August 1, 2008
RI Courts and Attorney General: Taking "A Second Chance" to a New Level
The passage of twenty four hours has conferred no perspective on or fathomability into this:
The state courts plan to keep doing business with two cleaning companies that the Carcieri administration fired last week after 31 of their custodians were arrested as suspected illegal immigrants.And Attorney General Patrick C. Lynch is also sticking with the one custodian he has left, even though the worker's boss and the president of the company has admitted to ignoring a federal law to keep certain documents on his employees.
In other words, two of the institutions charged with administering our laws and prosecuting crime propose to reward two companies which not only broke the law but broke the law within the physical boundaries of those institutions.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again:
http://PatrickLynchSucks.com
Posted by: Citizen Critic at August 1, 2008 6:13 PMWhy doesn't the AG hire the custodian as a private contractor and pay him on a 1099?This is precisely what the "advocates" were warning about,but guess what- a legal alien worker is being screwed and shouldn't be.He didn't do anything wrong and apparently does a good job.Just cut out his boss.Is that so hard?They're all lawyers there for crissakes.And I for one,like Patrick Lynch even if he isn't right all the time.Who is?
Posted by: joe bernstein at August 1, 2008 7:18 PM"Why doesn't the AG hire the custodian as a private contractor and pay him on a 1099?"
Funny, JoeB, Will Ricci said something similar: what is the mark up, what is the difference between how much the state will be paying this company and how much the company is paying their one employee?
In other words, how much is it costing the state for the Attorney General to pander to a possibly mythical constituency?
Posted by: Monique at August 1, 2008 11:19 PMOne more reason that Lynch will never be able to run for Governor.
Posted by: Anthony at August 1, 2008 11:29 PMA company that I worked at for 27 years hired outside contractors for security. Over those years the companies supplying the security changed, however there were a few people who nevered changed. Simply, when a new contract was awarded it contained the provision that certain individuals would be retained in their respective positons. I don't recall there ever being a problem with the request
Posted by: bobc at August 2, 2008 9:50 PM