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) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

88–243 PDF 2003

S. Hrg. 108–95

NOMINATION OF PETER J. EIDE

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

ON THE

NOMINATION OF PETER J. EIDE, TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL, FEDERAL

LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

APRIL 10, 2003

Printed for the use of the Committee on Governmental Affairs

(
(II)

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Chairman

TED STEVENS, Alaska

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio

NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota

ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania

ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah

PETER G. FITZGERALD, Illinois

JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire

RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut

CARL LEVIN, Michigan

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware

MARK DAYTON, Minnesota

FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey

MARK PRYOR, Arkansas

MICHAEL D. BOPP, Staff Director and Chief Counsel

JOHANNA L. HARDY, Senior Counsel

JOHN C. SALAMONE, Professional Staff Member, Oversight of Government

Management, the Federal Workforce and the District of Columbia Subcommittee

JOYCE RECHTSCHAFFEN, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel

LAWRENCE B. NOVEY, Minority Counsel

JENNIFER E. HAMILTON, Minority Research Assistant

DARLA D. CASSELL, Chief Clerk
(III)

C O N T E N T S

Opening statements: Page

Senator Voinovich ............................................................................................. 1

Senator Akaka .................................................................................................. 3

Senator Durbin ................................................................................................. 4

WITNESS

THURSDAY, APRIL 10, 2003

Hon. Peter J. Eide, to be General Counsel, Federal Labor Relations Authority

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 5

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 15

Biographical and professional information ..................................................... 16

Pre-hearing questions and responses for the Record ..................................... 26

Post-hearing questions and responses for the Record submitted to the

Hon. Peter Eide from Senator Lautenberg ................................................. 47

Post-hearing questions and responses for the Record submitted to the

Hon. Peter Eide from Senator Akaka ......................................................... 51

APPENDIX

Letters submitted by Senator Akaka from:

American Federation of Government Employees, AFL–CIO, dated April

9, 2003 ............................................................................................................ 54

National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU), dated March 26, 2003 ........ 56

Association of Administrative Law Judges, Inc., dated August 1, 2002 ...... 58

(1)

NOMINATION OF PETER J. EIDE

THURSDAY, APRIL 10, 2003

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, Washington, DC.

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:38 a.m., in room

SD–342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. George Voinovich

presiding.

Present: Senators Voinovich, Akaka, and Durbin.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR VOINOVICH

Senator VOINOVICH. Good morning. I want to thank you for coming, Mr. Eide.

Today, the Committee on Governmental Affairs meets to discuss

the nomination of Peter Eide for the position of General Counsel

at the Federal Labor Relations Authority.

I would like to extend a warm greeting to Mr. Eide and his family that are here in attendance. Senator Akaka and I have had a

chance to meet your daughter Cheryl and son-in-law Ray, and

grandchildren Savannah and Austin, and daughters Karalyn Eide

and Merissa Eide. We are glad you are here today.

Mr. Eide, I strongly believe in the nobility of public service and

I commend you for answering the President’s call to serve our Nation. Your qualifications include extensive labor management relations experience, first as an employee, and president of the local

union at the National Labor Relations Board, and then in the private sector. As General Counsel, your responsibilities would include managing the OGC’s seven regional offices, processing unfair

labor practice allegations, encouraging the use of alternate dispute

resolution techniques, and promoting stable and productive labor

management relations in the Federal sector.

As a former mayor and governor, I understand the importance of

establishing positive labor management relationships based on

open communication and trust. During my career I have worked

conscientiously to bring people together and when I came to the

Senate I embarked on a bipartisan approach to solve our government’s human capital challenges. I must say that Senator Akaka

has been my partner in this endeavor.

During this Committee’s consideration of the homeland security

legislation, last July, I worked with Senator Akaka to add key provisions of my human capital bill. The bipartisan effort made necessary changes in the Federal personnel policy to allow Federal

agencies the flexibility to get the right people with the right skills

and knowledge at the right place and time.
2

Also during the homeland security debate I strongly encouraged

the President to meet with unions to discuss their concerns about

the homeland security bill. I do not know whether you know this

or not, but the unions believed that they were being excluded from

the process because of the President repealing the Executive Order

establishing labor management partnerships which had been in existence with the previous administration. I encouraged the administration to continue the partnership agreement, and unfortunately

it did not happen. So I understand why the unions are concerned

and I would hope that you might encourage the administration to

review the partnership agreement. I think it would help foster better labor/management partnerships.

In addition, the administration issued an Executive Order barring unions from the U.S. Attorney’s Office. This issue came up,

Mr. Eide, in an unusual way and it worked its way through the

system and ended up before the Board, which became irrelevant

during the process because the President pre-empted the Board’s

decision by issuing the Executive Order exempting unions from the

Office of U.S. Attorneys.

So there is a problem here, and I think we need to work on it.

Kay James, who is the head of the Office of Personnel Management

is aware of it, and we have worked with some of the folks that are

involved.

I was pleased with the new Homeland Security law, which maintains the employee’s right to organize and bargain collectively. I am

also glad that the administration is following through with its commitment to consult with all stakeholders as it develops the Homeland Security’s personnel system. Thus far this process seems to be

going all right. I talked with the union presidents and trust that

this is going to be an open and collaborative process that will yield

a flexible personnel system that is fair to all employees.

Further, I hope we can enact additional provisions to give all of

our Federal employees the tools they need to do their jobs effectively.

If you are confirmed, I expected that you will do everything in

your power to ensure that the Department of Homeland Security’s

labor management relations apparatus is administered within the

spirit of the law, and that unfair labor practices rulings are applied

without prejudice throughout the government.

I hope you take a very active role in improving labor management relations and that you aggressively pursue a program that

would provide training to Federal employees on the benefits of consensus decisionmaking techniques for resolving workforce disputes.

To begin this endeavor, I suggest that you conduct a thorough assessment of the current labor management relations environment

and utilize the expertise of the new chief human capital officers to

accomplish this goal. This is a major highlight of my legislation because it creates a chief human capital officer in 24 major departments and agencies. We have not had them. We have neglected the

real important essential of government today, and that is people.

I have observed Congress as a mayor and then as governor and

as chairman of the National Governors Association, and also president of the National League of Cities. And I think it is atrocious
3

1The letters submitted by Senator Akaka appear in the Appendix on page 54.

that the Federal Government’s workforce has not been given the

kind of attention that is needed.

The General Counsel of the FLRA, in my opinion, is a very important position. How well you do that job will have a large impact

on whether we can develop effective labor/management partnerships in government today. The unions must feel that the process

is open, that they have somebody in your position aggressively trying to make sure that a dialogue exists, and frankly by doing that

you may eliminate the need for people to appeal. It is also important to make sure that employees and managers are treated fairly

and consistently based on the guidelines of the Federal Labor Relations Statute.

So I look forward to your testimony today to hear how you plan

to apply your extensive private sector experience to the government

and to learn what steps you have taken to prepare for this important position.

I would now like to call on Senator Akaka to give him an opportunity to make his opening statement, and then we will open it up

for your statement.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR AKAKA

Senator AKAKA. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

It is always a pleasure to work with you, especially to work with

someone who I call a champion on human capital. I look forward

to continuing to work with you on that. And it is a pleasure for me

to be with you this morning and with Senator Durbin, as well.

I want to add my welcome to Mr. Eide and your lovely and handsome family. The only thing I can say is you are really a fortunate

man to have such a family.

Mr. EIDE. That I am.

Senator AKAKA. Just 2 days ago my friend from Ohio chaired a

hearing with our House counterparts on the Federal workforce. I

was unable to attend that meeting because Tuesday was the first

day of a 3-day Energy Committee markup. That is the kind of problem we have here. We are members of other committees, and when

we have important markups, we have to be at those meetings.

But I wanted to be here today because I feel that the government’s most important asset is its employees.

Mr. Eide, I want to congratulate you for being nominated to

serve as the General Counsel of the Federal Labor Relations Authority.

The FLRA is charged with protecting the rights of Federal employees from unfair labor practices. Because of your prior relationships and your jobs in the private sector, there have been some

concerns. Concerns have been raised by the American Federation

of Government Employees and the National Treasury Employees

Union about your long association with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The reason is they regard the Chamber as an organization

that has opposed most labor initiatives.

Mr. Chairman, I ask that letters from AFGE and NTEU be included in the record, as well as a letter from the Association of Administrative Law Judge’s in support of Mr. Eide’s nomination.1
4

1 Biographical and professonal information for Mr. Eide appears in the Appendix on page 16.

Senator VOINOVICH. Without objection.

Senator AKAKA. The FLRA will face major challenges involving

the creation of the labor management relations policy at the new

Department of Homeland Security. The sheer number of employees

within the Department and the ability of the Department to waive

Chapter 71 of Title 5 relating to labor management relations undoubtedly will increase the workload at the FLRA. It may also pose

unique legal and policy questions for the authority and for the General Counsel.

I look forward to this hearing, Mr. Chairman, and I want to

thank you for having it today. Thank you.

Senator VOINOVICH. Thank you, Senator Akaka. Senator Durbin.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR DURBIN

Senator DURBIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I ask that my opening statement be made part of the record. In

the interest of time, I have a Judiciary Committee hearing, and I

will waive making a statement at this point. I hope I will have a

chance to ask some questions.

[The prepared statement of Senator Durbin follows:]

PREPARED OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR DURBIN

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for calling this hearing. I would like to welcome Mr.

Eide. Thank you for testifying this morning.

The Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) serves as an independent, neutral

third-party for resolving labor-management disputes in the Federal Government.

The Office of the General Counsel is the FLRA’s independent investigator and prosecutor.

Mr. Eide, if confirmed for this position to which you have been nominated, you

will have the important responsibilities of investigating all allegations of unfair

labor practices filed and processing all representation petitions received; exercising

final authority over the issuance and prosecution of all complaints; supervising and

conducting elections concerning the exclusive recognition of labor organizations and

the certification of the results of elections; conducting all hearings to resolve disputed issues in representation cases; preparing final decisions and orders in these

cases; and directing and supervising all employees of the regional offices.

I ask that letters submitted to the Committee in relation to this nominee be made

part of the record. I look forward to hearing your testimony, Mr. Eide.

Senator VOINOVICH. Thank you.

Mr. Eide has filed responses to a biographical and professional

questionnaire, answering pre-hearing questions submitted by the

Committee, and has had his financial statements reviewed by the

Office of Government Ethics. Without objection, this information

will be made a part of the record with the exception of the financial

data, which are on file and available for public inspection in the

Committee offices.1

Mr. Eide, our Committee rules require that all witnesses at nomination hearings give their testimony under oath. If you would

please stand.

[Witness sworn.]

Senator VOINOVICH. Now, I would like to hear from you.
5

1The prepared statement of Mr. Eide appears in the Appendix on page 15.

TESTIMONY OF PETER J. EIDE,1 TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL,

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

Mr. EIDE. I have a few written comments, I would like to read

that, and then answer your questions, if that is all right.

Good morning, Mr. Chairman, and Members of the Committee.

My name is Peter Eide. President Bush has nominated me for the

position of General Counsel to the Federal Labor Relations Authority.

I am truly honored and deeply appreciative and I would like to

express my sincere gratitude to you for this opportunity to appear

before you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Vice Chairman, for going into

the introductions that I had planned to make now. My family members are behind me, sitting behind me. And you certainly stated

their names and indicated who they were, so thank you for that.

This is a momentous occasion for this family, and I thought it

would be good if they could witness it firsthand.

I would like to assure you that, if confirmed, I will enforce in a

fair and consistent manner the Federal Service Labor Management

Relations Statute, the decisions and regulations of the Federal

Labor Relations Authority, and I will effectuate the statutes and

regulations affecting all employers and employees, including especially those focused primarily on Federal Government employees.

I am familiar with many of the statutes and regulations affecting

employment in the Federal sector, having dealt with them directly

or on behalf of the public and clients for nearly 28 years.

As you know, the Federal statute that I will apply and enforce

is modeled on the National Labor Relations Act, a statute I enforced as an employee of the National Labor Relations Board for

over 7 years, and which I have dealt with directly on behalf of employers, clients, and the business community for over 20 years.

Members of the Committee and your staff of the Governmental

Affairs Committee know, probably too well, that one of the biggest

challenges we face is activating the Department of Homeland Security. Mr. Chairman, I think your comments reflected that concern.

I want to assure you that of everything I do, one of my highest

priorities will be to make sure that activation is done smoothly and

promptly so that the Department can carry out its mission to protect this country from terrorism and other serious threats.

I look forward to applying my years of labor law and labor relations experience in this position to which I have been nominated.

I also assure you that I will be at all times responsive to the Governmental Affairs Committee and to the entire Senate and the

Congress, as well.

Thank you for considering my nomination and I will gladly answer any questions that you have.

Senator VOINOVICH. Mr. Eide, before we start our questioning,

there are some standard questions that we have to ask all nominees.

The first one, is there anything that you are aware of in your

background which might present a conflict of interest with the duties of the office to which you have been nominated?
6

Mr. EIDE. No, sir.

Senator VOINOVICH. Do you know of anything, personal or otherwise, that would in any way prevent you from fully and honorably

discharging the responsibilities of the office to which you have been

nominated?

Mr. EIDE. I know of nothing that would interfere with my job.

Senator VOINOVICH. Do you agree to respond to any reasonable

summons without reservation? Without reservation, to respond to

any reasonable summons to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of Congress if you are confirmed.

Mr. EIDE. Yes, Senator, absolutely.

Senator VOINOVICH. We will start the first round of questions

and we will limit those to 6 minutes.

Mr. Eide, in March 1999, President Clinton introduced a proposal to protect whistleblowers who were fired for speaking out

against health and safety hazards in the workplace. President Clinton had a proposal to protect whistleblowers who were fired for

speaking out against health and standards in the workplace.

In reactions to this proposed policy you said, the proposal would

‘‘open the floodgates to meritless charges, plaintiff’s lawyers are all

too willing to sue an employer with no intention of getting a verdict, simply to blackmail the employer to force him to pay off the

plaintiff.’’

I am somewhat concerned that a past statement like this gives

the impression that you might lack the objectivity necessary for the

position of General Counsel.

So I would like to ask you a two-part question. First of all, are

these your personal feelings, or were you merely reflecting the sentiments of the Chamber of Commerce?

And second, do you think that you can maintain the ability to remain neutral and apply the labor relations statute in a fair and equitable manner?

Mr. EIDE. I do not recall making that statement, nor will I deny

making that statement. It is consistent with the Chamber’s position regarding what has been called, what has been termed plaintiff’s lawyers, and what the Chamber believes to be their overwillingness to file charges and lawsuits against employers.

What I said, and I am not denying I made that statement, is consistent with the Chamber’s concern about overactive plaintiff lawyers and too many lawsuits against employers.

I said that as a representative of the Chamber, as a spokesperson for the Chamber. And I want to make sure that you understand that does not necessarily reflect my personal views. In fact,

it does not reflect my personal views on that particular subject.

The concern about whistleblowers, I think, is genuine and has to

be kept foremost in everybody’s mind because that is the way that

these problems in the workplace, these health and safety issues especially, are brought to light and corrected at the earliest possible

date and in the most efficient way possible.

So I am not denying that I made the statement but that does not

reflect my personal views. It does, I think, reflect the view of the

U.S. Chamber of Commerce at that time.
7

Senator VOINOVICH. The issue is do you believe that you can

bring impartiality to the job that you have and not be skewed in

favor of the employer?

Mr. EIDE. Absolutely. I would like to point out that for the first

7 years, over 7 years of my career, I worked for the National Labor

Relations Board. And the overwhelming majority of the cases that

I handled and investigated and made recommendations on were

charges against employers.

I think I did that job capably and did it well. And as a result

of my efforts in investigating those charges, a number of complaints were issued and employers, as a result, settled the charges,

settled the allegations, or were brought before Administrative Law

Judge’s and the entire labor board to have the issue resolved.

I do not think it is accurate to say that what I said as a representative of the Chamber and spokesman for the Chamber reflects on my objectivity or ability to address issues in an objective

manner.

Senator VOINOVICH. Have you given any thought to initiatives to

try and foster better labor management relationships?

Mr. EIDE. Yes, sir, I have. The authority, the OGC, Office of General Counsel has what I think is an elaborate program to encourage representatives of labor and representatives of management to

get along, to air their disputes, to resolve their disputes before it

becomes an issue in contract negotiations and they reach an impasse because of those disputes, to try to get those resolved.

I consider it a pretty elaborate program. I do not know if it is

effective. It seems to me it would be effective. And I am anxious

to engage in whatever activities I can and have my staff at the Authority do likewise, to encourage resolution of disputes before they

have to be litigated.

Senator VOINOVICH. How would you determine whether or not

the effort currently underway is a good one?

Mr. EIDE. How would I determine?

Senator VOINOVICH. You are coming on the job and you have got

this in place. How would you go about deciding whether or not the

initiative in the Department was a good one, or whether it needed

improvement?

Mr. EIDE. The Authority’s initiative? Is that what you are talking

about?

Senator VOINOVICH. Yes.

Mr. EIDE. Obviously, I am going to have to talk to a lot of people,

the staff of the OGC first and foremost, and then representatives

of organized labor and management representatives and find out

whether or not these programs and policies are working.

If they are not working, then they need to be changed and fixed.

And I would be anxious to do that to make sure that the whole system works. It is referred to as the FITE program and I think that

despite its name it would help the management and union folks resolve their disputes before they are brought to bear on the actual

negotiations.

Senator VOINOVICH. Thank you. Senator Durbin.

Senator DURBIN. Senator Akaka has been kind enough to allow

me to go first because of my other committee hearing, even though

he was first to arrive.
8

Mr. Eide, thank you very much for being here.

A basic question, did you seek this job?

Mr. EIDE. Did I seek this job? I understood that there was an

opening for the General Counsel at the Federal Labor Relations

Authority, and I, after learning of that opening, asked the White

House if they would consider me for the position.

Senator DURBIN. So you did?

Mr. EIDE. Yes.

Senator DURBIN. You did seek the job.

I am curious as to why you did that? I think there are a lot of

positions in the Federal Government where your credentials would

be impeccable. This is one that, as the Chairman has noted, raises

a lot of questions about why, with your background with the Chamber of Commerce you would want to take on a position which is described under law as being a neutral party in the settlement of disputes that arise between Federal agencies and unions on matters

outlined in the Federal Service Labor Management Relations statute.

In the past 12 years you have been very outspoken and very

anti-union on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce. On issue after

issue, statute after statute, you have questioned worker protections. You have supported the dilution of a variety of protections

of workers. You opposed OSHA regulations on safety and health.

You opposed provisions of the 1991 Civil Rights Act that provides

compensatory damage remedies and jury trials for violations of the

Americans with Disabilities Act. You advocated a policy that would

exempt from employment discrimination laws for 18 months employers who hired former welfare recipients. You have consistently

opposed increases in Federal minimum wages and other minimum

wages.

Can you understand why the labor unions are a little bit worried

if you are going to be their champion?

Mr. EIDE. Yes, sir, I can. I can also say that those positions that

I took were as a representative of the Chamber. And as you know,

the Chamber of Commerce is composed solely of businesses and

employers and business associations. And their concern was what

impact those laws that were under consideration at the time, or

those regulations, would have on them.

My job, as spokesperson for the Chamber, was to state what the

Chamber’s concerns were and to effectively argue the Chamber’s

position.

Senator DURBIN. I understand that. I have been an attorney, too,

and I know that you represent your client. But I am going to have

to take you to the obvious question. I believe you are a man of principle. Are you saying then that you were stating positions which

you did not personally agree with when you represented the Chamber of Commerce?

Mr. EIDE. I cannot say that applies to all of the issues that you

raised. There were concerns that I personally had regarding some

of the regulations that were proposed. The welfare reform statute

is a good example. What we thought would be appropriate would

be an exception for some employers for liability under various Federal discrimination laws, so that it would serve as an encouragement to hire people on welfare.
9

As it turned out, in that economic age or time period, there was

a shortage of employees nationwide and it was not necessary to add

an inducement for employers to hire people off of welfare.

Senator DURBIN. I only have a limited time, maybe 2 minutes

left here.

I note in your biography that before law school, or perhaps at the

same time as you were pursuing your legal education, you were a

member of a public employees union, and I suppose a representative of that union, in the work that you were doing.

What would you say is the reason for unions? Why do you believe

that we have unions today?

Mr. EIDE. I think that unions can provide a mouthpiece for an

employee, for all employees, an effective mouthpiece. In my case,

that was a situation where you had a management that required

formal notification of what employees rights were and constant reminders of what employee rights were that might not be able to be

conveyed to management by individuals and could easily be conveyed through a spokesperson. And I was that spokesperson at that

time.

Senator DURBIN. Mr. Eide, in a 1997 article appearing in the

Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune, you were quoted in reference to

the Fair Labor Standards Act. You said as follows: ‘‘the raison

d’etre of unions is antagonism.’’

That is a harsh statement. If I am a member of a union or representing people in a union and I hear that you want to be my advocate now and you believe that the reason unions exist is to antagonize an employer, I am not sure I am going to get a fair shake

from you.

What you have just stated was a union serves as a mouthpiece.

If you had a little more time you might come up with a different

word. I hope you will.

But I hope you understand that on this side of the table, this is

a curious nomination by the administration. As I said, I can think

of a hundred jobs that would be perfect for someone from the

Chamber of Commerce. I do not think this is one of them. Thank

you.

Senator VOINOVICH. Senator Akaka.

Senator AKAKA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Eide, the General Counsel of the Federal Labor Relations

Authority has broad prosecutorial discretion in determining whether to pursue allegations of unfair labor practices and operates, to

a large extent, without review by the members of the Authority or

any court. Refusal to pursue allegations of misconduct leaves the

injured party without any legal recourse.

Given this considerable responsibility, what factors will you use

in deciding whether to take such an action?

Mr. EIDE. To prosecute a case?

Senator AKAKA. Correct.

Mr. EIDE. There are a whole lot of factors to consider, that must

be considered. What exactly happened to the individual? What is

the complaint? What is the likelihood of it being resolved through

methods other than litigation? What remedies can be provided to

the individual if it, in fact, occurred, if the individual did in fact

suffer some sort of discrimination or adverse impact? What is the
10

remedy that is involved and how will that be brought about? How

can that be achieved through the system where the employee

works?

Those are a few of the considerations. I think that has to be just

some of them. There have to be a number of other considerations

that would go through my mind, as well.

I cannot list them all right now, right offhand, but it is not something that is what you would call a slam dunk, by any means. It

would have to be very deliberate and would require assessing a lot

of facts, gathering and assessing a lot of facts in every single case.

Senator AKAKA. Legislation creating the Department of Homeland Security provided the new Department with great flexibility

with its human resources management system. This includes the

authority to waive or modify Chapter 71 of Title 5, which governs

labor management relations.

Such authority could have major implications on how labor management relations are handled and what matters, if any, may come

before your office. Do you have any recommendations as to what

modifications should be made to Chapter 71 as it applies to the Department of Homeland Security.

Mr. EIDE. I do not have such a recommendation at this time. I

am sure that I will develop some over time, but I cannot articulate

those at this point. I simply do not know.

I know that there has to be some changes made. The Chairman’s

comments about human capital issues, and revising some issues in

that area were intriguing because before I was a lawyer or a labor

relations rep, I was a human resources manager and still am a

member of the Society for Human Resources Management. I chose

to follow my mother’s footsteps rather than my father’s footsteps.

She was an human resource manager for many years. For some

reason I took to that rather than my father’s profession, pharmacy.

But I am familiar with the fundamental tenets of human resource management and I really appreciate the comments that the

Chairman made about revisions to human capital issues and working that side of the homeland security problem or activation that

I referred to earlier.

Senator AKAKA. I want to thank you, Mr. Eide, for your response.

I hope you will keep this Committee updated on your activities and

also on any recommended changes you may be proposing. As has

been indicated here, there are concerns about your experiences and

some of your comments, but I wish you well on this nomination.

Mr. EIDE. Thank you.

Senator AKAKA. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Senator VOINOVICH. Thank you Senator Akaka.

Mr. Eide, I would like you to do a couple of things. First one is

to ask you to share your philosophy on labor management’s relationships, and how you envision your job responsibilities.

And the second one would be what steps—maybe you ought to

answer the latter question before the former. That is what steps

have you taken thus far to prepare for this position?

Mr. EIDE. I have read a number of Authority cases. I have read

large parts of the General Counsel’s, former General Counsel’s

statements, guidance documents on labor relations and alternative

dispute resolution.
11

I have read the statute carefully several times. I have amassed

a very small library of reference documents regarding Federal Sector Labor Relations.

I have joined the ABA Section on Federal Sector Labor Law and

become active in that group. I have become a member of the Society for Federal Labor Relations Professionals—I do not know if

that is the correct name of the group—and attended their meetings.

And I have tried my best to become active in issues that involve

Federal Sector Labor Relations.

I do not know what more I could have done. I held down a job

in another area at the same time and was a single parent to one

of the people sitting behind me.

So I did what I could and I look forward to doing a whole lot

more as the situation will permit. Once I no longer have to have

two jobs and worry about two sectors, the public sector and private

sector, I can focus on the public sector, Federal sector work.

In answer to your other question, on my philosophy on labor

management relationships, the quintessential labor management

relationship, productive labor management relationship, was what

I experienced when I was a labor management rep at Martin Marietta in Baltimore. There was a 2,000 person bargaining unit represented by the United Auto Workers. And the UAW had been

there since the early 1940’s or late 1930’s, I believe. They had a

very sophisticated relationship.

And I got to witness firsthand how management could, working

with the union, resolve disputes early and thoroughly effectively,

and refine disputes that could not be resolved easily or quickly so

that they could be resolved at the next higher level, which usually

involved corporate representatives and national union representatives or international representatives of the union. I witnessed

those bargaining sessions, as well, and saw again firsthand how a

very sophisticated and effective collective bargaining relationship

works.

I appreciated the fact that the union was there, had been there

for a long time and did have a great relationship with the company. The company appreciated that and they were able to do, I

think, great things in their industry.

As you know, that company no longer exists but has been merged

with another large defense contractor. And I think they still have

the same relationship.

Senator VOINOVICH. I do not know the answer to this question.

How many employees will you have? I know that you are in charge

of seven regional offices. Do you know how many people you will

actually be responsible for?

Mr. EIDE. Good question. I believe it is in the area of 90. It might

be a few more or a few less, I am not sure.

Senator VOINOVICH. Have you had any management experience,

90 people, in terms of organizational experience? You have got regional offices, you have got people. What kind of experience have

you had in that regard?

Mr. EIDE. In setting up regional offices?

Senator VOINOVICH. I am just talking about management experience generally. For example, the job that you have now, how many
12

people are you responsible for? Prior to this, the jobs that you have

had, how many people were you responsible for, in terms of management?

Mr. EIDE. The direct line management relationship was not there

when I worked at Martin Marietta. It was a dotted line relationship. I was in a position to advise line managers and section managers and section directors on how to achieve their human resources and labor relations goals, and when necessary, effectively

recommend action, disciplinary action if it was necessary, in that

area.

So it was not direct management relationship by any means, but

it was certainly dotted line, and certainly involved in the management decisions and instrumental in what decisions were.

Senator VOINOVICH. How about when you were with the FLRB?

Did you have any management responsibilities there?

Mr. EIDE. You mean at the National Labor Relations Board?

Senator VOINOVICH. Yes, the NLRB?

Mr. EIDE. Other than training employees, I was a senior examiner at the NLRB, and many new employees were assigned to work

with me for varying lengths of time. My job was to train them and

to supervise their daily activities, their daily work. Other than

that, there was no direct management.

Senator VOINOVICH. How about the Chamber?

Mr. EIDE. Again, other than my personal staff, there is no direct

management. However, the Chamber is, I think, an unusual operation because there is—a good example is I recently conceived and

produced and directed a webcast show involving several people

from OSHA and individuals from various companies.

My job was to coordinate all of the activities and have everybody

at the Chamber do what they were supposed to do. The camera

work, getting the web site ready, getting the information and the

actual video presentation on the web site. Again, it was not direct

management, it was getting people to do their jobs with respect to

my particular interest and on a timely basis, and a thorough and

competent basis.

Again, it was a—I like to describe it as a dotted line or matrixtype of operation. And that was successful and it is on the web site

now. It is a webcast on ergonomics, of all things, and it can be

viewed by going to the Chamber’s web site.

Senator VOINOVICH. Is there anything else that you want to

share with me this morning?

Mr. EIDE. No, I appreciate your having this hearing and considering the nomination and I stand ready to answer any questions

that you may have.

Senator VOINOVICH. We are going to adjourn the hearing and we

are going to leave the record open until 5 o’clock in case there are

other Members of the Committee who were not able to be here.

I apologize, that is the way it is around the Senate. I have had

a lot of these hearings, and sometimes I am the only one who is

here. So we are lucky to have a couple of other Senators here.

Mr. EIDE. As you know, I am a lobbyist and I have seen umpteen

hearings in both the House and the Senate.

Senator VOINOVICH. Then you understand. I just want to explain

to your family. It is an important hearing. It is just that Senators,
13

at any given hour of the day we could probably be at three places

and each of them is a legitimate use of our time.

So again, I want to thank you very much, and thank the family

for coming here today with you, and we look forward to seeing you

again.

As I say, we will leave the record open but I will recess the hearing

[Whereupon, at 10:22 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

(15)

A P P E N D I X
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58Æ