. Rokita? 

Mr. ROKITA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, Secretary, for coming. 

Dr. Bucshon, my friend to my right here, and I are both from Indiana. We are very concerned about MSHA and some mining regulations. I would like to, Mr. Chairman, yield a minute of my time 

to Dr. Bucshon. 

Mr. BUCSHON. Thank you, Madam Secretary, for coming. 

I am concerned about MSHA’s proposed regulation concerning 

respirable coal dust. To give you a little background, my father was 

a united mineworker for 37 years in an underground coal mine. 

Both of my grandparents were coal miners. I understand exposure 

risks, and I also understand that—I am a physician, and I see a 

lot of patients with workplace-related respiratory problems, some of 

which are, to put it bluntly, their own issue because they refused 

to wear safety equipment, regardless of whether there were regulations in place to do so or not. 

My understanding is that this potential regulation may cost the 

industry about a billion dollars. And I would like to know, since the 

stakeholders requested the data that you used to establish this and 

were denied that information, what are the assumptions that 

MSHA made in coming up with this new regulation, when, from 

my perspective as a medical physician and understanding the coal 

industry, I don’t see what the really big push for regulating this 

was at this time? 

The other thing to know is, in a coal mine, most of the exposure 

is not actually to coal dust but it is to silica dust because of rock 

dusting of the coal mine walls. 

So I would like you to comment on the assumptions and why you 

guys feel like that this is something that needs to be in place. 

Thank you. I yield back. 

Secretary SOLIS. Thank you, Congressman. 

I would just refer you back to a promise that was made 40 years 

ago by the passage of the Federal Coal Mine Health Act that was 

passed in 1969 to eradicate black lung disease. And what we are 

finding is that it kills hundreds of miners, and former miners each 

year are severely impacted and impaired. And we are also finding 

that there is a rise even amongst young miners. So there is cause 

for concern. 

We know that we have to work with industry, and we certainly 

want to hear their comments. I am not opposed to that. But I 

would tell you that I think that black lung disease is one that has 

not been dealt with by this Congress for many years. And we be-
53 

lieve that now is the time to act and to work as best we can with 

the industry. 

I don’t recall hearing this figure that you threw out, but I will 

certainly get back with my Assistant Secretary, Joe Main, and ask 

him to come and speak with you directly to tell you about exactly 

how we arrived at—— 

Mr. ROKITA. Thank you, Madam Secretary. I appreciate that. Reclaiming some of my time, do you plan to make the underlying assumptions available to the industry? 

Secretary SOLIS. I will discuss this with my Assistant Secretary, 

Joe Main. And we can have that discussion, surely, with you and 

the other congressmen here. 

Mr. ROKITA. When can you get back with me on that decision? 

Secretary SOLIS. I will get back to you once I speak to my Assistant Secretary and we arrive at what parameters we can consider. 

Mr. ROKITA. I know. Can you give me a day or time frame? A 

week, a month? How long before you think I would hear on your 

decision on whether or not you are going to make your underlying 

assumptions public? 

Secretary SOLIS. I have to ask my Assistant Secretary when—I 

mean, we can certainly push this as soon as we can. I will make 

that commitment to you. 

Mr. ROKITA. A week? 

Secretary SOLIS. Can’t put me on record for that because I—you 

know, I—— 

Mr. ROKITA. I mean, how long does it take to talk to someone 

that works under you? 

Secretary SOLIS. It doesn’t take that long. 

Mr. ROKITA. Okay. So maybe—— 

Secretary SOLIS. I am not trying to shy away from—— 

Mr. ROKITA. So just give me a time frame. A week, a month? I 

know it is Washington, D.C., and all, but just some time frame. 

Secretary SOLIS. Give me at least 10 working days. 

Mr. ROKITA. Thank you very much. 

The number-one focus of the administration, according to the 

President, is jobs. I know you are a fan of card check. It doesn’t 

appear—and I stand to be corrected, but it doesn’t appear card 

check is going to get through this Congress. 

What is your position on card check? Do you intend to implement 

elements of card check through the administration or through regulation? 

Secretary SOLIS. I don’t have the authority to do that through 

regulation. And, as it stands, my priorities are to, again, look at job 

creation and worker safety and protection in the workplace. 

Mr. ROKITA. Okay. Thank you. 

You mentioned that we need new mining regulations, when you 

testified, because people have died, unfortunately. From that, can 

I assume that MSHA enforced the current law perfectly and that 

no mining interests violated the current law, therefore needing new 

law? 

Secretary SOLIS. I would tell you that what we found is that 

there has been a history where there are operators who have been 

able to game the system because of the way that the violations are 

set up, that they can be contested. And so there tends to be a back-
54 

log of those contested violations, where we can’t really move forward. We don’t have all the tools that we need in place to actually 

come down and say, ‘‘Wait, stop, halt,’’ and really have, I think, the 

support that we need from the operator at that time. 

So that is why we need additional legislation, additional tools, so 

that we do understand and that we work with industry on this. 

There are a lot of good actors who want to see improvements. 

And, certainly, my agenda is not to put people out of business. 

I understand how important the coal-mining and the mining industry is to this country. But we also want to make sure that people, 

at the end of the day, can go home after their shift, and hopefully 

that we have compliance by those miners. And that is what we are 

attempting to do. 

And our program agenda really is to go out and start to talk to 

people. MSHA, in the past, I didn’t think really did a good job of 

working with the operators on both sides, the coal and the metal 

mines. And that is something that is equally important to us, as 

well. 

So I would urge my Assistant Secretary—I mean, it is not a problem. We will make available time to see you and talk with you and 

to answer any further questions that you might have. 

Mr. ROKITA. That wasn’t my last question, but thank you. I am 

out of time. 

Chairman KLINE. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mr. Hinojosa? 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Thank you, Chairman Kline and Ranking Member Miller. 

In this economic climate, it is imperative that our Nation create 

jobs, protect the rights of American workers, and prepare youth 

and adults for family-sustaining jobs. I am very pleased that we 

have Secretary Hilda Solis before us, that we can address some of 

the critical issues that concern me. 

Let the record show that I am very concerned and very disappointed that the Republican-proposed budget for the continuing 

resolution contains over $3 billion of cuts that zeros out our State 

and local workforce development system. 

Madam Secretary, in your testimony, you mentioned the need to 

reauthorize WIA. Can you elaborate on why we should update the 

WIA that we reauthorized back in 1998 and should have been reauthorized 6 years later? 

We must move forward to improve our Nation’s youth work development and adult education system in the 112th Congress. And 

I ask you to tell us and elaborate on why we should do it and how 

you recommend that we do it as expeditiously as possible. 

Secretary SOLIS. Thank you, Congressman Hinojosa. 

It is a pleasure to be working with you again. I know, last year, 

we had many discussions on the reauthorization of WIA, and I 

hope that this committee will be able to work together in a bipartisan effort, as the Senate has. They have been working on legislation this past year. Our staff has been able to provide technical assistance to both Senator Murray, Senator Harkin, as well as Senator Isakson, and all those who are interested in this discussion. 

I would hope that the urgency of looking at how we can make 

this program more effective is a priority for the Department of 
55 

Labor. So we are ready and immediately available to help provide 

whatever technical assistance to both sides of the aisle so that we 

can get at resolving some of the problems and the hearsay that you 

hear about duplication of programs. 

We realize this program hasn’t been reauthorized for some 8 to 

10 years. Now is the time to act, now is the time to work on a bipartisan level so that we can very much target and be more effective and strategic and streamlined and get to those industries that 

need workers right away. 

So the urgency is now, is to have this done. And I look forward 

to your leadership. I know you have been involved with this for a 

long time. 

And with respect to safety and protection of workers, you and I 

know that, on an average, about 12 Latino workers lose their life 

every week—every week. And a majority of that is in the construction industry. That is why our department of OSHA, as well as 

Wage and Hour, held a summit in Texas, where we drew about a 

thousand individuals—business community folks, employees, employers, faith-based groups—to talk about how we could provide 

protections in that vulnerable population. 

Since that time, we have seen more participation on the part of 

industry. And we hope to provide more assistance to them through 

our compliance programs and some of our other efforts that we 

offer through OSHA, as well as through Wage and Hour. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Going back to the first part of my question, on 

WIA, I understand that the administration and you, as our Secretary of Labor, have thought out of the box and are talking about 

helping us think regionally instead of just the small area. 

As an example, where I come from in deep south Texas, we have 

a workforce group in McAllen working with the county next to it, 

in Starr County. But the regionalization that you all talk about is 

one that is much broader, that possibly brings two Members of 

Congress, or three or more, to work together so that we can train 

individuals and help them get to where the job is—engineering, 

science, technology, all those jobs. 

Tell us how you envision that this type of regionalization that 

you mentioned in one of my talks with you could be done and put 

into WIA. 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, I think that what we are really looking at 

here is bringing together a better partnership that really is driven 

by the business community and what is being offered and what is 

available in that particular region. 

So, as an example, in Detroit or Michigan, where you have a 

large number of people who have been dislocated because the automobile industry is no longer there, many of those skill sets that are 

there from those dislocated workers can be retooled and looking towards renewable energy, solar panel installation, or lithium battery manufacturing. We are already finding that that is happening 

in places around the country. 

So we are looking to see what is generated from the region. And 

if we can get States to partner, that is a great idea. We are looking 

at funding—— 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Forgive me for interrupting you, because my time 

is up. Can we work with the community colleges and universities 
56 

and the business community to maybe go after large amounts of 

money that could help us train and put them into those good-paying jobs? 

Chairman KLINE. Can I ask that the Secretary respond for the 

record? The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman KLINE. Mrs. Noem? 

Mrs. NOEM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, Madam Secretary, for being here. 

I know the chairman has covered a topic that I had a question 

about, so I would just like to make a comment on that. And if you 

have something to add, you certainly could, but then I would like 

to follow up with another question. 

So, you know, the President’s budget has been in the headlines 

over the past several days. And from what I have found, comparing 

it to previous years’ budgets, the Department of Labor’s enforcement agencies are certainly—the majority, or the vast majority of 

them are receiving increases, some of them quite large, except for 

one, which is the Office of Labor-Management Standards, which 

you know receives unions. 

For example, the Wage and Hour’s total budget is increasing 

from fiscal year 2010 to fiscal year 2012 by 15.5 percent. The 

OFCCP’s budget will increase by 3.8 percent. And then also, when 

you go to the EBSA’s, theirs will increase 26.4 percent. However, 

OLMS’s budget will decrease by 8 percent. 

So this is concerning to me because the OLMS has remained the 

same while the number of staff in the division has declined. And 

I would like to you elaborate a little bit on that, on why this divergence in enforcement funding specifically just for this one area that 

oversees—and then I would like to follow up with a different question. 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, I would just reflect that our budget, actually, for the Department of Labor is a reduction of about 5 percent. 

The President did ask for all of us to look within, where we could 

get rid of programs or remove them from our authority. 

And one that I would just want to talk to you briefly about really 

has to do with taking funds from the current, existing job-training 

programs and putting up a new effort, what we are calling an innovation fund, where we can look to experiment and audit and evaluate where we have inconsistencies and where we can make our programs that are doing green jobs, youth build programs, Job Corps 

programs, dislocated worker programs, to really do some more finite evaluation of that. 

That is going to be an evaluation tool, and we are doing it also 

in partnership with the Department of Education. So that is a new 

thing that is happening. It is not new moneys, necessarily, but it 

is taking from other pools and directing them. 

With the OLMS, I would say again, restate for the record that 

it is the level playing field again. We are looking at the same level 

of funding, but we are actually asking them to be more strategic 

in terms of their auditing, their investigations and convictions. And 

a lot of that, as I have already testified, has gone up. So we are 

going after the bad actors, and we are doing our best to go into 

elections where we see that there are improprieties, as well. 
57 

Mrs. NOEM. Could I follow up with you on that? Per the levels 

of funding for these enforcement agencies, was that per your request to the President, at the levels that you specifically would like 

to see them at? 

Secretary SOLIS. I would say to you that all of us are looking at, 

in particular, how we can become more efficient, become also very 

consciously aware that we have to address the deficit. So all of us 

had to make some changes. 

And there are some programs that will no longer be under—one 

program, in particular, that deals with—a senior employment program that will be sent over to the Department of Aging in HHS, 

where it is more appropriately housed, so people that need additional help, counseling and things, can be offered that assistance. 

That program is going away, and that is a significant amount. 

Mrs. NOEM. Okay. Thank you. 

On a separate issue, I have just a quick question. President 

Obama also issued a memorandum on January 18th of this year, 

noting his intent to eliminate excessive and unjustified regulatory 

burdens on businesses. So, on the same day, your department 

issued a new rule that some small businesses noted extremely burdensome by artificially increasing the wages of H2B workers without regard to economic reality. So, seasonal industries of all kinds 

throughout this country have sent a letter to the President, noting 

the rule’s departure from that commitment and raising their concerns. 

I would like you to comment on that, specifically if you recognize 

that letter has been sent and what your opinion would be as to this 

burdensome—— 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, we were also attempting to address a lawsuit that was brought against the Department of Labor for holding 

up these regs, in particular those salaries. So we are moving ahead. 

We know that—we are not going to be making those changes this 

year. We have actually put them off. 

Mrs. NOEM. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for your answer. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentlelady. 

Mr. Tierney? 

Mr. TIERNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Madam Secretary, nice to have you with us. I appreciated having 

you as a colleague, and I am proud of the job that you are doing 

in your new position. 

I particularly had the pleasure of working with you on authoring 

the Green Jobs Act and enacting that, as well. And we were both 

pleased, I think, when the Recovery Act put in $750 million for 

competitive grants for high-growth industries, training and job 

work there. Five hundred million dollars of that, of course, was targeted to the Green Jobs Act. 

Now, you told me, or your staff, I guess, told our staff, that when 

the solicitations for grant applications went out on the green jobs, 

it actually received between double and triple the response compared to solicitations of a similar size. 

Secretary SOLIS. Uh-huh. 

Mr. TIERNEY. I see that reflected in my district alone, where the 

interest was very, very high on that. 
58 

And I know some, you know, want to eliminate it altogether, you 

know, think that not enough people have gone to work quick 

enough. Apparently they wanted 1 day’s training and a job the second day. 

But I wondered if you would go into a little bit of detail, tell us 

what the facts are on that and the success of that program. 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, I want to congratulate you, Congressman, 

for spearheading that legislation, as well. We worked very closely 

with this committee and with, I know, Congressman Miller on that, 

as well. And that was signed by a Republican President, George 

Bush, in 2007. 

Mr. TIERNEY. Amazing. 

Secretary SOLIS. I could see that the fruits of our investment are 

paying off. And, in fact, I think, because we have taken that bold 

step, that the industry is responding, and they are actually telling 

us that they would like to have more individuals that are fully 

skilled and trained; therefore, the need to continue this effort. 

I was reading in the National Journal, there was a study by the 

Pew Charitable Trust that, even going back as far as 2007, there 

were already 770,000 jobs created in the clean energy industry and 

more than 68,000 businesses that are going in that direction. 

In my State of California, the employment development department also said just recently that a million jobs were created in the 

clean energy sector. And this is positive, because I think that is a 

motivator for more people, businesses and community colleges, as 

well as our partners, to utilize our programs. 

Given the fact that we are going to have some moneys available 

through the TAA program and the community colleges, that is another way of helping to expand our effort and our reach, so that 

we really do home in on what the smaller industries—particularly, 

I am concerned about the small business, that they also have an 

appropriate level of trained individuals. 

We have some people here that are representing our Job Corps 

program from Woodland. Every Job Corps program since I started 

as Secretary has to provide curriculum on green jobs, so they are 

also getting a dose of that training and exposure. Some of them 

have already been given job offers, in some cases. 

But, nonetheless, it is something that it is, I find, very refreshing 

for people to hear, that they can make the transition from, say, a 

welding job to now someone who has, with additional training, got 

into welding and providing support for a wind turbine. And up in 

your part of the country, that is a big demand, and that industry 

continues to grow. 

And we are being outcompeted, quite frankly, by our friends in 

China and other countries. So we need to have a capable workforce. 

Business needs to know that they can rely on a trained workforce, 

so they can make that account in their budget and make it possible. 

Mr. TIERNEY. I suspect it is not different in other districts. In my 

district, the biggest champions of the Workforce Investment Act 

and boards are employers, businesses in particular, small businesses who participate in that. I am struck by the recklessness of an effort to cut $3 billion out 

of our job-training program, just what that would do to devastate 
59 

the One-Stop shops, what it would do for youth worker programs, 

some 250,000 youth affected by that. You are talking about young 

people getting an opportunity; that is gone if we take this kind of 

reckless action on that. It just goes on and on. 

But, you know, tell me about an individual whom I met in my 

district, a 58-year-old gentleman who lost his job—first time he has 

been unemployed for an extensive period of time. First, he held on, 

thinking he was going to get the same job back. Then it became 

clear that is not going to happen. Now he is getting some education 

and training so he can get back into the workforce. Found out he 

had prostate cancer, dealt with that. 

You know, if we take $3 billion out and decimate the workforce 

investment boards and all of that, where does a fellow like that go 

to get his life started again, to build back his ability to sustain his 

family? 

Secretary SOLIS. It becomes very hard, especially when we still 

have 14 million people that are out of work, and more than half 

have been off of work for more than 6 months to close to a year. 

And many of them, quite frankly, half of them have just above a 

high school education. It is no longer acceptable just to have a high 

school education. You have to have more training certificates, and 

you also should have the ability, when made available, the ability 

to go to a community college. 

That is why the TAA program that we are rolling out is so important—the need to underscore that we want more people to get 

that certification, because that is the first thing I hear from the 

business community: ‘‘Secretary, we don’t have enough people that 

meet the needs of what I need in my particular business.’’ And it 

is about having high-tech capability. It is about having people that 

have adaptable skills and understand how to be flexible, also, with 

respect to their training. 

And for the dislocated worker that you just described, it is very 

typical of what we are seeing across the country. And it is going 

to take more time, more training to get them up to speed, to get 

them ready and accessible for, say, a new place of employment. 

Mr. TIERNEY. Thank you. 

Chairman KLINE. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mr. Ross? 

Mr. ROSS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Madam Secretary, one of the things that I have seen—and if you 

were responsible for this, I want to thank you—and that is a rescission of the MSDS, or the musculoskeletal disorders, provision last 

month. Because, to me, it creates not only an unduly burden on 

employers, but it also may give rise to other causes of actions—inside the ADA, in tort law. And, as you know, employers are strictly 

liable under workers’ compensation laws, regardless of fault. 

And so, under the MSD, when a Log 300 is filed out and they 

have to report these repetitive trauma injuries or conditions, then 

they are essentially guilty until they can prove that there is no 

causal relationship. That was rescinded, but I think what is important is not so much that it was rescinded but that it took so long 

for OSHA to consult with the small-business community. 
60 

Are there other regulations that we can anticipate that might be 

of such egregious nature that are on the forefront of being promulgated? 

Secretary SOLIS. Congressman, what I would say is that we withdrew those two regs that you spoke about. One had to deal with 

noise, as well. 

What we are doing, as I said, is we are consulting with the 

small-business advocacy office there to make sure that we do a 

thorough analysis and we get all the comments that are necessary. 

And then at a time which is appropriate, those regs may come back 

or they may not. It depends, quite frankly, on what the staff that 

are looking at all the comments and the—— 

Mr. ROSS. But wouldn’t you agree that there should be a closer 

representative between those impacted by the regulations and 

those—— 

Secretary SOLIS. We absolutely need to hear from everybody, all 

the stakeholders, including those people that are injured. 

Mr. ROSS. Would you agree that probably one of the best things 

that we can do to recover from this recessionary period that we 

have been in is to have the creation of sustainable private-sector 

jobs? 

Secretary SOLIS. I believe that we—we need to have partners 

with the private industry, with the business sector. And in all of 

our partnerships, regardless of what is said, we do partner with the 

business community. They have to be a part of our workforce investment funds and—— 

Mr. ROSS. But getting the private capital in the market to create 

jobs is a necessary function of a recovery, wouldn’t you agree? 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, I would agree that what the President did 

last December to allow for tax breaks and credits for entrepreneurs, I hope, to begin to make that adjustment to hire people 

up will be an incentive. The tax credits that were given alone, I 

think, is one part of it, one part of the solution, but we definitely 

need to do more. 

Mr. ROSS. Two years ago today, the President signed into law the 

stimulus package. And as we look back over the last 2 years, we 

still have 9 percent unemployment. We have seen a greater creation of Federal jobs than we have seen in private-sector jobs. It 

has not been, I think, the panacea that those who supported it at 

the time thought it would be. 

In your opinion, do you think that the stimulus plan has been 

a success or a failure? 

Secretary SOLIS. I think the Recovery Act money actually helped 

to prevent 3 million people from losing their job, where unemployment would have been much higher. 

If you recall, last October we had an unemployment rate above 

10 percent. It has now dropped—— 

Mr. ROSS. To 9 percent. 

Secretary SOLIS [continuing]. To 9 percent. And what we have 

seen in the last year is that we have created 1.1 million privatesector jobs. I am not talking about public sector; I am talking about 

private sector. 

Mr. ROSS. The public sector has—— 
61 

Secretary SOLIS. That is the first time that we saw an increase 

in private-sector jobs than we did in the last 2 and 3 years, even 

before this President took office. 

Mr. ROSS. You know, as a consumer, I am sure that you choose 

to buy that which you find to be the best product at the best price. 

In other words, competition does have its benefits to the consumer. 

And the more choices you have as a consumer, the better price and, 

I think, the better market you can have. 

When we look at project labor agreements, we are essentially 

shunning away a marketplace environment to allow for nonunion 

contractors to hire nonunion labor at a better price to be just as 

effective and, yet, save money. 

Wouldn’t you agree that we need to revisit the project labor 

agreements and allow for a market wage, as opposed to a union 

wage, in the implementation of these contracts? 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, I would beg to differ with you. I think that 

many successful project labor agreements have been created and 

instituted by the private sector. In fact, Toyota has been one of 

those proponents of project labor agreements, as have other major 

industries, as well. 

What we are finding is that the costs are actually, in many cases, 

lower. You find agreements both with labor and management. They 

are able to come to agreement on what the timelines are and trying 

to minimize any labor disputes that might occur during the life of 

that contract. 

And, actually, that is something that I think helps to incentivize 

the local community to hire local, so that we can address that big 

issue of unemployment that you talked about. 

Mr. ROSS. But it does favor union labor as opposed to nonunion 

labor, wouldn’t you agree? 

Secretary SOLIS. I think that it isn’t just labor. There are many 

opportunities for different segments of the community to be a part 

of that PLA. 

Mr. ROSS. One last question. You spoke about the Employee Free 

Choice Act, and I agree with you, I don’t think that that is something that can be implemented by way of regulatory rule. But, in 

your opinion, would you support the Employee Free Choice Act 

as—— 

Secretary SOLIS. The President and I agree that collective bargaining should be a right. But whether or not there are votes to 

change that, currently I don’t see that happening in at least the 

near future. 

Mr. ROSS. I see my time is up. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Holt? 

Mr. HOLT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Madam Secretary, it certainly was a pleasure to serve with you 

in this body, and it is a pleasure to see you at work in the Department. 

Let me touch quickly on four points. 

First of all, I wanted to applaud you and Assistant Secretary 

Oates for tying the WIA to public libraries. Public libraries are so 

important for people to get the job training and connect to jobs. 
62 

And I would like to you keep us informed on how that effort is 

going. 

Secondly, you spoke to Ms. Biggert about her concern to get better investment information and education in your coordination with 

the Securities and Exchange Commission. I hope you will keep me 

informed, along with Ms. Biggert, on that issue. 

Secretary SOLIS. Certainly. 

Mr. HOLT. With regard to OSHA, which, you know, 40 years ago, 

New Jersey Senator Pete Williams helped to enact OSHA. And I 

am just—I can’t emphasize too strongly the importance that OSHA 

has. There are millions of Americans who have their arms, legs, 

eyesight, and even lives—and they don’t know who they are—they 

have those because of OSHA, but they don’t know that those were 

saved because of OSHA. 

You know I have been a big proponent of reinstituting the Office 

of Technology Assessment, this important congressional agency. 

Before OTA was defunded, it did a review of OSHA, quite a detailed review. And it came out with quite positive conclusions about 

the effectiveness of it, about the methodology and analytical priorities, and even about the cost burden that OSHA imposes. 

I think it is time for an update on this, whether it is done 

through the GAO or otherwise. I would like to talk with you about 

how we might update that. Because I am sure the results will be 

useful in actually making the case for how important OSHA is to 

keep going. 

And then, fourth, I just wanted to mention the legislation that 

Representative Petri and I introduced in this Congress, the Lifetime Income Disclosure Act, which will help workers prepare for retirement by providing them with information about how their savings will address their monthly living expenses on into retirement. 

And I know, last year, the Departments of Labor and Treasury 

held a well-publicized request for information on lifetime income. 

And I think this is a good way to go, and I wanted to ask you how 

Congress should be working with the Department on this issue. 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, your last question, Congressman—we are 

very interested in working with you. We know that there are different populations that are affected with respect to how they save 

and what information they get or they don’t get. And, typically, a 

widow, for example, may have had a work situation where she may 

not have had 20 or 30 years in the workplace because she had to 

take care of her family and now finds herself in a situation where 

she doesn’t have adequate retirement funds that she should have 

known earlier to set aside in some way. And there are tools to do 

that. 

So, through our offices of EBSA, Phyllis Borzi, I believe, has done 

a really great job in making sure that we provide as much information, as much transparency and options, so that individual, consumers can make better decisions about what they want. 

Typically, in some cases, when someone retires and they want to 

tap into that fund, it may not be wise to get a lump sum at one 

time. They may need to have it staggered. As you know, that is a 

very important part of managing one’s budget in that particular 

situation, when people are living off that one last amount of funds 

that is going to keep them going for a few years. 
63 

So it is so deeply important, and it is something that we care 

very much about. We want to work with you on that. 

With respect to OSHA, as you know, if OSHA wasn’t in place, 

I think we would have a much higher rate of injury. And because 

of OSHA and the passage back in 1970—and they are going to be 

celebrating their 40th anniversary, as well—we have been able to 

see reductions of 65 percent in occupational injury and illness. And 

that has been a tremendous factor that has helped keep people on 

the job, keep them safe, and to also minimize disturbances that 

might have occurred with their employer, bankruptcy or what have 

you, because someone was injured or someone was killed. 

Mr. HOLT. Thank you. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentleman. The gentleman’s time 

has expired. 

Let me note, the Secretary and I talked before the hearing about 

what time we would wrap up. It looks to me like we have about 

15 or 20 minutes more of questions, which would take us to about 

12:15. Is that all right? Something like that? 

Okay, thank you very much. 

Mr. Thompson, you are recognized. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Madam Secretary, thanks for coming today, for your testimony 

and your response to questions. 

It is probably appropriate—I represent Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania—because I feel like I am caught up somewhat in the movie 

‘‘Groundhog Day.’’ It was about a year ago, February 2010, you 

were here, and we had a discussion about project labor agreements. 

And I had mentioned a new construction project for a Job Corps 

center in Manchester, New Hampshire, that was subject to the 

PLA. And then, mysteriously, Department of Labor canceled the solicitation for bids in November of 2009. 

I also drew a comparison between that project labor agreement 

that was imposed on a contract in my home State of Pennsylvania, 

when Governor Rendell required a PLA for Rockview State Prison. 

Yet again, no one bid, and the project was put on hold. 

The Obama administration contends that PLAs control cost factors, and the President put forth an Executive order encouraging 

PLAs. However, in areas like New Hampshire and Pennsylvania, 

this removes about 85 percent of the eligible firms from bidding. 

Madam Secretary, I would rather not revisit the past, but last 

February our 5 minutes ran out before you actually answered my 

question. It was asked by then-Chairman Miller that you would follow up in writing, and, well, we are still waiting. That is the 

‘‘Groundhog Day’’ part. 

So I want to come back to that question from a year ago. Why 

was the New Hampshire project put on hold? 

And, secondly, since there have been PLAs successfully challenged in other cases, most recently in Pennsylvania, a VA center 

in the Pittsburgh area last December, has the administration 

begun to reconsider Executive Order 135022? 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, Congressman, I would just say to you 

again that we believe that PLAs actually help to bring down the 

costs and provide conformity. 
64 

With respect to withdrawing the Job Corps New Hampshire, that 

bid is actually—we wanted to take more comments. We felt that we 

didn’t do a sufficient job in making sure that we had actually provided more opportunity for people to make comments and to be a 

part of that process. So we realized—— 

Mr. THOMPSON. Was there any implication—— 

Secretary SOLIS [continuing]. That we had to bring that back. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Was there a similar experience at all in Pennsylvania, where, frankly, I mean, 85 percent of the eligible companies 

in Pennsylvania—I know that is a State project, but it was a 

PLA—chose not to bid. It really excluded, frankly, all of the workforce. I think, in central Pennsylvania, companies 3 hours away 

that were totally union that would have bid. It drove the costs up, 

and even Governor Rendell saw the perils of that. 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, I can’t really comment on what the State 

is doing because we don’t—— 

Mr. THOMPSON. Well, I know that. But I am asking, what are the 

experiences in New Hampshire with the Job Corps? 

Secretary SOLIS. I don’t think—I can’t go into detail because I 

don’t know all the particulars about the State project. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Okay, well, if you wouldn’t mind, we have been 

waiting a year. You know, an Under Secretary or someone, if you 

could have them, like, within 2 weeks get back to me. Because—— 

Secretary SOLIS. Absolutely. I apologize. 

Mr. THOMPSON [continuing]. This is obviously very important to 

me. 

I had the opportunity—and one of the things I wanted to—we 

have done some things on mine safety, obviously, in the 111th Congress. And one of the things that I know that has been added— 

there was a Pittsburgh office that was opened for the Federal Mine 

Safety and Health Review Commission, you know, I think as part 

of the effort to address the backlog. And I think the cases were 

around 10,000, or something like that, in the backlog queue. And, 

frankly, I think there are some creative things going on there. They 

are trying to get retired judges. They have staffed up to about 20 

judges is my understanding, and using some retired folks and some 

part-time. 

The issue of backlog at the Mine Safety and Health Review Commission certainly has been highlighted through those hearings, as 

I said. Do you believe that MSHA’s pilot conference program is 

working to relieve that backlog at all? 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, we just started it. And I do believe that 

it is making a difference. And I had a discussion with our Assistant 

Secretary, Joe Main, about it just last week to find out how that 

is coming along, because I am very interested in finding out how 

we are able to prevent us from having to go out and cite different 

operators. 

So I believe the more we do that and we engage, we give people 

information up front—and I know that Joe has traveled all over the 

country to make sure that we reach out to the associations. And 

they have been very supportive, especially in the metal mines, in 

particular. They seem to be very receptive to this. 
65 

So I am very open to seeing that happen, and I would love to 

have my Assistant Secretary stop by and see you and give you a 

preview of what we are doing and what our intent is. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you. 

Secretary SOLIS. I will make sure we get back to you. Thank you. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentleman. 

Mrs. Davis? 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Secretary, good to see you. 

I am sorry that I wasn’t able to be here earlier, and you may 

have answered some part of this question, I think, in talking about 

veterans. I know recently you had an opportunity to visit Camp 

Pendleton and, certainly, to tout the Department of Labor’s strategy of No Veteran Left Behind, and I greatly appreciate that. 

Could you elaborate a little bit more on how the Department of 

Labor could better work with the Department of Defense? Because 

we know that, no matter—I mean, there is quite an effort going on, 

and I appreciate the work that has been done and what you stated 

in your written statement here. Are there some disconnects there? 

How can we be more helpful? How can the Department of Defense, 

as well? 

The other issue that I think is really critical and, in speaking to 

a number of individuals on the boards and working within the community colleges, we have a number of schools that have veterans 

centers but very few, really, to meet the need. 

Does the Department of Labor play any role in that? And would 

there be a role there in trying to help facilitate so that our veterans 

at our community colleges, particularly, where the need is so critical, have the support system as well as the training supervision, 

mentoring that is required there? 

Secretary SOLIS. Thank you, Congresswoman Davis. 

We are working with the Department of Defense on a new effort 

to revitalize the Transition Assistance Program, known as TAP. I 

think you are aware of that. That program has been around for 

many, many years, but very little evaluation had been done in 

terms of the quality and the service that was provided. 

So my Assistant Secretary, Ray Jefferson, has been leading, for 

the last year and a half, on helping to revise and expand and make 

that program more meaningful, so that it isn’t just dropping information but actually following up at every point, so that the veteran, whether they are still in the service waiting to exit or if they 

are already out of the system, that there is a way that they can 

continue to get information about careers, job training, and other 

assistance, mental health, other things that they might need, as 

well as their family. So military families are also a part of that 

component. 

And much of it is being funded, actually, out of Department of 

Defense, because our budget is very minimal, as you know, with respect to being able to roll out something that big. But they have 

bought into the idea that our office would help to provide supports 

to structure this new program. 
66 

I am very excited about it, and I think you are going to be hearing more. And I would love to have my Assistant Secretary come 

by and see you. 

With respect to community colleges, without a doubt, we need to 

coordinate more our veterans programs that we have that are offered by the State. We actually provide funding that goes to the 

States, and they then hire up and place those individuals throughout the State, usually through our workforce investment programs, 

the WIA, or the One-Stop centers. 

They need to be collaborating with the community colleges. There 

is no reason why we shouldn’t be targeting—and I believe through 

the TAA program, the new funding that is being offered to the community colleges. There could be an incentive, there could be a demonstration project out there somewhere that could use that funding 

to actually illustrate how important it is that those two can connect, the veteran that is coming back from war, the younger one 

that actually needs to have several things going on—counseling, 

mentoring, but also a rigorous curriculum that is going to help 

them make that transition. So if they want to go into a short-term 

job or get a certificate in 6 weeks, they can do it at a community 

college, or a 2-year program. So we want to make those seamless 

for them as best as possible. 

But I would love to have the opportunity to talk to you about 

that, as well as what we are doing with homeless women veterans 

in our initiative to really go out and meet the needs of these returning veterans. We are finding that there is a high rate—and you 

know this—of suicide amongst our young returning vets, as well as 

the fact that we are seeing many women who were in the war, 

serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, that are coming back, and you 

don’t see that there are symptoms per se physically, but you are 

finding out after that they are not able to connect back home, to 

reintegrate. So we are very, very concerned about that aspect. 

And my Women’s Bureau is working with our VETS department 

to see how we can better conjoin and work with other agencies to 

help provide that needed support for these women, in some cases 

who have children as well. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Uh-huh. I am really glad to hear that. Because I 

think one of the concerns that we have in the community is that 

there are a lot of efforts out there, but people don’t necessarily 

know what is going on, you know, whether it is right, left, or center. I mean, people just don’t understand the efforts that others are 

doing. So I think there is a key role, actually, for the Department 

of Labor. 

Secretary SOLIS. And, by the way, visiting Camp Pendleton, the 

Helmets to Hardhats program was, I think, very essential for many 

folks that are getting ready to exit the military. That happens to 

be the Marine base there. We are looking to expand those efforts, 

I know DOD is, in other major States like Washington and, I believe, maybe in Georgia, Lejeune, Fort Lejeune. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Great. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman KLINE. Thank you. 

Mr. Platts? 

Mr. PLATTS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 
67 

Madam Secretary, good to see you. 

Secretary SOLIS. How are you? 

Mr. PLATTS. Always a pleasure when we served together and now 

in your new role—or, not new, but current role. 

I have, I guess, two areas of a comment and question, and they 

relate to the Office of Labor-Management Standards. And I share 

these comments or questions as a former union member, Teamster 

union, Local 430, as well as with many family members, retired 

union members or current. 

First is to associate my comments with the chairman and his 

concern about the budget, which shows, I would say, a lack of additional commitment to the Office of Labor-Management Standards 

in comparison to the Bureau of International Labor Affairs, which 

is getting about a 10 percent increase under the proposed budget. 

Yet, an office that has seen its personnel be cut by about 16 percent in recent years and is really the main enforcement office for 

unions properly disclosing how they are handling their union members’ money—so, first, I associate myself with the chairman’s comments and his concern. I share them, and think we should be better prioritizing protecting the labor affairs of American workers before we are increasing spending on labor elsewhere outside of this 

country and, specifically, the Bureau of International Labor Affairs. 

My specific question, I guess, is if you can share with me the 

logic—you know, the Office of Labor-Management Standards and 

the original law of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 is really about openness and transparency, that 

union members know that their funds are being handled properly 

by their leadership—a very important law, now 50-plus years in 

the works. And there have been efforts in recent years to strengthen disclosure and greater transparency—improvements to the LM2 form, the LM-30 form, a new requirement, the Form T-1, to really require more transparency. 

Instead of moving forward with that, what we have seen is this 

administration go backwards. My understanding is, as of October 

of 2009, the administration announced that they were rescinding 

the improvements to the LM-2 form. They announced also that 

they would not enforce the changes to the LM-30 form, and, just 

in December, published a final rule rescinding the Form T-1 completely. 

I guess I would like to know the logic behind lessening transparency if we really are serious about protecting union members 

and how their money is being handled. 

Secretary SOLIS. Thank you, Congressman Platts. 

I would say to you that what we have done is kept the level of 

funding consistent. So there really isn’t a major increase, as you 

state. And I would just say that one of the things we are doing is 

also looking at technology—— 

Mr. PLATTS. But, Madam Secretary, there is not a major increase 

for the Bureau of International Labor Affairs? 

Secretary SOLIS. When you asked me about OLMS, their level of 

funding is the same to what it was last year. 

Mr. PLATTS. Right. But if you look at where you are in several 

years total, your number of enforcement officers is down about 16 

percent. So instead of trying to, you know, return some of those en-
68 

forcement officers that go after misuse of union dollars, instead we 

are increasing funding for international labor. 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, I would say to you that we have actually 

been able to target—more of our improvements that we have seen 

is doing more auditing and actually having a higher rate of conviction and indictments. 

And I said earlier, I don’t think you were here when I said it, 

but back in 2010 we actually started looking at election investigations. And we actually were able to ramp that up, in comparison 

to what happened between 2006 and 2009 before I took over. 

So I would say to you that we are being more targeted. We are 

using more transparency in terms of using the computer, actually, 

to be able to disclose information much more quickly. We don’t 

have to have as much, how could I say, emphasis on getting a lot 

of paper when a lot of this can be posted and made available to 

members. 

And we certainly want to go after the bad actors. And I said earlier that we have some major convictions of folks that are in the 

labor movement that were not doing the right things, and many indictments that were made. So we are not going to move back on 

that at all. 

Mr. PLATTS. The effort to crack down and have those indictments 

I support, obviously. But I guess—there are two issues here, and 

one is transparency. Why rescind the regulations that were adopted to have more transparency? What was the decision behind the 

changes? 

Secretary SOLIS. Congressman, some of the information that we 

were already—that we were initially getting from other forms was 

duplicative. So we were trying to actually minimize the amount of 

information that wasn’t necessarily needed. We are getting it to 

begin with, so we didn’t need to have an additional paperwork requirement. 

So I think that is what we are trying to get at. It is not that we 

are excluding information. By all means, we are actually putting 

more information up so people can see it and that members can 

have that information and knowing fully that it is going to be 

available on the Internet. 

Mr. PLATTS. My time is up. I guess my request would be if you 

could submit to the committee the examples of duplication that 

were in the—— 

Secretary SOLIS. Sure. 

Mr. PLATTS [continuing]. LM-2, the LM-30, and the T-1, what 

was duplicative that is now not necessary to be acquired, so that 

I better understand. Because it doesn’t seem logical to me, and—— 

Secretary SOLIS. I will have our director come and speak with 

you directly, as well, John Lund from OLMS. 

Thank you. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentleman. His time has expired. 

Mr. Kelly? 

Mr. KELLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And, Madam Secretary, it is nice to be with you. 

I have a concern as a small-business person, myself, and understanding very much what wage taxes mean. In your testimony, you 

said, ‘‘The Department is focused on jobs of the future. And we also 
69 

understand that workers who are laid off cannot wait until the future to get a paycheck. We are doing everything we can to get 

workers into jobs quickly.’’ 

Also in the testimony, you said, there are 23 million unemployed 

workers right now who received $150 billion in unemployment insurance benefits in 2010, and that currently there are more than 

6 million workers who have been unemployed for more than 26 

weeks. 

My question is, how many of these recipients have been required 

to take job training under the Workforce Investment Act? 

Secretary SOLIS. Well, I would tell you that many of the programs that we do offer, in particular through our One-Stop centers, 

we do require, in some cases, for people to come in. Some States 

actually do that, where you have to come in if you are a recipient 

of UI and go through some of the training programs, get an assessment, and then find out exactly where it is you want to go. 

But what I think is important to underscore here is, the Unemployment Insurance Program is supposed to provide a safety net for 

people while they are transitioning and finding a job. Keep in 

mind, you still have almost five unemployed people per one job. 

And that isn’t going to change as quickly as I would like, but we 

are working on it. 

In addition, that $1 of UI money that goes back to that recipient, 

$2 are generated to keep some of the local businesses’ doors open. 

So the grocery store, the gas station attendant, the dry cleaners, 

people are also seeing that money then going back as kind of a 

short stimulus for areas that have been heavily impacted. 

Mr. KELLY. And I understand that. So, in December now, the 

President made unemployment benefits available for up to 99 

weeks. So do you support making enrollment in a job-training program mandatory for accepting unemployment insurance after a certain number of weeks? 

Secretary SOLIS. I am not sure that, at this time, I can say that 

I can do that. But certainly, working with the Congress and figuring out ways that we can incentivize people that are receiving UI 

or even those that may be shortly laid off, giving incentives so that 

the Federal Government can provide on-the-job training so we can 

consistently keep these people from being laid off—those are different activities that we offer now that many businesses are not 

taking advantage of. 

Mr. KELLY. Okay, well, I am going to encourage you. Because I 

have been involved in good investments and bad investments, but 

when we talk about the Workforce Investment Act, I think that the 

money we are spending, we deserve to have a positive return on 

that. And so I am going to encourage that people really get into 

looking into this. And, actually, if we are going to do this, we have 

to get people back to work. And I just don’t think we are going in 

the right direction. I see a lot of money being spent, and we don’t 

see a lot of jobs coming back to the forefront. 

Thank you. 

I yield back my time, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentleman. He set the example at 

the very end of the hearing, but I appreciate it nevertheless. 

Mr. Miller, any closing remarks? 
70 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you. 

Just quickly, one, I want to thank the Secretary, and I want to 

thank her for her administration of this agency. 

But back on the discussion you had with Mr. Platts, I would hope 

that we would also have some transparency. I think the LM-2, the 

LM-30s and the 20s, there really is an uneven level of bureaucracy 

required here. Certainly, one, it is a question of what the business 

consultants who do the anti-labor activities, whether they are even 

filling this out and complying with this. I am worried about that. 

I would say to my colleagues on the other side, if you put this 

level of regulation on a business, you would be screaming to high 

heaven. Well, you know, but to do this to labor, somehow that this 

is free. I don’t think you should relish that would you create that 

kind of system that is so costly and so burdensome to these organizations. 

But I would be interested in the compliance rates and the disparities in terms of reporting requirements and liabilities in this 

also. 

But thank you very much for being before the committee today 

and for your responses. 

Secretary SOLIS. Thank you, Congressman Miller. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentleman. 

I want to take just a minute to address an issue that has been 

kicked around here several times. You know, Madam Secretary, 

that we are—in the last Congress, we didn’t have a budget and we 

didn’t pass any appropriations bills. And so we are in the business 

of working with continuing resolutions and trying to debate how we 

should allocate that money. 

The question came up, I think from the ranking member and 

others, about the VETS, V-E-T-S, program and One-Stop shops. So 

I just wanted to point out a couple of things about that. 

One, it was mentioned by a number of my colleagues that we 

have in this job-training business, you know, 9 agencies spending 

$18 billion for 47 different job-training programs. And then Mr. 

Miller and I have had this discussion a number of times about how 

we need to address WIA and make this simpler and, clearly, less 

wasteful. 

But the question was raised about whether or not One-Stop 

shops would have to shut down on April 1st or something like that. 

Certainly, I don’t have the definitive answer here, except, clearly, 

there is money, there is $550 million in carryover balances that are 

unexpended and unobligated for the One-Stop system from 2010. 

There is another $1.1 billion in unexpended dollars left from that 

program that is carryover money. So I don’t think we are looking 

at an April 1st shutdown. 

I know that your department will be looking at that. And I am 

not purporting to give a definitive answer here. I am simply saying 

that there is carryover money here, there is often unexpended 

money. And it is somewhat of an indictment of a very confusing 

system that this committee and this Congress and, certainly, the 

Department are going to have to address. 

I want to thank you, Madam Secretary, for coming, for your testimony, for your very straightforward answers to our questions. 
71 

If there is no other business, the committee now stands adjourned. 

Secretary SOLIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity. 

[Responses by Secretary Solis to questions submitted follow:] 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 
77 
78 
79 
80 
81 
82 
83 
84 
85 
86 
87 
88 
89 
90 
91 
92 
93 
94 
95 
96 
97 
98 
99 
100 
101 
102 
103 
104 
105 
106 
107 
108 
109 
110 
111 

[The study, ‘‘Project Labor Agreements,’’ 2007, may be accessed 

at the following Internet address:] 

http://www.buildingtrades.org/BCTD/media/Documents/Field%20Services/PLA/NECA-PLA-Report.pdf 
112 
113 
114 
115 
116 
117 
118 
119 
120 
121 
122 
123 
124 
125 
126 
127 
128 
129 
130 
131 
132 
133 
134 
135 
136 
137 
138 
139 
140 
141 
142 
143 
144 
145 
146 
147 
148 
149 
150 
151 
152 
153 
154 
155 
156 
157 
158 
159 
160 
161 
162 
163 
164 
165 
166 
167 
168 
169 
170 
171 
172 
173 
174 
175 
176 
177 
178 
179 
180 
181 
182 
183 
184 
185 
186 
187 
188 
189 
190 
191 
192 
193 
194 
195 
196 
197 
198 
199 
200 
201 
202 

[Whereupon, at 12:20 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

Æ