FAMS Director Defends Agency's Treatment of Whistleblowers

POGO just received a letter from Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS) Director Robert Bray in response to our November 25th letter in which we raised concerns about the agency's treatment of whistleblowers.

While POGO was pleased to hear that FAMS supervisors are receiving training on whistleblower protections, and that there are a number of initiatives in place to reach out to federal air marshals for input, Bray did not respond to our recommendation to “rehire and make whole those federal air marshals who improperly lost their jobs after disclosing incidents of workplace wrongdoing but who still would like to come back and continue to support FAMS' mission.”

This includes former federal air marshal Robert MacLean, and security assistant Richard Hoskins, whose experiences we recently highlighted in Breaking the Sound Barrier: Experiences of Air Marshals Confirm Need for Reform at the OSC.

Bray did, however, respond to POGO's critique of his Deputy Director's efforts to insulate Bray from correspondence with his employees.  He pointed out that “managing the flow of information is crucial” at a large agency such as FAMS, and argued that we are being unfair in focusing so much on this one incident.  Nevertheless, we remain concerned that the Deputy Director appears to have a policy of sheltering Bray from complaints raised by current and former employees.  Somehow this doesn't quite seem to support Bray's earlier claim that “FAMS leadership has been engaging with our frontline workforce and maintaining regular dialogues with air marshals.”

-- Ingrid Drake

Comments

[al]

It is now time to a close look be performed of the retired secrect service agents and what they cost the government. They are into protecting their jobs and if doing so means to run complainers out of the FAMS, then they do. 1) removing them from just the TSA/FAMS will save an enormous amount of money. There was once over 80 retired SS individuals on the payroll. These individuals create stagnated mid and top levels of the agency. The government could save at least $20 million a year in salaries because with retirement these guys are making 200K plus. 2) A current SS agent states that the individuals at FAMS are the same that were the cause of many EEOs in their agency. The promotion rate of minority and women are very dismal. 4) Many individuals that transferred into FAMS are not being considered for promotion. Most of the individuals promoted are new to government with only service in the new FAMS service. They do not and have not complained because they no they are the chosen ones. Why mess up a good thing?

[Lessons Learned]

What about all the secret hand shakes and the golden envelope with PUBLIC MONIES to make things go away and they called them settlements. Are the public not enetitled to know how many out of court settlements and what cost and for what the FAMS have made over the past 3 years?

[Richard]

HAVE YOU READ THAT SURVEY?

Does Bray not understand why just a few people are represented here? Maybe he needs to understand how congress works and that some times a few people speak for many. Unfortunately this is done in the FAMS because of the fear for retaliation that they have witnessed time and time again. One FAM wrote to me the following issues/concerns that says a lot:

1. There is no fair mechanism for FAMs' to dispute or mitigate alleged violations without going outside of the agency.

2. There is no education or advisement on MSBP, OGC, IA, and DHS OIG, with respect to options for FAMs to submit problem, issues and/or dispute.

3. EEOC appears to be the only entity that is separated, from TSA and DHS. (Note by Richard, Even TSA & DHS Fail to comply to EEO Regulations and other Protected Personnel Practices)

4. Witnesses in a EEOC case are subject to reprisals, so they refuse to be involved in cases submitted by FAMs'.

5. DHS/TSA/FAMS/FIELD OFFICE policies are not consistent and are vague when it comes to travel, discipline, promotions, etc...this makes it very difficult to nail down specific violations(I suspect that his partially why).

Than if we look at TSA’s very own document we should highlight that he says a few but 2,163 OLE/FAMs taken this survey to deliver these results, is this a small portion of his workforce? I would say it would equate to a majority in 2007! Percentage to number of employees responding:
Manyt ares do not receive 50% positive.

5%=108

30%=649

55%=1190

80%=1730

10%=216

35%=757

60%=1298

85%=1839

15%=324

40%=865

65%=1405

90%=1947

20%=433

45%=973

70%=1514

95%=2055

25%=541

50%=1081

75%=1622

100%=2,163

"What is popular is not always right, what is right is not always popular."

[Patriot Advocate]

Obviously "Tom" did not read the 9th Circuit's decision:

"MacLean may still contest his termination before the MSPB, where he may raise the Whistleblower Protection Act and contend that the lack of clarity of the TSA's 2003 'sensitive security information' regulations is evidence MacLean disseminated the text message under a good faith belief the information did not qualify as 'sensitive security information.'"

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/E276163F5AD0C2C8882574C5008009E4/$file/0675112.pdf

Another failed attempt of TSA's inept management trying to cloud the facts of a case they are clearly losing. Unfortunately these "empty suits" will be long gone and retired after January 20 - spending our money with laughter.

[Kay S.]

Thomas "Tom" Dewey Quinn,

Didn't we pay you ENOUGH at DataMaxx Group? Tom, tom, tom TOM!!! ... We all think you need to go back to your retirement home being paid by U.S. Secret Service (D.C. Metro) and Federal Air Marshal Service retirement funds while your descendants do Google searches on your disastrous legacy of attempting to serve our country.

Please get back of Lyle Lovett's chopper, hold on tight to his chaps, and ride off into the sunset while real law enforcement officers clean up the mess you made.

By the way, Julie Roberts is no longer interested in you being her "fluffer" anymore.

Make room for your corrupt 1980's Secret Service cronies, they will all be needing room in your apartment after January 20.

Enjoy retirement!

P.S. The process server is knocking at your door.

[Kay S.]

Thomas "Tom" Dewey Quinn,

Didn't we pay you ENOUGH at DataMaxx Group? Tom, tom, tom TOM!!! ... We all think you need to go back to your retirement home being paid by U.S. Secret Service (D.C. Metro) and Federal Air Marshal Service retirement funds while your descendants do Google searches on your disastrous legacy of attempting to serve our country.

Please get back of Lyle Lovett's chopper, hold on tight to his chaps, and ride off into the sunset while real law enforcement officers clean up the mess you made.

By the way, Julie Roberts is no longer interested in you being her "fluffer" anymore.

Make room for your corrupt 1980's Secret Service cronies, they will all be needing room in your apartment after January 20.

Enjoy retirement!

P.S. The process server is knocking at your door.

[Lessons Learned]

I wonder how Bray or the real Author of the letter that he signed can indicate what they do, in good faith. Are they not familiar with this report?

http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/tsa_employee_survey.pdf

Tom maybe you should unerstand the facts of the case, listen to the argument and than compare it to the statements Bray makes in the letter he signed! I think the court even acknowledges GOOD FAITH!

Surely he would be aware that POGO could not list every name that has a complaint past, present and those in the very near future, as this was an example of those to make a point.

Contradiction

[ZD]

I guess when you falsify evidence and retroactively label things as SSI then you too can get the courts to make rulings in your favor.

And Tom, if you learn to address issues without making ad hominem attacks and you might be taken seriously.

[Tom]

Ingrid,

Who are you referring to in the following statement?

“rehire and make whole those federal air marshals who improperly lost their jobs after disclosing incidents of workplace wrongdoing but who still would like to come back and continue to support FAMS' mission.”

Who improperly lost their job? The Ninth Circuit Court recently issued a decision in favor of the TSA in regard to the example you site, Robert MacLean. Perhaps you should do your research before putting pen to paper in the future.

And correctly if I am wrong here, didn’t your ‘big report’ focus on wrongdoing at OSC? Why didn’t you send a letter to the head of OSC? Or for that matter the heads of any of the other agencies that have had cases before the OSC? Are you just trying to drum up raitings?

What’s wrong, did the air marshal on your last flight not flirt with you enough? Is the American Public in the middle of an Ingrid/Air Marshal domestic dispute?

I think these are valid questions; I can’t wait to read your answers…

Tom