Slashdot Log In
NASA Employee Suspended For Blogging At Work
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Wed May 28, 2008 10:00 AM
from the but-i-wanna-blog-now dept.
from the but-i-wanna-blog-now dept.
BobJacobsen writes "FCW has an article about a NASA employee that was suspended for blogging on government time. Seems the unnamed employee's 'politically partisan' blog entries were a violation of the Hatch Act. The article ends with a chilling quote from the government's Special Counsel in the case: 'Today, modern office technology multiplies the opportunities for employees to abuse their positions and — as in this serious case — to be penalized, even removed from their job, with just a few clicks of a mouse.'" Thing is, he was soliciting campaign donations and writing partisan stuff.
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
fair enough (Score:5, Funny)
Re:fair enough (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Obligatory (Score:5, Funny)
<Ben174> : If they only realized 90% of the overtime they pay me is only cause i like staying here playing with Kazaa when the bandwidth picks up after hours.
<ChrisLMB> : If any of my employees did that they'd be fired instantly.
<Ben174> : Where u work?
<ChrisLMB> : I'm the CTO at LowerMyBills.com
*** Ben174 (BenWright@TeraPro33-41.LowerMyBills.com) Quit (Leaving)
Parent
Re:fair enough (Score:4, Insightful)
I guess it makes sense in a twisted kind of way. When people are paid for their hours, the part of you that wants to get what you pay for would insist on those people working those hours, not "slacking off." Then again, it generally makes more sense to pay people for the task that they're doing. If they can get the task done quickly, more power to them.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I think it's a good thing. The last thing we need is political rallies on the intranet posting boards.
Re:fair enough (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Um (Score:2)
He should have been fired (Score:4, Interesting)
A more important issue is what this says about the bloat and inefficiency at NASA. If an employee can spend years working on their blog at work, it is because they are not being given enough real work to do.
Parent
Re:He should have been fired (Score:5, Insightful)
You don't get fired from any job for anything but the most egregious actions, like embezzlement or not showing up without calling in (or in Disney World if you are a Pluto, lifting your leg at a fire hydrant or cursing in public).
First, unlike you teenagers, adults go to work to earn a living. Supervisors, unlike the corporations they work for, empathise with this. You don't deprive a person of their livelihood for something trivial.
Second, it costs the employer money to place a person in any given job. There are hiring costs and training costs, and then it takes time for a new employee to get up to speed. That's not to mention unemployment insurance benefits.
If the person's getting his job done, you don't fire him, you use lesser punishment.
Many (actually most I've worked at) jobs have slow periods and times where there is too much work to keep up with. When I worked in the merchandise division at Disney in the early '80s, for example, there would be a half hour of tedius, mind-numbing boredon followed by more "guests" (as Disney called their customers) than one could reasonably keep up with.
Other jobs have had days with nothing to do but read the paper, followed by overtime. Life doesn't always run on a smooth schedule, kid.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You can get unemployment if you quit. It depends on the state. I got unemployment when I quit my job in the game industry. The standard in my state (New York) is that any "reasonable person" would have done the same thing. The conditions have to be such that it would be unreasonable to expect you to continue working
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And "Spending some time on their blog in the years X, Y and Z" is not equivalent to "Spending three years (X+Y+Z) on their blog". The article also never mentioned that the suspension wouldn't affect anyone elses' workflow. If the org did things right, they have backups for every employee with any real responsibility. What if he had to spend 180 days recovering from a bad car wrec
Yeah, that's sort of an inappropriate use of work (Score:2, Redundant)
Eh.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Eh.... (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Well gosh. (Score:5, Insightful)
Then he should have had a little discipline and waited till he was home.
Ok, here's the law. Let me guess: Still not enough (Score:3, Insightful)
No wonder you think GW is drivel
Ahh, a global warming flunky. Have any evidence to back your claims? It appears that, as usual, you are lobbing insults to make up for the fact that you are empty handed.
Here's a link for you. [cornell.edu] It's not an opinion column. It's the law in question. I'm no lawyer, but reading that seems to indicate that federal employees soliciting campaign contributions for a specific partisan candidate is illegal. Period. Location and/or mode of solicitation aren't even mentioned. Section 7323 (a)(2)(C).
So it re
So... (Score:5, Funny)
Perhaps the Special Counsel should be fired for "being a total idiot."
He did work at NASA.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Can't imagine it would be too difficult for a NASA engineer to write a program that automates political blogging to the point that you can get a new post out with a few clicks. Especially considering the 'quality' of some of the blogs out there....
Parent
Political autoblogging form (Score:5, Funny)
( ) New York Times
( ) LA Times
( ) Washington Post
is reporting that the government
( ) is censoring scientists with unpleasant news.
( ) is going to cut back program _________.
( ) has been engaging in warrantless wiretapping.
( ) wants to raise taxes.
( ) plans to institute new product regulations
This is just another case of
( ) Big Government ramming itself down our throats!
( ) the War on Science!
( ) how conservatives are killing the safety net!
( ) government punishing anyone productive!
( ) how the country's becoming a totalitarian dictatorship!
HT:
( ) Digg
( ) Slashdot
( ) Technorati
( ) The other blogger who's a carbon copy of me
Parent
Re:Political autoblogging form (Score:4, Funny)
Ask Slashdot: Can I Use Linux For Destroying The Ozone Layer?
Posted by brian on Wed May 28, 12:41 PM
from the have fun hitting reload page dept.
ScissorJammer asks "I just started playing around with Linux and it looks very powerful. I started thinking that this program might be perfect for my plans of destroying the ozone layer. Has any other Slashdot user tried using Linux in this way, or is the Open Source community not really into destroying the ozone layer? Either way I'd like to hear your views."
Trailer For Indiana Jones Sequel Released
Posted by brian on Wed May 28, 12:44 PM
from the have fun hitting reload page dept.
Angel writes "The new trailer for teh upcoming Indiana Jones sequel has been relaesed. This time starring Albert Einstein and Bruce Perens. Let's hope in this one that Albert Einstein can take teh bad guys and behead them with a guillotine. Go grab it before it gets Slashdotted."
New Distributed Computing Project Will Try To Help Retrieve The Amulet Of Yendor
Posted by brian on Wed May 28, 12:45 PM
from the have fun hitting reload page dept.
Distributed computing projects have been used in searching for aliens, and decapitating zombies. Now, Nvidia has announced a new program that will allow you to use your spare computing cycles in helping to help retrieve the Amulet of Yednor. Versions are available for Internet Explorer so download adn start crunching.
Parent
Intentional ignorance isn't either (Score:3, Funny)
No twitter, there is no "wrong party", this is the Hatch Act. Go. Read. A. Book.
That's true, but it's hilarious coming from the top "use GNU/Everything or die" evangelist on the internets.
blah blah, please mod me up, I'm with groupthink
Re: (Score:2)
Right Click on some text, highlight selection, select 'copy'
Right click on text box, select 'paste'
Click on 'submit'
Gotta follow the rules (Score:2, Insightful)
why a lower standard for government workers? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:why a lower standard for government workers? (Score:5, Insightful)
Is it OK to spend 5 minutes in the hallway talking to co-workers about the big game last night? Some places/bosses wouldn't care. Others would. Some places give you breaks and lunches. Many professionals don't a whistle that blows telling them it's break time. They manage their own time.
There is no "one size fits all here". And certainly no "lower standard" you could guess at based on the article.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Many companies also allow personal use of the internet (with varying rules regulating that use). Many companies don't. Many government entities do. Many don't.
It's not just "personal use" we're talking about here. It's partisan politics. Random Government Agency can have an Acceptable Use Policy defining how much personal business you can do on gov't time. (Usually, it ain't much.) RGA's AUP gets trumped by the Hatch Act, which specifically prohibits using government time and resources to engage in partisan politics. And that's how it ought to be. People who work for the go
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When you aren't at work, then you can be involved all you want.
Re:why a lower standard for government workers? (Score:4, Informative)
It also prevents one from using one's office to "encourage" (read extort) political contributions from those that must do business with one's office.
Parent
He deserved it... (Score:5, Funny)
Hatch Act (Score:5, Informative)
This [osc.gov] nice writeup. Bottom line is, this guy's a federal employee soliciting funds and pushing a political agenda on work time.
This of course has nothing to do with blogging, as you could replace "blogging" with "making phone calls" or "mailing letters" or "stalking people at the coffee maker".
Re:Hatch Act (Score:5, Informative)
In particular, the Hatch act has nothing to do with whether you are at work or not. The Hatch act prohibits a government employee from doing pretty much anything political even on your own time and with your own equipment. It is pretty draconian. And, of course, it only applies to peons; those high-level muck-a-mucks who are most likely to be abusing their positions are exempt. The excuse for all this is that it "protects" the employees from political pressure. Pretty lame excuse, though.
The bit about doing this stuff on government time is completely unrelated to the Hatch act. That's a distinctly separate offense, and one for which there is much less excuse.
It is unclear from the article whether the suspension was really because of the Hatch act offense or the use of government time.equipment. I suppose it could have been both.
Parent
Re:Hatch Act (Score:5, Informative)
We can also still run for and hold local office as long as we're not violating any conflict of interest rules.
Parent
Protecting the Civil Service (Score:3, Interesting)
These days, we take for granted that the Civil Servants are employees doing a job, not appointees serving as the pleasure of the President, but understand how difficult it was to arrive there. Until Social Security and
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Perhaps you failed to actually read what I said before deciding it was worth replying with such profanity. I rather specifically said that I was talking about stuff *NOT* done on government time and equipment. From other posts, it seems like we were being held to the pre-1993 rules; I don't know why. Of course, about 20 years of my time was pre-1993, so that would have made "sense" then.
You also apparently have trouble with English comprehension in that I rather explicitly referred
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This of course has nothing to do with blogging, as you could replace "blogging" with "making phone calls" or "mailing letters" or "stalking people at the coffee maker".
It should also be noted that JSC has a fairly reasonable policy towards personal use of IT resources. It's more or less the same thing with use of phones and mail. Personal use in an unto itself isn't an issue. Personal use becomes an issue when that use incurs a undo cost to the Government, interferes with work, supports a personal business, etc. So as has been pointed out, blogging is not itself the problem.
Being a Federal employee involves a lot of extra baggage folks aren't always aware of. I woul
Re:Hatch Act (Score:5, Informative)
If you would have read the linked resource in the parent post that you responded to, you would have known why that isn't a violation of the Hatch Act. This is a list of who cannot participate in partisan activities [osc.gov]. You will notice that the president does not fall into that heading. Not to mention that every US President that I can remember has politicked for members of his party, so I don't know why you are singling out ole George.
Parent
Hatch Act wasn't do depoliticize politics (Score:5, Informative)
While we joke about government employees being "lazy, incompetent, over/under paid, whatever," without a professional Civil Servants class it becomes a cesspool of corruption. As the public employees are normally unionized with a union that can both fight management (as a union) and change management (as a political organization), they are generally well paid and compensated, particularly with pension benefits and other back end benefits that politicians can approve and leave someone else with the bill. As a result, those jobs are potentially very desirable.
If you don't keep the political bosses away, watch how quickly jobs go to politically connected people that don't show up to work... It seems unlikely that someone powerful would care about a 30k - 90k/year job, but what if they could get it for their daughter-in-law that doesn't work, and just funnel money and benefits to their kids. That's how these positions work in countries without extensive controls, and why we have so many to keep the "friends and family plan" out.
Look at any community non profit and look at how many incompetent people hold well paying jobs because someone that gives money is friends with their parents/grandparents... corruption happens everywhere, and this attempts to reduce it. It doesn't attempt to remove partisanship from politics.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I was a Bush supporter, but I certainly didn't begrudge Clinton for campaigning for Gore. Now, maybe if he'd accumulated a large pile of accidental pocket-vetos, I'd be a little more upset. (Bush doesn't veto nearly enough, though, so it'd kind of be a relief for a change)
Well, (Score:4, Funny)
If the employee's views agree with mine, then they are jackbooted fascist thugs for suspending him.
If I disagree with those views, then the employee has every right to deal with this inappropriate use of paid time.
Yep, sounds about right (Score:3, Insightful)
Government jobs (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry to be anal about the grammar, but there is a significant difference. You implied that one could get in trouble for blogging about politics. The actual article is about getting in trouble for using gov't property to blog about politics. And to solicit donations. Such use is against the black-letter law.
Ideally... (Score:5, Insightful)
That said, whatever political activism people want to take part in should use their own time and their own equipment -- unless their job IS political activism. TFA doesn't say what this guy's job is, but I seriously doubt it"s "chief nasa suck-up to potential future presidents."
If he's using NASA equipment, NASA time, and identifying himself as a NASA employee, then he's basically creating a situation in which causual observers might be forgiven for assuming that NASA is endorsing "candidate x"
Quite frankly, it doesn't make sense for a department, which is often the subject of political punches, to want to be seen as interested - because if "their guy" lost, then the other guy will take it out on them.
Sucks for this guy, but if you work at NASA you should be smart enough to know better.
Why blame the Internet? (Score:5, Interesting)
There often however is an unfair difference between surfing Playboy and reading the Playboy magazine during the office hours. One is easier to detect and prove then the other. It will be used often as an excuse to fire people, because prove is so much easier to get.
At least In Belgium you need a valid reason before you fire somebody without having to pay weeks or months salary, so they will need this proof. People drinking coffee and having cigarette breaks all the time are much less likely to get fired on the spot.
It has to be said that many companies in Belgium will do the firing of people in several steps. Vocal warning, 2 or thre written warnings, firing the person.
Federal Employees give up some rights (Score:2)
one restriction that I remember is that she wasn't allowed to take part in protests. Workign in San Francisco, that must have been an every day opportunity she was missing out on!
So I don't find it at all suprising that someone who is doing campaign activities got zapped.
Workplace policies on blogging (Score:3, Interesting)
One specific to blogging appeared, with the usual wording about appropriate use of our company's name and so on (I think they wanted public affairs involved any time the name was mentioned in a blog). I came up with a list of obvious problems it raised, there was an outbreak of common sense, and all blogging language was removed.
Personally I feel that policies shouldn't be specific to online behavior if at all possible. Instead it's best to remain neutral to the form of communication and shape policies around it. For example, if we have a policy against hate speech, I wouldn't want to see employees writing hate speech on their blogs while they're at work (we let employees get online during breaks as long as it doesn't interfere with their work). What they do with their own time at home, of course, should generally be their own business.
No Surprise Here (Score:4, Informative)
Second, the Hatch Act has, for decades, prohibited partisan political activity by federal employees. There's good reason, if only because those employees make decisions every day about how and where to spend taxpayer money.
Third, the provisions of the Hatch Act are made clear to every federal employee when they accept the job.
I work in government (Score:3, Informative)
Worst (Score:3, Informative)
This stuff went on on Usenet... (Score:4, Interesting)