Roy Harris, CFO.com | US
November 8, 2007

Dismayed, but not dissuaded

I do think that Mr. Welch's expertise was helpful & hurtful. I also think there was a lot of sympathy for this small local bank. Not really the David & Goliath story. Still, that does not mean I am not supportive of Mr. Welch's plight. I certainly pray for his successful fight.

That said, I am not terribly mystified by the DoL's position. First, there is a common misconception that laws such as SOX are for "our" good (i.e. the average Joe). Never been true, never will be true. Where politicians are involved, there are always myriad hidden agendas. While appearing to be an avenue for resolving unjust workplace issues (let alone GAAP or other 'public policy"); the real cause is to make sure that the Public BELIEVES there is justice in the justice system - of which ALJs are a small part. That is, politicians, who by the way are mostly attorneys, contrive laws in such a way to give an appearance, when the reality is that most laws of these type are meant to bleed the Complainant slowly and convince them to give up before they give out. That way, the Respondant can say, "Look, there was no merit. Just as we were ready to blah, blah, blah; the Plaintiff realized they had no case."

Of course DoL is pleased. Most States have some form of at-will doctrine firmly established since the late 1880's when the servant-master concept was thrown out by the Supreme Court. To allow even one publically successful SOX test case, no matter how narrowly construed, WOULD open the door for both more cases and more successes - something the DoL and American business claims they can ill-afford. That begs the question: "So, American Business, it's business as usual, and reporting fraud, waste and other activities is a cost of doing business to be passed on the Consumers...right?"

In my situation, I have just gotten on the path of a SOX complaint - having filed with OSHA (isn't that strange how the SEC pawned that off to an unrelated Agency); as well as, unique to my case, filing with MSHA (Mine Safety and Health Administration) and the Railiroad Commission of Texas. That is because my last employer, a particularly egregious supporter of plausable deniability and master of internal ethics and compliance standards which they never really intended to follow, fired me last month "for cause". Their "cause" was manufactured from a 6 months smear campaign, full of cut 'n' paste non-sequitures, harrassment and retaliation.
However, the reason I am able to file across mutliple agencies is that this company is still a regulated utility (Railroad Commission), that has open-pit coal mining (hence MSHA), and just completed an LBO with a $450 million dollar pay out to the departing CEO and his top three looneys.

The other difference between myself and Mr. Welch is that what I uncovered (which led to my termination), was both accidental and incidental to my formal job title and duties. As the Company's Code of Conduct" specifically stated, I or any other employee was to bring to management's attention "anything" suspicious. Well, there was plenty of suspicious or illegal activity - including an unreported 5,000 gallon diesel spill near a wetlands area. My primary mistake was not knowing that the Mine Manager (newly appointed, but with no previous management experience), and to whom I reported these issues; was the ex-college roommate and certified best buddy of the SVP for the whole division. So there is the motive: real action would have brought down one whole leg of a 10,000 person organization and sabotaged the LBO worth billons. Not much of a stretch...throw the Complainant under the bus or do the real right things?

We'll see. The Company has made their first positive response since my termination - just as the inquiries, and my surprise Small Claims actions hit the Execs' desks this week. Good luck to all of us who are true Leaders and always want to do the right things right away.

Posted by Bruce Ades | Nov 14, 2007 1:48 PM ET