Days after losing a labor dispute with Gov. Phil Scott’s administration, the union representing state employees is seeking to block confirmation of the governor’s newest appointee to the state Labor Relations Board
Ahead of Senate confirmation proceedings, the union is questioning Karen O’Neill’s neutrality on labor matters, citing her long career in corporate management and work with a law firm representing management in labor disputes.
“Stop the confirmation of O’Neill!” the union posted to its Facebook page Friday. The campaign, which included distribution of a handbill and urgings to members to call their senators about the matter, was launched in advance of a vote expected next week in the Senate Economic Development Committee on whether to recommend O’Neill’s confirmation to the full chamber.
It followed her crucial vote to impose the state’s last best offer in recent contract negotiations, putting in place a contract that the union complains includes meager pay raises and cuts to health coverage.
The six-member Labor Relations Board is set up to have a balance of members from labor, management and neutral backgrounds. An opening for a neutral member was advertised in December, and Scott on Feb. 26 appointed O’Neill to the post.
Union leaders say they didn’t learn of the appointment until nearly a month later, when, with a Labor Board decision on their contract pending, Scott administration officials asked board member Alan Willard to step aside from hearing the case because of a conflict — he’s covered by the state employee health insurance plan.
“So after this Board member recuses himself, who steps in to fill the ‘neutral’ seat? That’s right, Karen O’Neill,” the union said in its Facebook post.
The VSEA points to the O’Neill’s career as a corporate executive, including work in human resources in companies with labor unions, and her work for Gravel & Shea, a Burlington law firm that says on its website that it “limits its practice to the exclusive representation of management in all aspects of the employment relationship.” She is now retired.
According to her biography on the Labor Board’s website, O’Neill did stints as vice president both at Vermont’s largest electric distribution utility, Green Mountain Power Corp., and the Vermont Electric Power Co., which manages the state’s high-voltage bulk power transmission system.
At GMP, she rose to vice president for organizational development and human resources. Workers at GMP are represented by Local 300 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. A key part of a human resources executive’s job is to represent management in labor negotiations with unions.
Gravel & Shea, where O’Neill also held a senior position, says on its website: “In both the public and private sectors, we have successfully defeated union organizing drives. We also have extensive experience in negotiating union contracts and resolving unfair labor practice charges before both the” Vermont Labor Relations Board and National Labor Relations Board.
Scott’s spokesperson, Rebecca Kelley, defended O’Neill’s appointment in an email, saying her name was among the candidates recommended to Scott by a panel set up to vet potential nominees to seats on the board.
“Part of their (the Labor Board Review Panel’s) outreach in seeking candidates for these positions includes outreach to labor organizations and employers,” Kelley said.
VSEA Executive Director Steve Howard said the union was not consulted about O’Neill’s appointment, and that he was skeptical about the notion of the administration’s supposed outreach.
Kelley added that state law “outlines qualifications of the nominees put forward by this panel, so it is clear she is highly qualified and meets these rigorous criteria. We trust the Senate will review her qualifications and come to the same conclusion as the Governor and the independent nominating panel, which voted unanimously to forward her name to the Governor.”
O’Neill said in an email Friday evening that in its handbill urging senators to block her nomination, the VSEA “provides an incomplete and misleading picture of me as a professional and a person.”
“I applied for this position because I want to serve Vermont in my retirement and because I believe my knowledge, experience and judgement will enable me to do a good job, including being fair and impartial in all matters coming before the board,” O’Neill said.
“I understand the VSEA is unhappy with the judgement I made in this case. One party always is when a decision has to be rendered in the absence of settlement,” she said. “But I strongly disagree with their suggestion based on that decision that I am not qualified to serve as a neutral because I can’t ‘be reasonably considered to be able to serve as an impartial individual.’”
