You are here
Labor Peace Through Unethical Conduct
Sunday, March 1st, 2009
Robert Wechsler
Rarely does an ethics commission get a clear chance to show it has no
favoritism. The Nevada Commission on Ethics will soon get that chance.
The Nevada senator who raised a legislative immunity defense last year against the commission was accused of a conflict of interest due to his position as president of the Las Vegas chapter of Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC), a nonunion contractors association.
Now an ethics complaint has been filed against a Las Vegas council member due to his position as president of the Southern Nevada Building and Construction Trades Council, a union organization in the very same industry as the state senator.
According to an article this week in the Las Vegas Sun, the council member has voted on three development projects benefiting union labor. The council member has attacked the complaint as a “brazen political stunt.”
Often this is true, but there happens to be a Cassandra in this story, and she is played by none other than a member of the Nevada Commission on Ethics, who said two years ago, after the commission cleared the council member to keep his union position, “I’ll guarantee you, you’ll be back here in front of us, whether you like it or not.” The then commission chair said that the council member would be “walking a field of land mines” and that, according to another Las Vegas Sun article, "if he were to find himself before the body again, the ethics commission would not look kindly on him."
Yes, the commission allowed the council member to keep his union position, but it recommended that he drop it because he "would have to abstain so often that his constituents would be deprived of their voices."
Well, not only did he not abstain, he didn't even disclose his conflict. Until last week. Here's the scene at the council meeting on February 18:
His vote was, by the way, completely unnecessary. He just wanted to be a hero. And despite the fact that the state ethics commission had told him that such a vote would involve a conflict, the city attorney told him otherwise, arguing that the project had not “gone to contract” or received final approval. That's a new argument to me. Recusal involves withdrawal from every stage of a deal, not just the final approval.
Most likely, the city attorney will now spend city money defending the council member before the state ethics commission, possibly even raising a legislative immunity defense. And when the council member loses the case or guts the ethics commission's jurisdiction over local government legislators, the city attorney will just have done his job.
What's nice is that the state senator who heads the anti-union contractors association is a big defender of the labor leader's insistence on voting on big building projects. They both put using one's legislative position to help one's employer ahead of their concerns about using or not using union labor. Perhaps unethical conduct is the secret to labor peace.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
The Nevada senator who raised a legislative immunity defense last year against the commission was accused of a conflict of interest due to his position as president of the Las Vegas chapter of Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC), a nonunion contractors association.
Now an ethics complaint has been filed against a Las Vegas council member due to his position as president of the Southern Nevada Building and Construction Trades Council, a union organization in the very same industry as the state senator.
According to an article this week in the Las Vegas Sun, the council member has voted on three development projects benefiting union labor. The council member has attacked the complaint as a “brazen political stunt.”
Often this is true, but there happens to be a Cassandra in this story, and she is played by none other than a member of the Nevada Commission on Ethics, who said two years ago, after the commission cleared the council member to keep his union position, “I’ll guarantee you, you’ll be back here in front of us, whether you like it or not.” The then commission chair said that the council member would be “walking a field of land mines” and that, according to another Las Vegas Sun article, "if he were to find himself before the body again, the ethics commission would not look kindly on him."
Yes, the commission allowed the council member to keep his union position, but it recommended that he drop it because he "would have to abstain so often that his constituents would be deprived of their voices."
Well, not only did he not abstain, he didn't even disclose his conflict. Until last week. Here's the scene at the council meeting on February 18:
More than 300 unemployed laborers — members of the building trades’ largest affiliate — packed the city council chambers to support construction of a city hall, a $150-million-to-$267-million project that would put them all back to work. And Ross, as a city councilman, was in a position to make that happen.
But he knew that voting on the project
would be flirting with a
conflict of interest. So, for the record, he disclosed to everyone in
attendance what they already knew: his union leadership job. He noted
that he had sought the advice of the city attorney, who, in turn,
quickly cleared him to vote. The union crowd erupted with applause.
His vote was, by the way, completely unnecessary. He just wanted to be a hero. And despite the fact that the state ethics commission had told him that such a vote would involve a conflict, the city attorney told him otherwise, arguing that the project had not “gone to contract” or received final approval. That's a new argument to me. Recusal involves withdrawal from every stage of a deal, not just the final approval.
Most likely, the city attorney will now spend city money defending the council member before the state ethics commission, possibly even raising a legislative immunity defense. And when the council member loses the case or guts the ethics commission's jurisdiction over local government legislators, the city attorney will just have done his job.
What's nice is that the state senator who heads the anti-union contractors association is a big defender of the labor leader's insistence on voting on big building projects. They both put using one's legislative position to help one's employer ahead of their concerns about using or not using union labor. Perhaps unethical conduct is the secret to labor peace.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Story Topics:
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
