Democrats -Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. House of Representatives

Rep. George Miller Statement on NLRB Member Terence Flynn’s Resignation

Tue, 29 May 2012 18:44:30 +0000

WASHINGTON – U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), the senior Democratic member of the House Education and the Workforce Committee, issued the following statement today after National Labor Relations Board Member Terence Flynn announced that he will resign on July 24th and recuse himself from Board actions until then. The NLRB’s Inspector General found that Flynn disclosed deliberative and nonpublic information on pending cases and other pending NLRB actions to outside parties, including to an advisor to Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign.

“The Inspector General’s recent reports pulled the curtain back on what was the most corrosive scandal in the agency's history. As I pointed out in my call for his resignation, Mr. Flynn’s continued presence as a member of the NLRB would raise serious concerns about the agency's ability to ensure the due process rights of any party before it. In light of the Inspector General’s troubling findings, Mr. Flynn’s resignation is both appropriate and necessary.”

After receiving the first of two Inspector General reports on Flynn’s activities, Miller wrote the U.S. Attorney General on March 23rd, urging the Department of Justice to consider evidence provided by the Inspector General of potential conversions of government information for private gain. After receiving a second report further detailing Flynn’s activities, Miller called for Flynn to resign on May 2nd. As ranking members of the committee and subcommittee of jurisdiction, Miller and U.S. Rep. Rob Andrews (D-N.J.) wrote Committee Chairman John Kline (R-Minn.) on May 11th requesting a hearing on the matter.

Read the Inspector General’s report and other materials relating to the investigation here.

Members of Congressional Monitoring Group on Labor Rights in Colombia Send Letter to President Obama

Thu, 24 May 2012 19:59:02 +0000

George Miller, the senior Democratic member of the Education and the Workforce Committee, joined other members of the Congressional Monitoring Group on Labor Rights in Colombia in sending a letter to President Obama last week expressing concern over a number of recent incidents of violence and threats against labor activists in Colombia. With the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement going into force earlier this month, the members emphasized the need for continued engagement with Colombia on its workers’ rights commitments.

Read the full letter here.

GAO: Employers Don’t Understand All the Fees in the 401(k) Plans they Sponsor

Wed, 23 May 2012 17:17:18 +0000

WASHINGTON – A new report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released today by Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.) shows that many employers GAO surveyed do not understand or were unable to identify the 401(k) fees that they and their employees pay. Without the ability to determine the fees charged to both employers that sponsor 401(k) plans and the workers who participate in them, employers and employees may be paying much higher costs than they are aware of, resulting in reduced retirement savings.

“Middle class families who rely on a 401(k) do not have a fighting chance if employers don’t understand how their own plan works,” said Rep. Miller, the senior Democratic member of the House Education and the Workforce Committee. “For too long, confusing business arrangements and hidden fees have skimmed money from workers’ hard-earned savings without full disclosure. Through these practices, neither workers nor their employers know how much they are being charged or why. Financial service firms need to be more up front about the fees they take from workers’ accounts. While I’m hopeful that efforts by the Obama administration to require greater fee disclosure will shine a much needed light on these practices, it is clear that Congress, the Department of Labor and employers need to be doing more to protect working families and their retirement savings.”

The GAO report underscores the need for all fees to be disclosed to employers by 401(k) service providers in a clear and easy-to-understand format. For example, nearly six in ten sponsors said they are “completely” or “very confident” that service providers fully disclose all fees to the plan and its participants. Yet, at the same time, half of employers admitted they did not know if they or their workers pay investment management fees or mistakenly believed that such fees were waived. GAO noted that investment management fees account for the majority of all 401(k) fees.

In addition, 48 percent of employers did not know whether their plan provider engaged in revenue sharing arrangements whereby service providers compensate another provider for administrative or other charges. For example, one employer with a large 401(k) was unaware of a revenue sharing agreement that underestimated the amount the employer was charged by a service provider for recordkeeping by 16 times. Another employer with a small plan reported paying nothing at all to service providers for recordkeeping when in fact the employer paid $10,700 in 2010. Nearly half of that recordkeeping fee ($4,800) was taken from employees’ assets.

“If sponsors do not understand these arrangements, it could result in the plan sponsor and participants paying more for services as assets grow, although the level of service provided tends to remain the same,” GAO wrote.

Watch a short video from GAO explaining revenue sharing.

In other words, many workers and businesses are paying higher fees than they may be aware. As previously uncovered by GAO, many fees in 401(k) plans are hidden and even a small difference in fees could make a big difference in the retirement savings for workers. The Department of Labor estimated that a one-percentage point difference could reduce a worker’s retirement savings by 28 percent at the end of his or her career.

GAO’s survey of plan sponsors found a wide divergence in fees charged to sponsors and participants:

· Employers reported they paid between 0.00 percent and 1.17 percent in investment management fees. At the same time, employers reported that their 401(k) plan participants paid anywhere between 0.01 percent and 3.24 percent in investment management fees.

· For recordkeeping and administrative services, employers reported that their 401(k) plan participants paid anywhere between 0.02 percent and 1.59 percent. Employers reported that they were charged anywhere between 0.01 percent and 37.26 percent for recordkeeping, for an average of 1.13 percent. The 37.26 percent recordkeeping fee was reported by one small plan with very few assets.

· Transaction or trading fees varied widely depending on investment options and were difficult for employers to understand. Half of employers said they did not know whether they or their 401(k) participants paid this fee. A later GAO review of plans’ documents found that the average transaction or trading cost was 0.45 percent, with one fee as high as 2.72 percent. One employer with a very large plan told GAO that its plan did not pay any trading or transaction costs, but a GAO review of this plan’s documents showed that the plan was actually charged more than $310,000 in transaction costs.

· Eighty-five percent of plans hired a plan consultant or advisor and 77 percent passed the consulting fee onto plan participants, which added an additional 0.01 percent to 1.40 percent in costs to workers.

GAO also highlighted employers who contracted with insurance companies – a growing group of 401(k) service providers that address an increasing interest in annuities – as paying higher than average recordkeeping fees and investment management fees, on top of wrap fees for the annuities.

“Fees associated with certain 401(k) insurance products – where participants pay for some benefits but which otherwise appear similar to noninsurance 401(k) products – can be difficult for sponsors to identify and therefore evaluate,” GAO said. For example, “fees associated with group annuities can add significant costs to a plan.”

GAO’s survey also highlighted the significant difference in fees charged between smaller and larger 401(k) plans:

· Employers with smaller plans with fewer than 50 employees paid nearly 90 percent more on average in recordkeeping fees than employers with larger plans with more than 500 employees (1.33 percent versus 0.15 percent). The average across all firms was 1.13 percent of assets.

· Workers at small firms also paid nearly twice as much on average for recordkeeping as workers at large companies (0.43 percent versus 0.22 percent).

· For consulting services, 401(k) plan participants at small companies paid almost 80 percent more on average (0.29 percent versus 0.07 percent).

Other results of interest from the GAO survey:

· 66 percent of employers have not negotiated over fees in the last five years.

· 56 percent of employers used bundled services.

· 70 percent of respondents thought that it would be helpful to participants if fees charged against accounts (including commissions, sales loads and account fees) were disclosed to participants.

· 68 percent of respondents thought it would be helpful to participants if the actual dollar amount in fees and expenses charged against participants’ accounts was disclosed in their quarterly statement.

· Among plans that paid more than 1 percent in investment management fees, half said fund performance was more important than low-fee investment options when considering the options to offer participants.

· 75 percent of 401(k) plans did not make any changes (reduce or eliminate matching contributions) to their plans during the financial crisis

· 17 percent of employers used auto-enrollment.

Rep. Miller has worked for years to expose hidden fees and how they can cut into workers’ retirement savings, requesting an initial report on the issue in 2007. He is the author of 401(k) fee disclosure legislation that was approved by the House of Representatives in 2010 and appeared on CBS’s 60 Minutes to discuss how hidden fees can eat into Americans’ retirement savings. For his efforts in advocating for workers’ retirement security, Miller was named a retirement “Legend” in 2011 by Plan Adviser Magazine, a leading publication for advisors and consultants for retirement plans. Rep. Miller also received the Robert M. Ball – Lisle C. Carter Superhero Award “for outstanding contributions for retirement security” from the Pension Rights Center in 2011.

Read the GAO report.

House GOP Block Effort to Restore Health and Safety Protections and Oversight at Nuclear Weapons Facilities

Thu, 17 May 2012 19:17:50 +0000

WASHINGTON – House Republicans rejected consideration of an amendment last night to the defense authorization bill to restore important health and safety protections for workers and residents who live near nuclear weapons facilities operated by the Department of Energy.

The amendment, offered by Reps. George Miller (D-Calif.), Pete Visclosky (D-Ind.) and Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.), would remove provisions of the Defense Authorization Act (HR 4310) that weaken a number of worker and public safety protections that government contractors at nuclear weapons facilities must follow.

“I am deeply disappointed that House Republicans are intent on dramatically reducing safety protections at nuclear weapons facilities,” said Rep. Miller. “If this bill were to become law, fewer protections mean more human costs for both workers who handle these dangerous materials and families who live near these operations. Self-policing by the government contractors who run these ultra-hazardous facilities only invites unnecessary danger.”

The Defense Authorization bill being considered by the House of Representatives weakens numerous safety protections that government contractors must follow today.

The bill strips the current system of time-tested worker protections based on clear, concise, non-negotiable requirements that holds contractors accountable for safety.
It strips the Secretary of Energy of oversight and enforcement authority and turns much of the safety oversight over to contractors to police themselves.
It mandates new standards that downgrade workplace safety to the bare minimum established by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration for the average workplace, despite the unique risks at Department of Energy nuclear weapons sites.
Nuclear weapons workers would lose the right to stop work when they encounter unsafe conditions.
Contractors would be allowed to use obsolete chemical exposure limits, rather than updated exposure limits developed in 2005.
The bill erects roadblocks limiting the ability of the sole watchdog agency, the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, to ensure adequate protection of public and worker safety.
Rep. Miller and Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) sent a letter to the Armed Services Committee last week outlining the dangers of reducing safety protections at the nation’s nuclear labs. Read the letter here.

The Obama administration issued a statement of administration policy earlier this week opposing the effort to reduce safety protections at Department of Energy nuclear weapons facilities.

More than 30 citizens groups living near these facilities, Cold War-era nuclear workers and current workers at every Department of Energy facility have raised concerns or objections to the bill.

Miller spoke on the floor today against the legislation. Watch it here.

Parent Involvement Critical to Successful Public Schools, Witnesses Tell Education Subcommittee

Wed, 16 May 2012 22:00:04 +0000

WASHINGTON – Parents should be empowered to ensure their local schools live up to the promise to educate all children, witnesses told the House Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education at a hearing today. Specifically, they said parents should be equipped with the knowledge and tools they need to advocate for their children and be part of decision-making in the schools to ensure that both students and schools are successful.

“In order to effectively engage, parents must have access to meaningful information and data about their child’s academic achievement,” said Rep. Dale Kildee (D-MI), the senior democrat on the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education.

Research clearly supports parental engagement leading to better academic outcomes for children.

“Family engagement is an essential component of our education system and must be a part of our strategy going forward as we work to close the achievement gap and better prepare our young people to be the leaders of tomorrow,” said Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY). “The bipartisan Family Engagement in Education Act is just the kind of community- and family-based solution that could help schools and students across the country in these tough economic times. I’m grateful to Congressman Platts, the PTA and Dr. Fletcher for their support and leadership on this issue.”

Parental engagement must include informing school leaders and teachers about effective engagement practices and it must include parents having access to meaningful and consistent data.

“We should empower parents with real, tangible tools to supplement student learning at home coupled with accessible, understandable, and actionable student and school data that serves to inform and support instruction and learning,” said Dr. Maria Fletcher, President of New York State PTA.

National Defense Authorization Act Threatens to Roll Back Safety Standards at Nuclear Sites

Wed, 16 May 2012 16:52:00 +0000

This week, the full House will debate two important amendments to last week’s National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) related to nuclear safety: one offered by Representatives Miller (CA), Visclosky (IN), and Sanchez (CA) to strike NDAA provisions that would erode safety standards and weaken oversight, and another offered by Rep. Smith (WA) that would strike provisions removing nuclear weapons from the Secretary of Energy’s jurisdiction.

The Miller et al. amendment would protect the “adequate protection standard” that has guided nuclear safety oversight for more than a quarter century, ensure that nuclear oversight agencies retain a “transactional” oversight model, and prevent new layers of bureaucracy from undermining technical experts. The Smith amendment would prevent jurisdictional overreach by the House Armed Services Committee, as power to determine the Secretary of Energy’s jurisdiction rests with the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Right now nuclear oversight is “transactional”, meaning that it prescribes best practices for contractors to follow in the hopes of avoiding an accident. “Performance-based” oversight – the standard that the NDAA would dictate – is the style used by the National Transportation Safety Board, which would only investigate an airline’s safety procedures based on an airline’s performance after a plane crash.

Katherine Fuchs, Program Director for the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability (ANA) said “The results of the U.S. nuclear complex regulating itself are evident in the billions of dollars that the federal government has paid in compensation to sick nuclear workers and contaminated communities. The current NDAA’s shift to contractor self-regulation puts the fox in charge of the henhouse.”

“The decades that communities surrounding the U.S. nuclear complex struggled for justice, compensation, and hope for future generations must not be diminished by this Congress. The Miller and Smith amendments would ensure that others don’t have to struggle the way my family has.” said ANA Board member Sharon Cowdrey. Ms. Cowdrey is the president of Miamisburg Environmental Safety & Health and worked for cleanup at the Mound Site, part of NDAA author Rep. Mike Turner’s home district, where nuclear weapons components were manufactured.

ANA is a national network of organizations living in the shadows of the nuclear weapons complex. ANA and 32 other organizations recently sent a letter to House members requesting support for the amendments to protect safety standards on strengthen oversight of nuclear weapons facilities.

Miller Statement on Department of Education Guidelines to Reduce Seclusion and Restraint in Schools

Tue, 15 May 2012 14:21:13 +0000

WASHINGTON - U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-CA), the senior Democrat on the House Education and the Workforce Committee, issued the following statement today following the release of the Department of Education’s Restraint and Seclusion: Resource Document. The resource document provides states and local school districts with guidelines and principles for developing state policies on seclusion and restraint in schools. Though there are federal safety standards on the use of seclusion and restraint in hospitals and similar facilities, currently there are no federal laws addressing seclusion and restraint in school.

“I applaud Secretary Duncan for his leadership in working to protect the safety of all schoolchildren. Though some states have made progress developing policies on seclusion and restraint, the policies vary widely in what protections they afford students. A patchwork of protections, riddled with holes, is not acceptable when it comes to children. We cannot sit idly by as incidents of students being abused or inappropriately restrained continue to occur. This resource document establishes principles for states to follow when addressing seclusion and restraint in schools. It is an important step forward in nation efforts to end dangerous and abusive practices against schoolchildren. We must continue to work to ensure that all states establish meaningful protections for our Nation’s children in school.”

The resource document identifies 15 principles that states, local school districts, schools, parents, and other stakeholders should consider as the framework for developing policies on seclusion and restraint in schools. The 15 principles support legislation championed by Miller since 2010 – the Keeping All Students Safe Act. The bipartisan legislation establishes minimum safety standards in schools, similar to protections already in place in hospitals and other facilities, to protect children from abusive practices of seclusion and restraint. Similar to today’s resource document, the Keeping All Students Safe Act would:

Prohibit the use of any mechanical restraint, such as strapping children to chairs, misusing therapeutic equipment to punish students, or duct-taping parts of their bodies;
Prohibit chemical restraint, meaning medications used to control behavior that are not administered consistent with a physician’s prescription;
Limit the use of physical restraint to only cases involving imminent danger of serious physical harm to self or others, and discontinue use of seclusion and restraint as soon as imminent danger of serious physical harm has dissipated;
Train teachers and other school personnel regularly on the appropriate use of effective alternatives to physical restraint and seclusion, such as positive behavioral interventions and supports; and

Require notification to parents following any instance when seclusion or restraint has been used with their child.

Read the Restraint and Seclusion: Resource Document here.

For more information on the Keeping All Students Safe Act and restraint and seclusion, click here.

Miller, Holt Statement on NAEP Science Report Card

Fri, 11 May 2012 19:03:54 +0000

WASHINGTON – U.S. Reps. George Miller (D-CA), the senior Democrat on the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, and Rush Holt (D-NJ) released the following statement today in response to the National Assessment Governing Board’s report card on the performance of U.S. eighth grade students in science from the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

“The NAEP Science 2011 report card contains good news for science education citing numerous examples of improvements in science performance scores across the country. We must continue to build off this progress and reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) with a strong focus on science education. Unfortunately, the partisan ESEA reauthorization bill the Republicans pushed through the Education and the Workforce Committee earlier this year completely ignores science education. Our economy depends on an educated and skilled workforce to be successful in the global market. Science education is a key component to that success. ”

NAEP, which is administered by the National Center for Education Statistics within the U.S. Department of Education, is the only continuing and nationally representative assessment of what students in the United States know and how they perform in certain subjects.

The Nation’s Report Card: Science 2011 is available at www.nationsreportcard.gov. Visit www.nagb.org/science2011 for more information on recent results.

###

Democrats Request Committee Hearing into “Most Corrosive Scandal” in National Labor Relations Board History

Fri, 11 May 2012 15:26:06 +0000

WASHINGTON – Top Democrats of the House Education and the Workforce Committee today called on the Republican chairman to hold a hearing with the Inspector General of the National Labor Relations Board into evidence he uncovered involving current and former Republican members of the Board and the transmission of confidential government information to private parties.

Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), the senior Democratic member of the committee, and Rep. Robert Andrews (D-N.J.), the ranking member of the Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions Subcommittee, wrote to Chairman John Kline (R-MN), asking for a hearing with the NLRB’s Inspector General.

“As you know, the Board’s Inspector General has issued three investigative reports so far this year that raise serious questions about the conduct of current and former Members of the Board,” Miller and Andrews wrote. “These reports cannot be ignored by our Committee. We respectfully request that you convene a full Committee hearing post haste with the Inspector General to provide all of our members the opportunity to ask questions and explore in depth the findings and potential consequences of his investigative reports.”

The NLRB’s Inspector General uncovered a number of instances where Board Member Terence Flynn, while serving as chief counsel to Board Member Robert Hayes, forwarded sensitive and nonpublic information to former Board Chairman Peter Schaumber, who has served as a labor policy advisor for the Romney presidential campaign. These leaks included a draft of an NLRB decision, draft dissenting opinions before cases have been decided, and other deliberative and non-public information on the NLRB’s internal operations.

The Inspector General concluded that these disclosures “evidence a serious threat to the Board’s decisional due process.”

“Evidence from all three investigative reports has been shared with the Department of Justice. While the Department of Justice is responsible for investigating whether any of the subjects in the Inspector General’s investigative reports committed crimes, we are responsible for directly overseeing the effective and efficient performance of the Board,” Miller and Andrews concluded. “According to the Inspector General’s latest report, such performance is in peril. With the Board’s ability to properly function at stake, it is incumbent upon us to fully engage as the oversight committee.”

Read all documents regarding oversight and investigations into National Labor Relations Board

Full text of the letter to Chairman Kline appears below:

May 11, 2012

The Honorable John Kline Chairman Committee on Education and the Workforce 2181 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Chairman Kline:

To date, the Committee Majority has requested thousands of documents from the National Labor Relations Board (“the Board”) and held six legislative and oversight hearings related to the Board and the National Labor Relations Act. The Majority has also stated in its Budget Views and Estimates for FY 2013 that “[t]he committee will remain vigilant in oversight of the NLRB...” Such vigilance is particularly needed now as we confront the most corrosive scandal in the Board’s history.

As you know, the Board’s Inspector General has issued three investigative reports so far this year that raise serious questions about the conduct of current and former Members of the Board. The most recent reports on Member Terence Flynn detail extensive disclosures of internal, deliberative information by Mr. Flynn to select private parties for their private benefit. Such behavior threatens the Board’s integrity and strikes at the very heart of its ability to effectively and efficiently function as an adjudicatory and rulemaking body bound by principles of due process and fair play. The Inspector General has called these matters “a serious threat to the Board’s decisional due process.” After concluding that Member Flynn released deliberative nonpublic information, the Inspector General in his most recent report states that:

Members of administrative bodies such as the Board cannot freely discuss decisions and points of law and fact if they are fearful that the positions that they take during deliberative discussions or in drafts of documents are going to be made public, distributed to pundits, or leaked to parties.

These reports cannot be ignored by our Committee. We respectfully request that you convene a full Committee hearing post haste with the Inspector General to provide all of our members the opportunity to ask questions and explore in depth the findings and potential consequences of his investigative reports.

A hearing with the Inspector General is only a preliminary step in our efforts to fully investigate these matters. We have begun the process of seeking the voluntary cooperation of a number of principals to provide the Committee with information on their involvement.

Evidence from all three investigative reports has been shared with the Department of Justice. While the Department of Justice is responsible for investigating whether any of the subjects in the Inspector General’s investigative reports committed crimes, we are responsible for directly overseeing the effective and efficient performance of the Board. According to the Inspector General’s latest report, such performance is in peril. With the Board’s ability to properly function at stake, it is incumbent upon us to fully engage as the oversight committee.

Thank you for your consideration of this request.

Sincerely,

GEORGE MILLER Senior Democratic Member ROBERT E. ANDREWS Ranking Member Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions

Miller Calls on Chairman Kline to Address Abusive Seclusion and Restraint Practices in Public Schools

Wed, 09 May 2012 20:52:22 +0000

WASHINGTON, D.C. – During remarks on the House floor today, Rep. George Miller (D-CA), the senior Democrat on the House Education and the Workforce Committee, called on Chairman John Kline (R-MN) to consider the Keeping All Students Safe Act – a bill to protect children from abusive seclusion and restraint practices while attending school. Although the legislation passed the House more than two years ago with bipartisan support, it never became law.

“Schools are supposed to be a safe place. Parents should never have to worry about the safety of their children when they’re at school,” said Miller. “No child should be neglected, abused, or injured while they are trying to learn.”

In recent months, there have been disturbing cases of children being dangerously restrained by teachers and staff during the school day. In several of these cases, students have suffered serious injury or even died as a result of their injuries. The Keeping All Students Safe Act would, for the first time, put in place minimum safety standards to prevent abusive seclusion and restraint in schools across the country. The legislation would protect schoolchildren from inappropriate uses of seclusion and restraint while at school. The bill would also provide school personnel with the necessary tools, training, and support to ensure the safety of all students and school personnel who support them.

Miller’s remarks today follow a letter he sent last week to Chairman Kline requesting immediate committee action to markup the legislation.

The full text of the letter to Chairman Kline can be found here.

Miller’s remarks on the House floor can be found here.

More information on seclusion and restraint can be found here.