You're watching...
BGR Group chairman Ed Rogers argues Thomas Perez isn’t the right person to head the Labor Department.
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
Our next guest says the nomination -- Thomas Peres's labour secretary of the president has.
No interest in working with the private sector to -- -- extremely crucial jobs in this economy Ed Rogers is a former deputy assistant to the first President -- and and it baucus and I'll talk about anything on immigration issue because he took that opportunity obvious that this was planned by the White House mr.
-- -- -- Two to show the Spanish speaking population of this country that he cares about this issue this -- got to point to the immigration.
Debate that is encompassing Washington.
Are right now your -- Well what does America need need more than anything else that needs.
Robust economic growth and then aggressive job creation.
There's nothing about his background that would suggest he can make much -- -- intellectual or energetic contribution toward.
The -- robust economy economic growth or job creation I think he probably.
Indicated one of his principal our show to -- this principle qualifications.
For getting the job was that he spoke Spanish.
But in fact he -- spent a year he has spent a career either in government or as a civil rights lawyer -- academic.
And nothing about his background suggest.
That he is ever hired anyone that he's ever worked in the private sector workshops are gonna come from OK and so perhaps the he has been put in the cabinet for some.
-- -- -- reasons but it's a disappointment it's a disappointment that.
The labor secretary obviously isn't going to be part of an economic team that is charged with.
Job growth economic growth.
Ed can even more specific about the holes in his resume is you put it and then that you -- -- actual labor secretary.
Well he's coming from the Justice Department where was -- a civil rights division.
And that would suggest he's probably better suited as a regulator.
Where he is in the business of handling grievances.
And so if he takes that.
It takes an experience that Labor Department what's -- gonna do he's gonna be inclined to.
Listen to grievances that people have about.
The private sector or about their employer or the union allies were the first group of people that he did -- he mentioned he went on to say Republicans but he pointed out.
Our allies in the unions and so.
Is that is that Labor Department just there to be a giant complete management department for the labor unions -- again.
-- that you don't think that he's not going to take the stand for that I'm sorry but this is this is what I kind of soft.
When he was at the White House has not speaking he's not gonna try and bring down the unemployment rate in this nation.
By bringing ending giving temporary visas if you will to to migrant workers to fill those lower wage jobs that frankly many businesses say that they have a hard time spelling.
That that as a way to get a better benefits the president's benefits have -- -- -- that's a.
He said the reason was chosen for this position.
It certainly could be in that would ring true -- I don't know what kind of charger mandate he's gotten from the White House and again whether or not the Labor Department is in a position by fiat.
To rate waive some of the deal were these requirements and get some of this workers in the skilled workers in here that we need to do specific jobs and so.
What role he'll play overall in an immigration reform initiative in that context.
Remains to be seen.
But again.
You would think.
That ground zero the bull's eye of the problem in America is job growth that you -- -- labor secretary to be part of your economic team.
He seems to be more.
It's better -- be part of a regulatory.
Regime.
Rather than an economic.
Are at what -- picky very much for for joining me up for the breaking news as we see the president nominate one -- good as far as.
To be that is secretary labels have a confirmation process goes as well at thank you very much.
Thank you we.
