The No-Show Consultant
Yesterday, Pete Gorman, former IAFF chief of staff, disclosed that General President Harold Schaitberger was funding a no-show job from his own budget line under the label of “consultant.”
Gorman also said that Mark Ouellette, IAFF Eastern District Trustee, “had full knowledge of the situation.”
Standard of Proof
Mark Ouellette
Gorman sets forth an entirely reasonable standard of proof.
If anyone is being paid by the IAFF for services they should be submitting an invoice detailing the work they performed and the hours spent.
In addition, there should be a contract clearly explaining work product requirements and other aspects of the relationship.
Gorman says, “Ask him (Ouellette) to show you any expense voucher associated with that line in any year from 2002 to 2007. The IAFF maintains an electronic voucher system (ReQlogic). All records are preserved.”
An Explanation?
Our Dear Leader
Schaitberger could easily shield Ouellette from criticism by clearly explaining all of the details of the consultant arrangement Gorman refers to.
(If there is a suitable explanation, that is.)
That’s extremely unlikely to happen, however, because many are those who can attest that Schaitberger loyalty flows in only one direction: toward him.
Ouellette should expect no help as he answers Gorman’s charge.
An Ethics Violation
The house, again
Gorman’s assertions represent a clear ethical violation but there’s a problem with that.
After Schaitberger was caught red-handed in the house purchase conflict of interest he did what any blatantly corrupt third world dictator would do: he rewrote the ethics rules.
Here’s what they now say:
“All allegations [of conflict of interest] and review shall be kept confidential unless and until the ad hoc ethical practices committee finds reasonable cause to bring the matter to the attention of the IAFF executive board. The committee shall adopt reasonable measures to ensure that confidentiality is maintained, including enforceable sanctions for breach of confidentiality.”
He gets to keep the matter secret and punish anyone who dares to talk about it.
Any idea who appoints the investigating committee?
You guessed it, he does.
Case Closed?
Maybe not.
If Ouellette wants to defend his reputation and record he should detail his involvement and knowledge of the allegation and press for an ethics investigation that is full, open, and unsparing.
His alternative is to wait and see if Our Dear Leader Shields him from harm.
Good luck with that.
Like and Share this post to stop the Schaitberger Corruption.
Take Our Union Back.
– See more at: http://www.turnoutblog.com/2016/04/03/harold-and-karen-and-us/#sthash.AekGru2Z.dpuf