[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Obama Wars Title: Two more Census workers blow the whistle Two more Census workers blow the whistle Last Updated: 1:23 AM, May 25, 2010 Posted: 12:42 AM, May 25, 2010 John Crudele You know the old saying: "Everyone loves a charade." Well, it seems that the Census Bureau may be playing games. Last week, one of the millions of workers hired by Census 2010 to parade around the country counting Americans blew the whistle on some statistical tricks. The worker, Naomi Cohn, told The Post that she was hired and fired a number of times by Census. Each time she was hired back, it seems, Census was able to report the creation of a new job to the Labor Department. Below, I have a couple more readers who worked for Census 2010 and have tales to tell. But first, this much we know. Each month Census gives Labor a figure on the number of workers it has hired. That figure goes into the closely followed monthly employment report Labor provides. For the past two months the hiring by Census has made up a good portion of the new jobs. Labor doesn't check the Census hiring figure or whether the jobs are actually new or recycled. It considers a new job to have been created if someone is hired to work at least one hour a month. One hour! A month! So, if a worker is terminated after only one hour and another is hired in her place, then a second new job can apparently be reported to Labor . (I've been unable to get Census to explain this to me.) Here's a note from a Census worker -- this one from Manhattan: "John: I am on my fourth rehire with the 2010 Census. "I have been hired, trained for a week, given a few hours of work, then laid off. So my unemployed self now counts for four new jobs. "I have been paid more to train all four times than I have been paid to actually produce results. These are my tax dollars and your tax dollars at work. "A few months ago I was trained for three days and offered five hours of work counting the homeless. Now, I am knocking (on) doors trying to find the people that have not returned their Census forms. I worked the 2000 Census. It was a far more organized venture. "Have to run and meet my crew leader, even though with this rain I did not work today. So I can put in a pay sheet for the hour or hour and a half this meeting will take. Sincerely, C.M." And here's another: "John: I worked for (Census) and I was paid $18.75 (an hour) just like Ms. Naomi Cohn from your article. "I worked for about six weeks or so and I picked the hours I wanted to work. I was checking the work of others. While I was classifying addresses, another junior supervisor was checking my work. "In short, we had a "checkers checking checkers" quality control. I was eventually let go and was told all the work was finished when, in fact, other people were being trained for the same assignment(s). "I was re-hired about eight months later and was informed that I would have to go through one week of additional training. "On the third day of training, I got sick and visited my doctor. I called my supervisor and asked how I can make up the class. She informed me that I was 'terminated.' She elaborated that she had to terminate three other people for being five minutes late to class. "I did get two days' pay and I am sure the 'late people' got paid also. I think you would concur that this is an expensive way to attempt to control sickness plus lateness. I am totally convinced that the Census work could be very easily done by the US Postal Service. "When I was trying to look for an address or had a question about a building, I would ask the postman on the beat. They knew the history of the route and can expand in detail who moved in or out etc. I have found it interesting that if someone works one hour, they are included in the labor statistics as a new job being full. "I am not surprised that you can't get any answers from Census staff; I found there were very few people who knew the big picture. M.G." When I received my Census form in the mail, I filled it out. Nobody had to knock on my door. I answered truthfully about the number of people living in my household. But I could have just as easily dou bled the number. Why not? Didn't Census ad vertisements imply that my community would get more federal money if the popula tion were larger? I'm glad people are finding work with the Census. For some it's the only work they have had this year and the chump change they are making for a few hours' work is a godsend. But wasting taxpayers' money on busywork isn't going to do much for the economy. john.crudele@nypost.com #ixzz0oxZFZznJ
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Badeye (#0)
(Edited)
Chuckles...Crudale is clueless and anyone promoting this as "fact" is as well. It does, on the other hand, underscore a gross misunderstanding of how employment is calculated.
#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace
|
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|