- FedSmith.com Blogs -

Tags:

How Federal Employees See Themselves (And Are Seen): Part Two

by Steve Oppermann |

I noted in part one of this
article
that, in my view, Federal employee misconduct has been in the news all
too often in recent years. Accordingly,
I have, in tribute to The Rocky and Bullwinkle Show (not the movie), subtitled
part two of the article The Federal
Agency Follies
or Employees and
Pornography:  A Match Made in
Public Relations Hell.

I’ll start in 2008, when the Department of the Interior’s inspector general (IG) found that the Minerals
Management Service (MMS) was in bed, sometimes not just figuratively speaking,
with the oil and gas industry that it theoretically regulated. 

If that wasn’t enough of a blow to
the agency’s reputation, MMS has been accused of facilitating the British
Petroleum oil spill   According
to a Reuters article on May 18, a lawsuit filed by the Sierra Club and the Gulf
Restoration Network alleges that MMS granted a waiver, setting aside
requirements for documentation outlining what companies would do if a
“worst-case scenario” spill were to happen. The lawsuit charged that
the documentation is required by law before exploratory offshore drilling is
approved. The waiver, which was
given in 2008 and is valid through 2013, exempts oil companies that drill in
the Gulf of Mexico from disclosing blowout scenarios and response plans.   

And while Wall Street was burning, torching the investment
accounts and retirement hopes of millions of “Main Street” Americans, at least
28 employees of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and five
contractors were fiddling with pornographic websites on their government
computers. Ed O’Keefe’s Washington
Post column, “Federal Eye – Keeping Tabs on the Government,” recently pointed
out that, according to SEC IG H. David Kotz, staffers
in the financial watchdog agency accessed pornographic websites and images by
using popular search engines and by successfully disabling Internet filters on
their computers. The IG reported
that several of the alleged miscreants held senior positions, earning up to
$222,418 per year! 

The O’Keefe columns went on to
note that none of the employees had been fired, according to the
SEC. Eight
of them resigned and six were suspended for periods lasting from one to 14
days, Mr. Kotz said in a letter to U.S. Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa).  Five were issued formal reprimands, six
received informal counseling or warning letters, and three were facing unspecified
disciplinary action at the time of the article. 

In a related development reported
by O’Keefe, Grassley’s office also distributed a whistleblower complaint sent
to his office regarding an assistant regional director at the SEC’s Los Angeles
office who received nearly 1,800 access denials for pornography during a
two-week period.  I can’t help but
wonder what the SEC official might have accomplished if he had approached his
actual job responsibilities with that level of diligence. 

A senior attorney at SEC
headquarters in Washington admitted he sometimes spent as much as eight hours
viewing pornography from his office computer, according to the report. The attorney’s computer ran out of
space for the downloaded images, so he started storing them on CDs and DVDs
that he kept in his office. And a
staff accountant had more than 600 pornographic images stored on her laptop’s
hard drive, according to the IG’s report. 

While such misconduct cases often
make for entertaining reading, they can have serious consequences with regard
to agency mission and funding. For
example, on May 20, 2010, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar signed a
secretarial order reassigning the responsibilities of the Minerals Management
Service to a new Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Bureau of Safety and
Environmental Enforcement, and Office of Natural Resources Revenue.

Meanwhile, back at the Securities
and Exchange Commission, Mr. O’Keefe quoted U.S. Representative Darrell Issa (R-California),
ranking Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, as
saying it was “nothing short of disturbing that high-ranking officials within
the SEC were spending more time looking at pornography than taking action to
help stave off the events that brought our nation’s economy to the brink of
collapse. This stunning report
should make everyone question the wisdom of moving forward with plans to give
regulators like the SEC even more widespread authority.”

The behavior exposed (no pun
intended) in the SEC IG’s report violates government ethics rules, but
misconduct in which Federal employees access pornography while at work is
nothing new, to wit: 

  • A senior executive at the
    National Science Foundation spent at least 331 days looking at pornography on
    his government computer and chatting online with nude or partially clad women
    without being detected. The
    problems reportedly were so pervasive they diverted the agency’s watchdog from
    its main mission. 
  • National Park Service employee
    John A. Latschar, who oversaw the Gettysburg National Military Park, used his
    office computer to search for and view more than 3,400 sexually explicit images
    over a two-year period. He was
    later reassigned to an unspecified desk job. 

And the Huffington Post published a
July 23, 2010, Ann Flaherty piece titled Pentagon Child Porn Scandal: Security Agencies Were Left at Risk,
Investigators Say. According to
the article:

“A major federal investigation has found that dozens of military officials
and defense contractors, including some with top-level security clearances,
allegedly bought and downloaded child pornography on private or government
computers.

The
Pentagon…released investigative reports spanning almost a decade that
implicated individuals working with agencies handling some of the nation’s most
closely guarded secrets, including the National Security Agency and the
National Reconnaissance Office, which operates U.S. spy satellites.

Defense workers
who purchased child porn put the Department of Defense, ‘the military and
national security at risk by compromising computer systems, military
installations and security clearances,’ a 2007 investigative report said.

The suspects also
put the Defense Department ‘at risk of blackmail, bribery, and threats,’ one
report added…

Several suspects
were convicted and sentenced to prison terms of up to about five years and ordered
to pay hefty fines – including one of $150,000. But several suspects identified by investigators were never
prosecuted.

In a Virginia
case, a contractor working for the National Security Agency was indicted on
child pornography charges but fled the country and is believed to be hiding in
Libya.

According to
federal investigators, a computer repair shop had alerted the police after
finding ‘thousands of possible child pornography images’ on a hard drive
brought in by a man who worked for the Naval Air Warfare Center in China Lake,
California. The suspect died of
pulmonary disease in 2009 before he could be charged, a report said…”

Having spent many years in the
Employee Relations business, I understand that each allegation of misconduct
has to be handled on its own merits, including an analysis of the Douglas
Factors – as enunciated by the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) in
the landmark 1981 case, Curtis Douglas v. Veterans Administration -and that the Privacy Act imposes major limits on
the information that can be disclosed about the action an agency takes against
an employee. 

However, many agencies provide for harsher than normal
penalties when the offense involves accessing pornographic websites from
employees’ government computers. For example, the Table of Penalties for the U.S. Department of the
Interior (DOI) recommends a range of penalties from Written Reprimand to 5-Day
Suspension for a first offense involving “Misuse of the Internet in violation
of the DOI Internet Use Policy…; misuse of electronic mail; visiting websites
or downloading material from the Internet during duty time for non-official
use; Sending electronic mail for unauthorized purposes.”  But there is a special note under “First
Offense” which reads as follows: “Persons
who send or download obscene or sexually related materials over the e-mail or
visit obscene websites may be subject to harsher penalties for a first offense,
including removal.”

Accordingly, my contention is
that, even if it was a first offense, an agency could make a compelling case for
removal of a management official who was found to be viewing pornography repeatedly
from his/her government computer. Examples
might include the executive who was surfing porn sites while being paid $222K a
year to do his job, the assistant regional director who allegedly made 1,800
attempts to access pornographic websites over a two-week period (an average of
180 attempts per work day, if my math is correct), and the senior attorney who
admitted spending up to eight hours a day viewing pornography from his
government computer. In the latter
case, I guess it could have been worse – the employee could have claimed
overtime for the hours spent indulging in his “hobby.”

I’m not making moral judgments
here, except in very limited circumstances. For example, Cornell University’s website notes that “Child
pornography, material that depicts minors in a sexually explicit way, is
illegal.” The site avers that “Knowingly uploading or
downloading child pornography is a federal offense,” and that
“Under
the federal child pornography statute (18 USC section 2252), anyone under the
age of 18 is a minor.”  Thus, if a Federal employee is charged with downloading child
pornography, even from his/her home computer during non-duty time, the chances
are excellent that the agency will propose removal of that employee for the
off-duty misconduct, and that the usual requirement to establish “nexus,”
meaning the connection between the off-duty offense and the employee’s
responsibilities at work, will not come into play. And if you work in a regulatory agency, it is probably wise to avoid sleeping with any of the employees from the regulated industry, even
on your own time.

As for viewing pornography that
does not involve children and is not otherwise illegal, can it really be so
burdensome to simply ask employees to do that from their own personal computers
and while they are not on the clock?

When these lurid cases come to
light, it is easy to forget that only a tiny fraction of employees engage in
misconduct. Based on my long experience, as an employee and as a consultant, I believe the Federal workforce is a tremendous asset to our nation – highly educated, extremely competent, and
dedicated to carrying out agency missions and functions, often despite an
environment in which the agency’s top political appointees are barely around
long enough to articulate an agenda, much less to see it implemented. 

Unfortunately, every time allegations of misconduct are significant enough to hit the newspapers, the air waves
and/or the Internet, the image of all Federal employees is tarnished, however
unfairly. And when members of the public read about what appears to be minimal discipline, or none, for egregious offenses, such as accessing porn sites with government computers or viewing
child pornography from any computer, they have to be rolling their eyes,
shaking their heads and wondering how Federal agencies could be failing to take
effective action against these offenders.

I don’t think the importance of
public confidence in Federal agencies can be overstated. I’m old enough to remember when much of the American public thought highly of the Federal Government. Growing up in the 60’s, I was thrilled
at President John F. Kennedy’s declaration that “I believe that
this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is
out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth.” Now there was a mission statement!

And the United States of America did it! On July 20, 1969, Commander Neil
Armstrong became the first man on the moon. In addition to an astonishing burst of technological creativity, the moon landing required the largest commitment of resources ($24 billion) ever made by any nation in peacetime. At its peak, the
Apollo program employed 400,000 people and required the support of over 20,000
industrial firms and universities. The monumental effort was led by the National Aeronautical and Space Administration (NASA), which clearly demonstrated that it had “The Right Stuff.” I’m convinced that the private sector
could not have played that role.

I have not heard a single candidate in the upcoming national
elections argue for government to play a larger role in American lives, and
many candidates are waging campaigns focused on the theme of making government
smaller, more efficient, and more responsive to the American taxpayer. No matter which party is in the
majority in Congress after the elections, I think that will be the trend in the
foreseeable future.

Against that backdrop, if Federal
agencies don’t clean up their act – and I would include in my definition
performance problems as well as misconduct – they are likely to suffer the
consequences in terms of their missions and their budgets, with reductions in
the latter likely translating into lost jobs. 

That may mean agencies challenging themselves to elevate their game – from agency leadership
down through the management and supervisory ranks to the non-supervisory
employees, the front-line folks who often have the most influence over the
public’s perception of the agency. Think park rangers, for example, or the folks who handle phone calls and
visits at the Social Security Administration or the Department of Veterans
Affairs.

If you’re looking
for examples of agencies that seem to “get it” in terms of providing effective
leadership, establishing a results-oriented performance culture, managing
talent and fostering job satisfaction, a good place to start would be the 2010
Human Capital Assessment and Accountability Framework (HCAAF) list
of top agency rankings. I pay
particular attention to agencies which make the list year after year, such as
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which has now finished first for three years
in a row.

Washington
Post.com has a feature called the “Management Tip of the Day.” I’ll close with a tip that was
published on October 23, 2008: “When you expect the best from your employees, you get the best…To
unleash the power of positive expectations, start by expecting the most from
yourself. Superior managers have
confidence in their ability to select, develop and motivate employees. Their confidence in turn influences
their beliefs about their people – and their expectations and treatment of
them.” 

© 2014 Steve Oppermann. All rights reserved. This article may not be reproduced without express written consent from Steve Oppermann.

About the Author

Photo of Steve Oppermann

Steve Oppermann

Steve Oppermann served as Regional Director of Personnel for GSA and advised and represented management in six agencies during his federal career.

Bio

Comments

If you are an Internet Explorer user, please note that Disqus may not render properly in compatability view mode.

Free Email Updates

Unsubscribe or Update Email

Daily TSP Rates

April 17, 2014

Fund Last Change YTD
L Income 16.9750 +0.0069 +0.94%
L 2020 22.0406 +0.0303 +1.12%
L 2030 23.7376 +0.0425 +1.19%
L 2040 25.1366 +0.0530 +1.22%
L 2050 14.2365 +0.0355 +1.23%
G Fund 14.3859 +0.0010 +0.69%
F Fund 16.1278 -0.0505 +2.45%
C Fund 24.2371 +0.0345 +1.52%
S Fund 33.7924 +0.1332 +0.36%
I Fund 25.7933 +0.1257 +0.90%
More TSP Rates | Track Your Investments