Readers' Comments
Total Comments: 9
Page 1 of 2
Page 1 of 2
« Previous | Next »
Privacy Among Federal Employees: Who Has More Rights?
Total Comments: 9
Page 1 of 2
Page 1 of 2
« Previous | Next »
Free Email Newsletter
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| G | $13.2114 | +0.0012 | +0.70% |
| F | $13.6201 | -0.0062 | +2.14% |
| C | $13.8116 | -0.0706 | +4.49% |
| S | $17.9282 | -0.1903 | +8.91% |
| I | $18.5079 | -0.0782 | -0.16% |
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| L 2040 | $16.1968 | -0.0789 | +3.59% |
| L 2030 | $15.9593 | -0.0673 | +3.23% |
| L 2020 | $15.7365 | -0.0532 | +2.72% |
| L 2010 | $15.4595 | -0.0197 | +1.57% |
| L Income | $14.0856 | -0.0155 | +1.48% |
March 21, 2010
Search:
Custom Search
Home | About Us | FAQ's |
Site Map | Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
RSS 
|
Twitter 
| Mobile
© 2010 FedSmith Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Personal Information Use:
VA
Wed Aug 15, 2007 9:36 AM
Post Reply
It is offensive to contemplate that a Board member condones the use of Personnel records by Personnel employees in pursuit of their private aims. This gives Personnel employees an unfair advantage in dealing with issues that involve them.
I think the decision stopped short of fairness; the Personnel employee who abused access to Personnel records should have been removed, if not from his position, then at least from any future access to sensitive and confidential records. How, knowing that personal and confidential information can legitimately be disclosed in unrealted situations, can any employee feel secure in making a full and honest disclosure of their situation when responding to discipline.
Someone needs to challenge this decision on behalf of the rank-and-file empolyee supported by Federal Personnel offices.
RIGHT TO PRIVACY
DOD
Wed Aug 15, 2007 10:02 AM
Post Reply
This individual should be placed in another job where he cannot access other employees' personal information.
I have always thought that people who work in these
sensitive areas should be bound (like doctors/lawyers/social workers, etc) to a no disclosure requirement. There's no telling who he was willing to share information with. This 'anything goes" attitude could hurt lots of people.
Just Curious
DOD
Wed Aug 15, 2007 5:01 PM
Post Reply
Could he have used the information if he found it while researching someone else's cause? If so, why wasn't he assigned someone to help him through the process who would have the means to use this information?
Or am I way of base and NO ONE gets to use any information in these records to help with EEO cases?
Can Barbara Sapin spell Privacy Act
NASA
Thu Aug 16, 2007 10:12 AM
Post Reply
The Privacy Act of 1974 needs to be kept in mind in this type of fact
situation.
There is an argument that Smith's actions violated this law, assuming
the records he copied for his personal use were contained in an
agency system of records. The employee whose records were thus
improperly disclosed by the agency certainly has a potential
Privacy Act claim. And that law provides remedies, including fines
for its violation.
It's surprising the agency didn't fire him for what he did.
The MSPB dissent's position is creative, but legally contorted. It's
disappointing that Sapin's one-sided approach to cases would lead her
to come up with logic that undermines the privacy rights of EEO
complainants.
NO ONE IS TO KEEP RECORDS ON INDIVIDUALS
DoD
Thu Aug 16, 2007 10:23 AM
Post Reply
I have seen this many times.
I have seen EEO reps keeping records on employees, & passing those records onto other EEO reps. This is illegal.
I have seen superviosrs keeping records on employees (and when the employee goes to work for someone else - then the old supervisor will hand his records on that employee over to the new supervisor).
This is an illegal act but it happens to many times.
I have had EEO reps tell me everyone does this, but they are not doing anything to stop it.
I have seen commands keeping records on employees and give them to each new commanding officer when he checks in (all the old records - The bad thing is no one verifies the facts (all hear say, or Mr Smith said, etc)). This is an illegal act.
The governement should look at some way of keeping personnel (employees) information private.
& voilaters being removed from positions if caught voilating private info. Some people should not be in positions where they have access to info.
Grievance ABUSERS
treas
Thu Aug 16, 2007 12:14 PM
Post Reply
If this guy was NOT fired for his breach of trust, then they must play pretty fast and loose with our goods! If so, then I have a proposal.
There are those among us who chose to play the perpetual victim. We know who you are.
They use grievances to bully mgmt (too weary to fight it), to get out of whatever nasty work assignment is asked of them, (like being moved to sit with the REST of the group), and to make accusations that they were overlooked for a promotion.
Well, WHO ISN'T?! wahh!!
But some can play that card easier than others, and they wield it like a Ginsu knife.
Why can't they run audits on grievance-abusers? These are REAL paychecks we're letting them manipulate.
It's not fair that some people got where they are by "grieving their way to the top", while honest, qualified and deserving people are passed over for those same slots.
This is always discussed in whispers. Maybe it's finally time to shine some light on the shame.
Personal Use of PA Information
Fed Agency
Thu Aug 16, 2007 12:28 PM
Post Reply
While I don't condone what Mr. Smith did, I can understand why he did it. This past year we have had a number of EEO complaints stemming from one particular manager. I believe this dept has lost 10 employees who left on workers' comp, retired or just up and quit in the past year alone. Not to mention, this manager has a similar past in the region. We tried to get EEO cases (that we knew to be exact in nature. We even knew the names of the individuals) under the Freedom of Information Act, Particularized Need Statements, Privacy Act and we even agreed to "sanitized" copies of the documents and have been stymied the whole way. They records only appear if it suits management to use them in their own cases.
Re: Personal Use of PA Information
DOD
Fri Aug 17, 2007 10:58 AM