Home » Community Networks »Competition »Frontier »Public Policy & Gov't »Rural Broadband » Currently Reading:

Frontier Fires West Virginia’s Senate President After He Refused to Block Pro-Competition Bill

Phillip Dampier June 6, 2017 Community Networks, Competition, Frontier, Public Policy & Gov't, Rural Broadband 3 Comments

Frontier is the dominant phone company in West Virginia.

Frontier Communications terminated the employment of West Virginia Senate president Mitch Carmichael just weeks after he refused to kill a pro-competitive state broadband expansion bill the company fiercely opposed.

Carmichael (R-Jackson), worked for Frontier for six years, most recently as a sales executive. Shortly after voting in favor of a bill making it easier for public broadband co-ops to deliver better broadband service in West Virginia, he was suddenly given two weeks notice his employment was being terminated.

Frontier refused to comment about its sudden decision to eliminate Carmichael’s job, but there is speculation the company was unhappy with Carmichael’s unwillingness to act on their behalf in the state legislature. Carmichael told the Charleston Gazette his dismissal came as a complete surprise, and he was not aware of any other layoffs in recent weeks.

“This was not something I wanted at all,” Carmichael told the newspaper. “They had a bad year, from a legislative perspective. They severed ties from me. 

Carmichael also noted Frontier was insistent on getting him to sign a nondisclosure agreement that would forbid him from talking about his job being terminated. He claims he refused to sign it.

The newspaper calls Carmichael Frontier’s most powerful ally in the state legislature. As Senate president, Carmichael was instrumental in killing a 2016 bill that would have launched a statewide municipal broadband network that Frontier never wanted to see get off the ground. Carmichael argued the competing network would have discouraged Frontier from investing in or expanding its own network, largely acquired from Verizon Communications in 2010. The bill died in the House of Delegates.

Carmichael

But as West Virginians continue to endure poor quality DSL service from Frontier and the company continues to experience financial pressures from its declining stock price and increasing investor discontent, it seemed unlikely Frontier would embark on dramatic new spending to boost internet speeds. This year, legislators proposed allowing up to 20 families or businesses to form nonprofit co-ops to offer internet service where Frontier and other providers have failed to expand service. The bill also permits up to three cities or counties to join forces and jointly construct new public broadband networks.

Frontier’s lobbyists loathed the bill, worrying about the prospects of facing new competition. The company devoted significant attention to block the bill in the legislature, but was apparently surprised when Carmichael refused to repeat his 2016 objections and recused himself from debate on the bill, and later voted for it. A short time later, his job was gone.

Whether Frontier assumed Carmichael’s primary loyalty should lay with the company and not the public that elected him to office isn’t known. Ironically, Carmichael tried to leave Frontier last summer after accepting a job with Frontier rival Citynet. Frontier offered a lucrative pay increase to convince Carmichael to change his mind. Ultimately, Carmichael returned to Frontier days later last August after he said the company begged him to stay.

Carmichael makes it clear he wasn’t in office just to represent Frontier’s political and corporate interests.

“The one thing I’m not going to do here as Senate president is advance special interests,” Carmichael told the newspaper. “It was obvious the body [Legislature] wanted that bill, and I wasn’t going to stand in the way of it.”

0 0 votes
Article Rating
3 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Josh
Josh
6 years ago

LOL! Corporations are just hilariously brazen.

We are so far gone.

No One Important
No One Important
6 years ago

“Whether Frontier assumed Carmichael’s primary loyalty should lay with the company and not the public that elected him to office isn’t known”….. Here’s the real answer from Frontier’s Code of Conduct……”Avoiding Conflicts of Interest We all have a responsibility to do what’s right—for ourselves, for our stakeholders, and for our Company. Sometimes what seems right for us is not right for the Company and our stakeholders. This is called a conflict of interest. When this happens, we must always choose the best interests of Frontier.” Even though Frontier frames his dismissal as a “reduction in force”, the actions here say… Read more »

Lee
Lee
6 years ago

He should not discuss, debate, or vote on any legislation that impacts Frontier or its competitors. Frontier can sick their conflict of interest clause where the sun don’t shine. The states conflict of interest clause supersedes Frontier’s. At least he was not a total shill for Frontier.

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

Your Account:

Stop the Cap!