Buddy Finch, who said he was fired in retaliation for his effort to root out government waste and abuse, wants a judge to put him back in charge of the NCDOT Ferry Division - and to shield him from political meddling.
In a wrongful termination lawsuit filed this week in Wake Superior Court, Finch asks to be reinstated with back pay. A retired 30-year Coast Guard veteran, he was fired in June after 55 days as state ferry director.
Finch’s attorney, John C. Hunter of Asheville, said the state’s whistleblower law gives judges broad powers to reinstate and protect government workers who suffer illegal retaliation for their efforts to clean up abuses.
“We're asking that they not interfere with his ability to deal with the various problems he found and he reported,” Hunter said. “We're asking the court to keep a continuing role there, if necessary.”
In his lawsuit, Finch says he was thwarted repeatedly in efforts to limit the duties of some ferry workers, and to assign new responsibilities to others.
He says Stan White, a politically connected Nags Head developer who serves on the state Board of Transportation, exercised undue influence on behalf of ferry officials Jed Dixon and Charlie Fearing.
And he says White received inside information from two DOT employees who worked for Finch in Morehead City and for Westmoreland in Raleigh.
Bruce Siceloff reports on traffic and transportation. A News & Observer reporter, editor and blogger since 1976, he took over the
Comments
Re: waste fraud a corruption within the entire structure of ncdo
Fri, 09/24/2010 - 02:03 — beachbum3i am 100 % agreement with mr finch the politician need to quit portecting the states contractors an the special instrest in this state an allowed decaited employees to be able to perform the dutys of their jobs decription without being an having to live in constant fear of a state politician being able to put an end to their careers just becaues the politican has taken a campaign contrubtion from some business to by influence to stop state personnel from beiing able to carry out the dutys an functions of their jobs dutys to the benfite of the taxpaying citizens of this state an not protecting some coporate business enity. that ends up allowing the state contractor to get away with providing the state taxpayers a sorrier qulity of work /service that they should an could be getting other wise with out the interferrence of some state politican protecting big business instrest. theythemslves are supposly to be looking out for an protecting ths instrest fot ehstates taxpayers just as are all state hired personnel. thank you