If LWDA jackass Robert Jones is to be confirmed by the Senate on May 14, then contact the Senate NOW!

Please contact every member of the Senate Rules Committee and find out who's in charge of reviewing, approving, and confirming this clown for his political appointment.  Here's what the Senate members need to ask at the confirmation hearing:

1) Why did you issue a "No-speak" memo to DLSE attorneys, only to cowardly yank it after they filed a PERB complaint?

2) Why did you terminate Miles Locker in exchange for being Acting Labor Commissioner and Acting Chief Counsel?  How long have you lived your life as Acting Jackass?

3) Why were you involved in the Blogger's Free Speech litigation, and why do you hate free speech, as evidenced by your 'No Speak' memo and anti-blogger involvement?

4) How long have you been a whore for the Meal & Rest Period reform attempted by the various lobbyists and political contributors?

5) Will you continue to whore yourself for either monetary gain or political power?  What is your starting price, and can an individual taxpayer afford it, other than the Governor that appointed you?

6) How much did you personally profit, either politically or financially, from the (at least) $6,000,000.00 taxpayer-paid abortion called "CMS?"

7) How were you able to deceive the taxpayers of their political due process by collecting a paycheck as Acting Labor Commissioner for almost two years?  Is it because they could not appoint you as Labor Commissioner because you would never be confirmed?  You received two years of experience, being a loyal a dedicated whore for your masters, so that it would be an easier sell to this political appointment?

8) Why were you down in San Diego, actively involved with the "Brinker" decision?  Was this another example of you on your knees, trying to please your masters?  Did the taxpayers pay for your flight from Nor Cal to San Diego?  What was the excuse/justification for the taxpayers to take in the shorts for your jaunt?

9) What was that stunt you tried to pull with Wal Mart?  Didn't you want to save them $60,000,000.00+ by knee-capping the lawsuit against them concerning the statute of limitations regarding meal & rest periods?  Is Wal Mart also one of your masters, or do you drop to your knees for any big corporation?

10) Other than living on your knees to please your masters, explain in detail how your public service benefits Californians overall, or do you just take up space to please elite millionaires and employers?

This clown has been a disaster for public service since DAY 1.  If he is confirmed by the senate, then  it will be a dark day for all Californians earning less than $125,000.00 per year.

DLSE press release: division bends over forassists Wal-Mart by having them pay a petty fine, then is dumb enough to broadcast it

Someone commented that Wal-Mart got their very own Wal-Mart discount at DLSE. Who says that this administration is in bed with corporate interests? By my math, 50,000 victims equals a $5,000,000 citation (under the Labor Code). Would $198,000 citation be considered a bargain, as compared to $5,000,000? That's (not even) 4 cents on the dollar! Here's the Labor Commissioner's press release: I'd say she's doing exactly what Robert Jones was doing (click bluelink to jump to press release).

Here's some more of that press release:“On behalf of the 50,000 workers who were inadvertently underpaid overtime and other wages, we are pleased with this settlement,” said California Labor Commissioner Angela Bradstreet. (Blogger's note: "inadvertantly"?? WTF? Officer, I didn't rob the bank, I inadvertantly received a withdrawal. Funny how these financial accounting "accidents" always benefit the employer...what a fcuking coincidence).

“We are ensuring that the workers are completely compensated what is owed to them in overtime and interest, and that penalties are provided for.” "As always, our goal is to encourage voluntary compliance with California labor laws," Bradstreet added. "By its actions in this case, Wal-Mart has set a positive example for other employers who may be out of compliance because it illustrates how they can work with us to properly compensate workers as well as meet legal requirements." Blogger's note: "...and that penalties are provided for"? WTF does that mean? That the DLSE is providing Wal-Mart with penalties, or that the DLSE is ensuring that penalties are provided for Wal-Mart? I don't get it, but then again, I'm no dipshit lawyer that states a confusing sentence, then ends it with a preposition.