WhistleblowerSupporter

Federal Oversight: A Failure to Act

 My comments are referenced to the situation ably described by the Project on Government Oversight's (POGO) Beth Daley in her testimony at the Office of Special Council (OSC)/Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) hearing July 12, 2007.  -GFS(http://www.pogo.org/p/government/gt-070712-osc.html)

 

 

 

It is good that talk and dialogue continues regarding the OSC and MSPB and the environment for whistleblowers in the federal government.  However it is important to realize that the sum total effect of the inactivity of real accomplishment means that real people's lives are being affected, and in some cases, ruined and families torn apart.  One federal employee over the course of his/her career conducted a number of serious investigations with regard to the inappropriate handling and mishandling of classified national security information and technology.

 

In one investigation, the Investigator was called in by a Security Specialist from the Dept. of Energy (DOE), to investigate the refusal of DOE management to take their investigative findings seriously.  The Department of Defense (DOD) Investigator was dispatched along with a second DOD Senior Security Specialist, to investigate the allegations.  The DOD Investigator met with a DOE scientist, and the DOE Security Specialist, making the allegations.  The DOE scientist, and Security Specialist provided sworn statements and documented evidence was provided to the DOD investigator and Senior Security Specialist.

 

Upon return to the DOD field office, the Investigator and the Senior Security Specialist wrote a classified report of findings (administrative inquiry).  What had been shared with the DOD was a DOE security program out of control.  The evidence documented critical nuclear weapons design information (CNWDI), and fissionable nuclear material being improperly stored at a DOE facility.  The report was appropriately classified, and appropriately forwarded through channels to the DOD headquarters.  Several weeks later, the DOD field office received a telephone call from one of the DOD headquarters personnel who had read the report.  The comment made to the DOD investigator and Senior Security Specialist was:  And what do you expect me to do with this?

 

The field office said that they expected it to be briefed to the DOE Director, believing that the problem was extremely serious, and when disclosed, would be addressed and fixed by the DOE Director.   At that point, the DOD headquarters individual said:  If you think that DOD headquarters is gonna walk over to the director of the DOE and brief her on the fact that she has fissionable nuclear material being improperly stored, you're out of your "God damned mind!"

 

The effect of this DOD management level person's refusal to do his job was that good people within the DOE that wanted to do the right thing were left swinging in the wind.  For the past 10 years, these people's lives have been holy Hell.  The scientist was forced to relocate to another DOE facility; one much more remote to his/her family, by DOE and commutes back to his/her home several times a year, time permitting.  The DOE Security Specialist that tried to do the right thing, and when all appropriate channels failed within the DOE, then reported it to the DOD, found that DOD miserably failed them also.  For the past 10 plus years, that person's career has been lost; their life has been ruined.  They have lost almost everything they owned.  And nothing has changed.  It's time to get past just talking about this.  It is time to DO something.

Who are Whistleblowers and how do they become one?

The majority of whistleblowers are dedicated and ethical employees, who work hard and try to do their jobs responsibly and competently.  So, the question is, how can this happen?  How can the employees suddenly find themselves being labeled a whistleblower?  Most often, in the course of doing the job they were hired to do, they came across something that should not be, something unethical or illegal.  Being the kind of person they are, they really face no other option than to do their job and report it, and as is often the case, include the incriminating evidence that “outs” the wrongdoers, in their routine report they must submit as a part of doing their job.  The inclusion of the incriminating evidence in the required report understandably aggravates the wrong doer(s), who may even be a supervisor at some level above the employee, or someone with connections to a supervisor.  At the point that the wrongdoer begins to assert pressure on the employee to change, or make the accurate and truthful report go away, the employee then faces the choice of whether to stand up or be compromised.  And if they choose to take the high road, they become a whistleblower.  If they choose to be compromised, and a security clearance is required for doing their job, they are now potentially a blackmail victim, targeted by others in whose best interests it is to cover-up illegal activities. 

 

What is not understandable is how these whistleblowers are treated, not only by the corrupted supervisors, but the whole federal system, and sometimes our society as a whole.  There is a tendency to try to kill the messenger, and to blame the whistleblower for the problem.  The incidents that employees need to report, which happen because of wrongdoing by their co-workers or supervisors appear to happen primarily because of ambition, greed, and lack of ethics of the wrongdoers.  And in the response to being “outed” the wrongdoers and anyone they can influence, exact some pretty grim retribution on the whistleblower.  This is not what should happen, and is a pretty sad situation.  But in spite of this, ethical people still stand up and do the right thing at great personal risk, and personal and professional consequence. 

 

When decisions need to be made under duress, everyone always has choices, but choices are open or closed by one’s character and level of ethics.  One researcher called this the “choiceless choice” that whistleblowers have to face.  The whistleblower’s other option is to look the other way as ordered, or even actively become involved in the cover-up for the wrongdoers.  An employee who does this, risks losing their own security clearances, jobs, and reputations if this is discovered or they may be further manipulated through threats of exposure by the corrupted supervisors later for continued nefarious purposes. This choice, for ethical people, is not really a choice.  Whistleblowers are the employees who choose to do the honest and ethical thing, and in doing that become a whistleblower.

 

In return for their integrity, whistleblowers may face harassment, discrimination, and other assorted types of retribution for just doing their job as required by law. If doing their job gets in the way of unethical people, either in their agency or in a defense contractor their agency has oversight of, then things become very ugly.  They may have their working conditions turned into a nightmare, lose promotion capability, be rated unfairly, be set up for failure by their corrupt managers, even lose their job.  They can then be “black listed” and find it difficult or impossible to get a job in their field of expertise again, and in some cases not be able to get new employment.  Due to the secrecy held by members of the defense arena, it is not easy to discover what is being done to hurt you or who exactly is doing it.  It has become even worse in recent years, as many federal employees can attest to, due to the increased secrecy practices of the Bush/Cheney administration.  This could happen to anyone, and most often happens to honest, competent and responsible people of character, because they refuse to be compromised or corrupted. 

 

There are many employees in industry and federal employees who have run up against corrupt players that are still being abused in record numbers and have very few places to get help.  It is imperative that elected officials, those in oversight who are not compromised and corrupted, and U.S. citizens,  must stand up and help to clean house, and assure appropriate protection for our whistleblowers who have the courage to do what many of us do not - stand up and do the right thing - or the future for these whistleblowers, their families, and for our country look bleak indeed.

 

 

-GFS

 

 

 

 

 

Attorneys Wanted

Do You Know a Good Labor or Whistleblower Attorney?

 

In communicating with various people, including readers of this blog, I’ve found that finding an attorney to assist and help protect people who are being beat up for doing their jobs, or who have elected to join the ranks of whistleblowers by doing the right ethical thing, is not a very easy thing to accomplish.   I’ve decided that there is a need to post names of good attorney’s that have served people well.  If you know an attorney who has helped you or someone you know who is working or worked in federal government, defense contractor, military, or other area and you can attest to their integrity and competence, please post their name, contact information and area of expertise.  If you can also describe testimonial style, how they were able to help you that would be great.  You may also email me using the link on this site. 

 

Thank you all for your assistance in this project!

 

-GFS

Obama Called on to Give Federal Jobs a Makeover

By Joe Davidson
Link to original:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/06/AR2008110603287_pf.html

Friday, November 7, 2008; D03

Here are some interesting tidbits that recently knocked on the Federal Diary's door.

The Project On Government Oversight has one of the best acronyms in a city overwhelmed with them. POGO reminds me of Walt Kelley's comic strip, and that's almost always a more pleasant thought than whatever problem the organization has uncovered.

Like many organizations, POGO (the organization, not the comic critter) has suggestions for how President-elect Barack Obama should do his job. Some of them center on federal employees.

POGO says Obama should:

· Make federal employment more attractive by changing "pay scales to make them competitive with those in equivalent private-sector jobs, instituting agency honors programs, paying student loans in return for a period of civil service, [and] allowing retired civil servants to retain their pensions even if they are rehired by the government.

· Issue an executive order strengthening federal employee whistleblower protections. He also should boost the status of whistleblowers with commendations, public recognition and monetary awards.

· Examine whether his administration really needs the 4,000 political slots in the executive branch and consider converting some to civil service status "in order to enhance senior level institutional memory and competence at the agency."

A Good Place to Work

The AARP has selected the National Institutes of Health as one of the best places to work for people over 50. About 42 percent of the NIH workforce is in that age group.

AARP cited various benefits at the Bethesda agency, including "support for tele-work and flexible-work schedules -- applying directly to NIH's mature employees."

As an example of the Institutes' flexibility, AARP said NIH made special accommodations for a blind employee. The agency provided space in her office for her guide dog and modified her computer. "Her coworkers received on-site training on disability etiquette, specifically addressing how to work with a blind individual who is assisted by a guide dog," AARP said.

The Postal Service is the only federal agency on Hispanic Business magazine's "Diversity Elite 60," a list of best companies for Latinos. The rankings are determined by more than 30 criteria, including hiring, promotion, marketing, philanthropy and supplier diversity.

The magazine also placed USPS on the publication's list of "top 10 companies for workforce diversity." The ranking measures and compares the percentages of Hispanics, African Americans, Asians, Native Americans and women in the workforce, and gives increased weight to higher-level positions such as managers, according to the Postal Service.

Saturday Delivery

Speaking of the Postal Service, whenever I write about its budget problems that are driven by sharply declining mail volumes, readers suggest stopping Saturday delivery as a way to save money. Here's what USPS spokesman Gerald J. McKiernan says about that:

"The elimination of Saturday delivery would result in a saving, but it would also mean a loss of volume and the revenue that volume brings. Past surveys have indicated that many Americans would be willing to go without Saturday delivery but the sender side is less certain. Many senders of mail prefer that their deliveries arrive on Saturdays (packages, medicines and ad mail) when it's more likely that people will be at home."

Health-Care Choices

Open Season for federal employees begins Monday and runs through Dec. 8. During this period, workers can select health-care related options under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, the Federal Employees Dental and Vision Program and FSAFEDS, which is the Federal Flexible Spending Account Program. More information is available at http://www.opm.gov/insure/openseason/index.asp.

You also can discuss Open Season, suggest improvements to the benefit program or vent about its problems at a new online group discussion I'll be leading on federal workforce issues. It's called Federal Career Talk: Discuss Federal Employee Issues with the Federal Diary's Joe Davidson.

Starting Monday, it will be a forum to discuss a variety of topics affecting the federal workplace. You will be able to find it at http://www.washingtonpost.com/fedpage.

Contact Joe Davidson at federaldiary@washpost.com

Scott Bloch's "Whistle-Muting" Legacy

Whistle-Muting?

 

Link to original:  http://voices.washingtonpost.com/government-inc/2008/10/whistle-muting.html

 

Office of Special Counsel chief Scott Bloch has resigned after much turmoil, following months of pressure to give up his post as the government's putative advocate and investigator of whistle blower complaints.

Bloch bailed out under pressure from the White House five months after the FBI raided his house and government office as part of an obstruction of justice probe, according to a piece by The Post's Carrie Johnson.

Bloch set a peculiar tone for his office, claiming to be a dedicated protector of government employees who speak out about fraud, waste and abuse of tax dollars, even as he fell under scrutiny himself. He is under investigation on allegations that he retaliated against whistleblowers in his own office and then tried to hide the evidence, allegations he has denied.

Even his depature this week was unusual. In his resignation letter, he suggested he was the victim of people who didn't like what he had to say.

"'No one likes the bearer of bad news' wrote the Greek poet Sophocles," his resignation letter to the president begins.

Critics aren't buying that suggestion, though. Among them is Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight, which has been examining the office for several years.

"This is a victory for federal workers. It would have been obscene for this man to be able to walk away under his own terms," she said in a statement. "He has left the agency in shambles. It will take a lot of work to repair the damage Bloch caused. It will also be necessary to fix the systemic flaws which have long hampered its effectiveness."

 

Scott Bloch won't be missed by many

Workers Applaud Special Counsel's Return to Private Sector

 

Link to original:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/21/AR2008102102572_pf.html

 

By Joe Davidson
Wednesday, October 22, 2008; D04

The reaction from leaders of organizations that work with federal employees to the announced resignation of Scott J. Bloch, the besieged U.S. special counsel, can be summed up in two words:

Good riddance.

"Mr. Bloch destroyed the credibility of the Office of Special Counsel," said Mark Roth, general counsel of the American Federation of Government Employees. "He committed more prohibited personnel practices in the unwarranted purge of numerous OSC [Office of Special Counsel] career staffers than he deterred.

"We look forward to Mr. Bloch returning and staying in the private sector."

Bloch resigned, effective Jan. 5, in a letter to President Bush on Monday. In it, Bloch praised his own leadership, saying the agency "has made unprecedented progress in eliminating case backlogs left by previous administrations."

The office describes its mission as "protecting federal employees and applicants from prohibited personnel practices, especially reprisal for whistleblowing." Bloch alluded only obliquely to his troubles in office, telling Bush: "As you well know, doing the right thing can result in much criticism and controversy from every side."

In Bloch's case, every side includes the FBI, which raided his home and office in May. The bureau reportedly is investigating accusations that Bloch politicized his office.

"His term has been marked by continuing controversies, including claims by his own employees that he has violated the very laws the OSC is charged with enforcing," said Colleen M. Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union.

In his letter, Bloch takes credit for increasing "our caseload capacity, resulting in a 400 percent increase in substantiated whistleblower disclosures and stepped up enforcement of job rights for military service members."

Yet, at least one whistleblower and an organization that works closely with them couldn't be happier to see Bloch go.

"Dedicated federal workers have been left to hang without a protector on their side," said Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight. "We are not sorry to see this pathetic chapter close."

Neither is Howard Floch, a surgeon who said he was fired by the Department of Veterans Affairs after he protested to Bloch's office about "what passed for medical care" at a VA hospital in Martinsburg, W.Va.

"They certainly don't protect whistleblowers. This is well known. . . . . " Floch complained. "Anybody who becomes a whistleblower under the current system is out of his mind."

OSC spokesman Anthony Guglielmi wouldn't discuss details of Floch's case. Guglielmi said Bloch was unavailable for comment, but added that "our staff works really hard to protect the merit system."

Those representing workers in the merit system have a dramatically different view.

The special counsel's office "is supposed to be the first line of defense to protect federal employees from prohibited personnel practices, but over the last five years the OSC has ignored its statutory mission," said Richard N. Brown, president of the National Federation of Federal Employees. "Federal employees have not been getting the protection they need and deserve. Under his tenure, federal employees have had little faith in their guaranteed protections."

In defense of employees at the agency, James Mitchell, who was suddenly fired as Bloch's chief of staff just before Labor Day, said they have tried, with great frustration, to carry out its mission while "in the middle of Hurricane Scott."

Honored for Good Work

While many cheered Bloch's resignation, another group of government watchdogs were celebrated for doing good work.

More than 95 workers from the inspectors general community were honored, as the Marine Band played rousing patriotic music, during a program at the ornate Andrew W. Mellon Auditorium on Constitution Avenue.

Paul Converse, an auditor assigned to an inspector general's office in Iraq, was given a special recognition posthumously, the Sentner Award for Dedication and Courage.

Auditors are often thought of as bean counters who face no danger greater than paper cuts and terrible tedium.

But Converse was in Baghdad's Green Zone when that place of supposed safety came under fire. He died March 24.

He was remembered as a "man of integrity, diligence and compassion."

Contact Joe Davidson atfederaldiary@washpost.com

 

Book & Movie Review(s) for Whistleblowers

 

Book World Live: The Shadow Factory
The Ultra-Secret NSA from 9/11 to the Eavesdropping on America

Link to original:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/10/09/DI2008100901600_pf.html

James Bamford
Investigative Journalist and National Security Expert
Tuesday, October 14, 2008; 3:00 PM

"By exploring the current, post-9/11 operations of the NSA, Bamford also goes where congressional oversight committees and investigative journalists still struggle to go. Rather than finding out what went wrong in the run-up to 9/11 and disciplining those who made serious mistakes, the Bush administration declared its need for new authorities to wage a global war on terror. Congress agreed to most of the White House's demands, though we know from other sources that former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle resisted some of the most extreme requests. According to Bamford, the NSA's expanded powers and resources enabled it to collect communications both inside and outside the United States. He quotes a former NSA employee as a witness to the agency's spying on the conversations of Americans who have no connection to terrorism. After suing the NSA for documents, the author obtained considerable evidence that telecommunication companies (with the notable exception of Qwest) knowingly violated U.S. law by cooperating with the NSA to tap fiber optic lines.

In impressive detail, The Shadow Factory tells how private contractors, including some little-known entities with foreign owners, have done the sensitive work of storing and processing the voices and written data of Americans and non-Americans alike. And Bamford warns of worse to come: 'There is now the capacity to make tyranny total in America. Only law ensures that we never fall into that abyss -- the abyss from which there is no return.'"

Bestselling author James Bamford was online Tuesday, October 14 to discuss his new book, The Shadow Factory: The Ultra-Secret NSA from 9/11 to the Eavesdropping on America, which was reviewed in Book World. In the book, he offers new revelations about the National Security Agency's counterterrorism tactics, including its controversial domestic surveillance programs.

Bamford is the author of two other books on the NSA: Body of Secrets and The Puzzle Palace. A former investigative producer for ABC's World News Tonight, he currently writes and produces documentaries for the PBS series NOVA.

 

 

 

**********************************************

Root for the Little Guy (Again)

Link to Original:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/02/AR2008100200949_pf.html

 

Friday, October 3, 2008; WE32

The true story of inventor Robert Kearns's years-long struggle to force the Detroit auto industry to admit it stole his 1963 design for the intermittent windshield wiper will appeal less to courtroom-drama fans than to stick-it-to-the-Man fans in "Flash of Genius."

For one thing, the courtroom drama -- a climactic lawsuit against Ford Motor Co. in which Kearns (Greg Kinnear) acts as his own attorney -- doesn't kick in until almost 90 minutes, and much human drama, have elapsed. By then, there has been another whole movie, in which Kearns loses his job, his wife (Lauren Graham), his lawyer (Alan Alda), the affection of his kids and, nearly, his sanity.

That movie is not half bad, either. The trial, by comparison, will feel familiar to anyone who has ever watched any David take on any corporate Goliath before a court of law ("Erin Brockovich," "A Civil Action," etc., etc.).

What's more, it's not as if the outcome of the lawsuit will have too many on the edge of their seats. The movie, directed by Marc Abraham, is based on a 1993 New Yorker magazine story. Kearns was even profiled in a long article in this newspaper. Oh, and guess what? They don't make a whole lot of movies about the triumph of soulless corporations over plucky whistleblowers.

Not that I wouldn't go to see one if they did.

Kinnear, who burns through a number of different hairpieces as his character ages, will have you rooting for the chipper if dweeby engineering professor. The genial actor does a yeoman's job of charting Kearns's self-destructive obsession.

Still, we'd relate to him even if he didn't. This is the story of Everyman vs. the System, and we've all heard it before. It's Kearns who had his work cut out for him. Kinnear's job is a relative cakewalk.

-- Michael O'Sullivan

 

Whistleblowers know what broken oversight is; ask them!

Broken Oversight, Investigations & Justice Dept. Affect Whistleblowers

 

I recently, received an email from the group administrator of a
Whistleblower group I belong to chastising the group members about
only sending in posts of direct implication and interest to
whistleblowers, not notes on general corruption etc. This post is
about the problem of focus and scope of the focus and why the
patterns of corruption we see are indeed most germane to every
whistleblower, and everyone else who cares about integrity in
government and industry.

 

 

Advice from effective investigators: keep a broad focus while
digging for the details; follow the money, search for patterns and
connections. The problem may be bigger than you think.

 

 

One has to wonder about the true depth of manipulation of the various
arms of our Justice Department. It appears that there has been quite
a lot of this lately. I mean by that, finding that the FBI and
others have been turned away from certain cases, or types of cases,
and put onto selected other more politically convenient lines of investigation.

 

Another part of the pattern of operations by the current
Administration or their minions appears to be effective use of a "red
herring" as it gets investigators off chasing other demons, and helps
divert public attention from dangerous ground.  I have heard from some

DoD whistleblowers that their experiences have included:  having initial response of shock and indignation over the merits of the cases taken to law enforcement/ investigative personnel  (Justice and others) agencies. That followed by investigations purposefully initiated with great energy and resolve by field personnel accompanied by check backs and good communication, only to have those law enforcement/investigative personnel, inexplicably after
a few weeks, become quite mute.

 

These whistleblowers have further explained that they have discovered the following kinds of things have occurred:

 

a.      Investigators were told to stop by higher ups, sometimes
quite a bit higher levels of management.

b. Investigators were loaded down with other work and told their
priorities, which did not include the whistleblower case of concern.

c. Investigators were removed from the case and another
investigator, in one case a very senior investigator are put on it
instead, one who appeared to be on marching orders to drag it out,
obstruct the investigation and make it "go away."

d. The whistleblowers have also reported that even though well
developed cases were turned over to the appropriate three or four
letter acronym agencies for criminal investigations, including lists
of people to be interviewed, deposed, or subpoenaed, no contacts by
the investigator now in charge to interview or communicate with those
witnesses with further evidence whatsoever.

e. In one case, the investigator ignored a list of a dozen
witnesses, and spoke instead to an employee in an involved
department, who was new, and obviously had no history and no
knowledge of the case, which many other employees with more seniority
and experience did have knowledge of, and were listed in the
witness/source list that the investigator chose to ignore. The
investigator in this case was quoted, as saying the reason the case
was not going anywhere was that "No one will talk to me." In the
mean time, the whistleblowers were informed by the witnesses on the
list waiting to tell what they knew, that no one had contacted them.
They understandably expressed frustration that the case was not being
worked.

 

It seems that many view things a bit myopically. This is somewhat
understandable due to the level of stress and pressure most
whistleblowers feel, and the lack of energy and time may have to
research and reflect while in the slowly heating pot surrounding
their own particular situation. Good communication and a broader
view are necessary.

 

This is not about just one whistleblower.  The problems we are having are not limited only to one agency or area. The stories that do break are symptomatic of a much bigger problem. A problem created not in small part by the corruption and excesses of those who have been in powerful positions of influence and control, and position to profit from those corruptions and
excesses. Justice and law enforcement are not being allowed to function like they are supposed to and that is affecting all of us, particularly "whistleblowers."

 

-GFS

 

 

For more on President Bush's plans to pardon...

This was an interesting site, someone sent me regarding the expected actions of President George W. Bush, plans for pardons and final blocking of investigations into wrongdoing and whistleblower allegations.  -GFS

http://puddydunne.wordpress.com/2008/11/15/lauras-busy-with-packing-george-with-pardons/

Boeing Responses to Seattle PI Questions

From The Seattle P.I.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/printer2/index.asp?ploc=t&refer=http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/323843_boeingqa117.html

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/323843_boeingqa117.html

Boeing responses to questions: Round one

Last updated July 16, 2007 10:08 p.m. PT

Before providing executives for interviews, The Boeing Co. asked the Seattle P-I to outline its questions in written form. The P-I submitted two rounds of questions, which are displayed here along with the company's official responses.

Boeing's summary statement:

Follow links to read full response to questions.

The Seattle P.I.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/printer2/index.asp?ploc=t&refer=http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/323842_boeingqa217.html

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/323842_boeingqa217.html

Boeing responses to questions: Round two

Last updated July 16, 2007 10:08 p.m. PT

These are the P-I's second round of questions and Boeing's written responses.

·  Some organizations, including Standard & Poor's, encourage full disclosure of deficiencies even though law does not require it. What factors went into Boeing management's decision not to discuss internal control deficiencies in its filings to the Securities and Exchange Commission?

Follow links to read full response to multiple questions.