TUESDAY, JULY 27, 2010


KLMNO


S 


“What are you doing after work?”


“I hate my boss!”


“Wish I could leave early.”


Agency and one union in talks over proposed social media policy


by Ed O’Keefe The General Services Adminis-


tration is attempting to become the first civilian federal agency to codify how workers should be- have on Facebook and Twitter, but it faces resistance from one of its unions over the use of social media Web sites. GSA officials and representa- tives of the National Federation of Federal Employees’ GSA Na- tional Council are set to resume negotiations Wednesday, two weeks after talks broke down over the proposed social media policy. The government wants GSA workers who post comments on non-agency Web sites to con- sider adding a disclaimer that their opinions do not reflect offi- cial GSA policy. It also wants to remind workers not to share de- tails of internal discussions or agency policy on non-GSA blogs. “Assume your thoughts are in the public domain and can be published or discussed in all forms of media. Have no expecta- tion of privacy,” the proposed pol- icy states. The proposal is meant to pro- vide guiding principles and will evolve as technology changes, the GSA said. Charles A. Paidock, who is leading the union’s negotiating team, presented an alternative proposal that would keep the use of social media sites separate from the agency’s standards of professional practice and con- duct. The agency could punish workers only if they breached GSA’s security or confidentiality agreements, according to the pro- posals.


“I think the agency would ben-


efit more if they opened it up a bit. Everyone benefits from free speech,” Paidock said. John M. Hanley, union presi- dent, said that sites such as Face- book, MySpace and FourSquare


FED FACES Weather research for ‘public good’


Joseph Schaefer Former director, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/ National Weather Service Storm Prediction Center


Best known for: Enhancing the scientific knowledge of torna- does and severe weather condi- tions and translating those find- ings into state-of-the-art forecast and warning systems that have saved lives and pre- vented property dam- age.


Because of Schaefer’s efforts, the National Weather Service storm center can predict tor- nado conditions up to eight days in advance, an eight-fold increase over the past 20 years, and issue tornado warnings with an aver- age of 14 minutes’ lead time, compared with the previous average of four minutes. There were nearly 1,691 tornadoes in the United States in 2008, 1,156 last year and 1,018 so far this year, making awareness and preparedness watchwords for people in the 17 states in the middle of the coun- try known as Tornado Alley. Government service: Schaefer began his 46-year government career as an intern with the Na- tional Weather Service and did stints at the U.S. Navy Weather


SAM KITTNER


Joseph Schaefer enhanced knowledge of tornadoes.


Research Facility, the National Severe Storms Laboratory, the National Weather Service Train- ing Center and the National Weather Service’s Storm Predic- tion Center, where he served as director until recently retiring. Biggest challenge: Working with partners and customers to keep forecast products and ser- vices relevant to the public and ensuring that life-saving infor- mation about torna- does and other severe weather conditions was widely communi- cated in a timely fash- ion. Quote: “I was doing weather-related re- search for the Navy during the Vietnam era, and I went to work for the severe-storms lab to do forecasting research on tornadoes. Something was lack- ing. I thought, gee, I’m doing this research, but why? Until you can


get it to the public, you’re not go- ing anywhere. I had a desire to get the research into practice and used by the forecasters for the public good.” —From the Partnership for Public Service


For more on Schaefer, go to washingtonpost.com/fedpage. Send your nominations for Federal Faces to fedfaces@washpost.com.


THE FEDERAL WORKER Slap on the back comes with a kick in the butt


T


GSA could impose rules for Facebook


are popular with his members, but he worried that the agency might overreach. “I’m afraid that if people are doing something with their friends, it’ll get back to GSA and there’s some ramifications with it,” Hanley said. He’s also con- cerned that GSA will bypass the union and use agency blogs to communicate workplace policy. “GSA encourages the use of so- cial media technologies to en- hance communication, collabora- tion, and information exchange in support of GSA’s mission,” agency spokeswoman Caren Auchman said in a statement. “GSA is currently in negotiations with NFFE to go through normal labor management processes to reach resolution.” An American Federation of


Government Employees council that represents other GSA work- ers approved the agency’s propos- al last year, Auchman said. AFGE did not return requests for com- ment.


Tim O’Reilly, a social media ex-


pert and leading advocate for of- fering more government services online, said the public sector has struggled with adapting to new technologies for years. He re- called trying to convince law- makers in the 1990s that they needed to use e-mail to reach con- stituents.


“Some listened, others didn’t, and the ones who didn’t listen lost,” O’Reilly said. “There are or- ganizations resistant to using so- cial media or any of these new technologies, and they’re going to be less effective from the people who do, and they’re going to lose.” Part of the impasse between


GSA and NFFE is due to an unfa- miliarity with fast-changing tech- nologies, said Steve Ressler, founder of GovLoop, a privately run social media Web site for public sector employees. But some sort of written policy is needed to help establish ground rules, he said. “Much like at happy hours, you


don’t do certain things,” Ressler said. “It’s probably the same thing here.” ed.okeefe@washingtonpost.com


PABLO MARTINEZ MONSIVAIS/ASSOCIATED PRESS John Podesta runs the Center for American Progress. Scoring the Feds


A Center for American Progress survey of more than 2,500 people looked at the views of the American public on examples of waste in government. Te category of inefficient government employees receiving generous benefits or high salaries received an average score of 7.8 on a scale of 10. Faring worse was the category of government contractors receiving no-bid contracts and overcharging for services. A 10 was considered a perfect example of wasteful spending and a zero score meant the category was not an example of waste.


Te average score of all adults and adults by political affiliation on examples of government waste ALL


Government programs continuing for years even though they have not proven effective


Government contractors receiving no-bid contracts and overcharging for services


People receiving government benefits who do not deserve them


Tax breaks for corporations that have political influence


Inefficient government employees receiving generous benefits or high salaries


Government agencies duplicating the efforts of other agencies


Government agencies failing to use new technologies and modern management methods to improve efficiency


Excessive and unnecessary military spending SOURCE: Center for American Progress


Intelligence contracts include some limits The United States and its NATO coalition partners continue to hire private contractors to support their intelligence and counterintelligence analyses and operations in Afghanistan. Fine Print, A15


Kerry still hopeful despite bill’s failure


Even though Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) announced last week that his long-standing climate-change bill had died, he says he’ll eventually succeed. In Session, A15


Pentagon faulted on oversight of Iraqi funds


An audit by the inspector general for Iraq reconstruction says the Department of Defense cannot account for how it spent $2.6 billion that belonged to the Iraqi government. The Federal Page, A15


8.1 8.1 8.0 7.9 7.8 7.4 6.7 5.8


7.6 7.9 7.4 7.9 7.3 6.8 6.5 6.5


8.3 8.2 8.1 7.9 7.9 7.6 6.7 5.9


DEMOCRATS INDEPENDENTS REPUBLICANS


8.5 8.3 8.5 7.8 8.2 8.0 6.8 5.1


THE WASHINGTON POST


he American people don’t have much confidence in government, but that


doesn’t mean they want less of it. They say Uncle Sam should


work efficiently, without wasting money or getting too big, but they still embrace “a wide range of actual federal government programs and initiatives.” That’s from a report scheduled for release Tuesday by the Center for American Progress. There’s good news for


government tucked in the report, but it can be overshadowed by the gloomy expressions of doubt about competence. In what could be interpreted as


a hearty slap on the back for federal employees, for example, nearly two-thirds of those surveyed said they were satisfied with their interactions with government agencies. But that slap on the back comes with a kick in the butt. The notion of inefficient federal employees getting big bucks and generous benefits upsets Americans across party lines. The image of inefficient workers is an “especially powerful item” and “the most significant predictor of low ratings on how well the government spends money,” the report says. Yet Ruy Teixeira, co-author of the report, said the finding does not necessarily mean that those surveyed think federal employees are paid too much. Their “primary concern,” he said in an interview, “is to have them work more efficiently and effectively rather than cut their salaries.” The main focus of the center’s


report isn’t the pay of federal workers, but that has been the target of scrutiny from conservative forces and others this year. In a report published


JOE DAVIDSON Federal Diary


this month, the Heritage Foundation concluded that “Congress should not overtax all Americans to overpay the privileged workers in the civil service,” even as it noted that federal workers are more skilled, better educated and older than private-sector employees. The conservative think tank does not advocate cutting federal salaries across the board. Instead, it wants Congress to take a series of steps, including establishing a pay-for-performance system, reducing benefits, making it easier to fire workers and increasing the amount of federal work done by private contractors. The report from the Center for American Progress is based on a survey of more than 2,500 people, conducted for the center in May by the Democratic polling firm Hart Research Associates. The center is run by John Podesta, who was President Bill Clinton’s chief of staff. The survey found that “public


confidence in government is at an all-time low,” by a significant margin. “Just one-third (33 percent) of adults voice a lot or some confidence, 35 percent have ‘just a little confidence,’ and another one-third (31 percent) have no confidence at all. The proportion saying ‘no confidence’ in the past has never before exceeded 23 percent.” Like so much in America, the report reflects a racial and ethnic


divide. “African Americans stand out as the only group whose confidence has risen over the decade (+10), most likely because of the combined effect of their Democratic partisanship and strong support for President Obama (91 percent favorable rating),” the survey found. “Confidence declined among both Latinos (-16) and whites (-22). White working class (non-college educated) adults have registered an especially sharp fall in confidence of 25 points.” A lack of confidence in


government is not the same as believing that government is too big. But there is a strong feeling that government needs to work much better. Hence, the title of the report: “Better, Not Smaller.” By 62 percent to 36 percent, “people say their priority is making government more efficient and more effective, not reducing its size,” according to the center. The report identified five areas where Americans want more government involvement: developing new energy sources, improving public schools, making college education affordable, reducing poverty and ensuring affordable health care. There’s a strong link between the dismal view of government held by many and their view of the economy. Those satisfied with the economy gave government strong positive ratings. But those who said the economy had tanked thought the same about government.


Although advocates of a small


federal government often criticize Uncle Sam for taking on responsibilities that they think should be left to the states, as well as for not being more like the private sector, he comes out looking okay in comparison with those competitors. While favorable opinions of the


federal government fell 11 points since 2005, ratings for state governments dropped by 13 points. And since 2007, good feelings about corporations have plunged 18 percent. “Clearly, the recent negative turn in feelings about the federal government is part of a larger pattern of dissatisfaction with public and private institutions alike, especially those related to the performance of the economy,” the center said.


federaldiary@washpost.com


B3


washingtonpost.com Q.


A report by the Center for American Progress says confidence in the federal government is at an all-time low. What can federal workers do to improve the view of government in the eyes of the American public?


 E-mail your answer to federalworker@washpost.com, and include your full name, home town and the agency for which you work. We may include your response in Friday’s Washington Post.


Online federal benefits calculators


 Federal retirement: www. opm.gov/retire/tools/calculators/ ballpark/menu.asp This calculator projects


retirement benefits under federal retirement systems. It also has links for calculating how much of an annuity will be tax-free and how much tax to have withheld.


 Social Security: www.ssa. gov/planners/calculators.htm This site features a Social


Security benefit estimator for those who will be eligible under that system, which includes most current federal employees. It also has links to other calculators.


 Thrift Savings Plan: www.tsp. gov/calc This site has calculators allowing participants in the 401(k)-style retirement savings program to project future account balances; to determine loan payments if they borrow against their accounts; and to see how an account balance would translate into income after separation, among other functions.


 Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance: www.opm.gov/calculator/ worksheet.asp This site calculates premium and benefit amounts under various options as well as potential changes after retirement.


 Other benefits: www.opm. gov/insure This site has links to calculate premiums under the options available in the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program (click on “Long Term Care,” then “Program Information,” then “Cost Information”) and to determine the potential tax savings of flexible spending accounts. It also has links to compare premiums and other features of plans in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program and the Federal Dental and Vision Insurance Program.


Note: Eligible employees can enroll or make changes in the TSP or FLTCIP programs anytime, but other programs have restrictions on enrollment and changing coverage.


— Eric Yoder


Your Place to Save - Monday through Sunday in Metro


REPLACEMENT WINDOWS


Qualifying products up to $1500 Energy Tax Credit!


$189


WE SELL ENERGY STAR


703-378-7999 Any Size White Double-Hung


Window INSTALLED!* *3 Window Minimum Up to 4ft Wide x 7ft Tall


of DC Inc.


“Simply the Best for Less” MHIC #1222286 VA License #2705274538 Class A 4116Walney Rd., Ste. - J, Chantilly, VA 20151 www.windowworlddc.com


Payment Options


Available


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60