When you are looking for a job there are a couple of ways to do it. Probably the most common way it to work up a resume and start sending it to every possible vacant position posting you can find. This is called the shotgun method. I don’t know what the success rate is for the shotgun method; you would have to check with professional employment agencies and human relations folks for that.
Another method for looking for work is called networking. This seems to be a more successful method. This is where you meet folks of like mind and profession in various venues, strike up a conversation. Pretty soon you find that you have mutual interests and talents. There may or may not be a resume involved but a professional relationship is established, phone numbers, and email addresses are exchanged.
An extension of the networking method is what I call “Super Networking.” That is where you take a job as a government regulator, investigator, or presidential advisor and start making contacts or renewing contacts in the professional world. That seems to be the method that the OWH’s appointees employ. There has been a fairly steady turnover of personnel in the Executive Branch; and no, these folks are not leaving to spend more time with their families.
The Washington Post published an article this morning about numerous Executive Branch officials who have departed their $200k jobs for $400k+ jobs in the private sector. These folks include several Justice Department lawyers who have left to go to work at prestigious New York and Washington law firms and SEC and banking regulators who have gone to work at such financial institutions as Goldman Sachs and Citibank.
Technically, if a banking regulator is working on a case involving, say, Citibank they cannot go to work for Citibank for one to two years. However, that seems to be a matter of guidelines instead of a hard and fast rule, especially as you climb the government ladder.
These folks seem to have one trait in common, aggressiveness. When you look at the take-over of much of our culture by Executive Branch dictates it is only reasonable that the people the OWH hires to effect these “changes” have to be aggressive. This is what top corporate managers want in their penthouse offices.
However, the obvious question here is what kind of oversight is being conducted by these government employees before they leave government service? Where is the oversight of these overseers? Can we really depend on the OWH’s hirelings to do the job they were hired to do, or did they just come into government service for a couple of years to bolster their resume and conduct a little “Super Networking?”
I do not think this situation calls for congressional hearings. That seems to be the usual course of action. When someone does something questionable let’s hold a hearing. It seems to me that there are flagrant violations going on and criminal investigations should be conducted by the FBI. Of course, I’m just an American citizen and of little consequence to the OWH.
As always, I welcome your comments and discussion.