Senator Wants Reports on Absent Employees
Looks like Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., isn't going to drop his crusade against federal employees who fail to show up for work any time soon. Now he's threatening to add a rider to every appropriations bill requiring agencies to track employee absences without leave and publish the numbers.
"If you have to publish it then we can see," Coburn told Federal News Radio. "You gotta measure it, and you gotta have a plan, and so I'll try to tack a rider on appropriations bills that says you gotta report it. Once you have to report it, management ought to know it, and if they have to report it, they're going to address the problem."
COMMENTS
Post a Comment
By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although GovExec does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.
ABOUT THIS BLOG
Government Executive Staff Correspondent Alyssa Rosenberg takes a look at news affecting the management and operations of the massive federal bureaucracy.
While it is unacceptable to permit unauthorized absences by Federal employees, a balance must be struck. All Federal employees should not be painted with a broad brush stroke as 'lazy'. For example, there are a number of employees in my office that work hundreds of uncompensated hours each year. Go after the abusers, but don't lump us all in that category.
Bill Posted Thursday, August 28, 2008 5:10 AMWhile I freely admit there are certainly employees who are guilty of this, I think Senator Coburn is only seeing half the picture...I know for a fact that there are many federal employees who work above and beyond their 40 hours each week and who do NOT claim compensation for it; either in overtime or in compensatory time. If we are going to report on those who are AWOL, then I believe we need to assess how many are going OAO (Over and Above) without compensation. Both are fundamentally wrong, for a variety of reasons, and to those who give their time, please realize you are "gaming" the system...making it look like you are doing your work in the 40 hours you are paid for vice the 45, 50 or maybe more than it actually requires. Leadership assumes in it's favor and by not telling them how much you are doing, they rightfully assume all is well. Every issue has two sides.
Federal Employee Posted Thursday, August 28, 2008 7:07 AMSenator, be very careful in wishing for something... you may just get it.
Shall we also assume that you will be publicly announcing when you are absent from sessions of Congress?
Concerned citizen Posted Thursday, August 28, 2008 7:13 AMBefore he starts going after the regular old Feds, maybe he should look into absent Senators and Congressmen for hearings and voting.
Federal Employee Posted Thursday, August 28, 2008 7:33 AMSilly Senator! If federal agencies can't figure out right now how many of their employees are ditching work under the guise of "a meeting across town" when in fact they're going to the mall, then what good is the pretty little reports they plop out for your staffers?
Happy Fed Posted Thursday, August 28, 2008 8:12 AMCould federal employees require the Congress, including Coburn, to report when they are not serving their constituents, such as attending parties, or in Coburn case, practicing medicine? As in any matter there are issues involving LWOP that reflect the length of service a person has and what responsibilities he/she faces. A single mother with a sick child could be placed on LWOP when her leave options are exhausted. Should she bring her sick child to work? Should the agency fire her? Coburn should mind his own business.
Richard, Tulsa Ok Posted Thursday, August 28, 2008 8:22 AMIf the Senator wants to track the times for federal employees how about we put time clocks at the doors to the senate to track the time spent by our elected officials doing their so called jobs.
terrence trapp Posted Thursday, August 28, 2008 8:22 AMI agree with Bill...the larger the organization, the harder it is to police such abusers. I don't think I want tax money being spent on people watching people on their time away from work. There comes a point when you have to trust people to do the right thing.
voice_in_dc Posted Thursday, August 28, 2008 9:12 AMAnother classic example of the higher ups holding the worker to a higher standard than what they hold themselves to.
I'm still waiting for the firing anyone caught drinking and driving and/or drug testing of anyone elected to office. If it's good enough for us, they should lead by example.
I wont hold my breath though half of them would be out of a job.
What about campaigning for re-election or running for a different office? Shouldn't that be on their own time also?
Rooster Posted Thursday, August 28, 2008 10:00 AMAccording to a study by the Washington Post, this year, The Senator has MISSED over 200 votes in his tenure staring back in the late '90's. This may not seem much, BUT his voting is what CREATES LAW, which affects millions of people.
iggy Posted Thursday, August 28, 2008 10:19 AMIts no wonder people view Congress as not doing its job!
It makes you wonder if he's actually up for re-election this year. If he is, then it's an election ploy to show his constituents that he's "working to save their hard-earned tax dollars" and if he isn't, he's just being an [fill in your own discription].
Michelle Posted Thursday, August 28, 2008 10:59 AMI love the post "it all boils down to trust" guess what CS can neither handle the truth or be trusted. All the comments trying to defend the indefensible.
dan ketter Posted Thursday, August 28, 2008 12:01 PMThe fact that this goes on and there are no repercussions speaks volumes. I could understand this if you worked in the private sector without sick leave, annual leave comp time ad nauseum but there is "0" for the feds to do this
This issue may be overblown by the honorable senator to a certain degree. When I first read the article, I thought immediately about IRS seasonal employees and their leave situation. Then I saw Sen. Colburn's claim that Treasury was a worst offenders. Since seasonal employees may only work for several weeks or months during a year, they do not accumulate much annual leave or sick leave. Therefore, they must use some LWOP to cover leave time. HOWEVER, it is approved by management. This is contrary to the claim that people are not showing up for work as the senator claims. Consequently, use of LWOP does not necessarily mean employees are negligent and workload is not performed.
Mike Castro Posted Thursday, August 28, 2008 12:04 PMI've actually read part of the good Senator's report and skimmed the rest. Whoever wrote this for the good Senator, didn't know enough to separate AWOL from Leave With Out Pay. LWOP.
And we all know there is a hugh differnce between the two.
Besides keeping track of the good Senator's attendance record, maybe we should start looking at where he gets his staff.
Old Geezer Posted Thursday, August 28, 2008 12:40 PMMaybe he will miss this vote, too...
voice_in_dc Posted Thursday, August 28, 2008 3:24 PMSenator Larry Craig use to rant on about Federal workers in the same fashion as does Senator Tom Coburn---ummmhh.......penny for your thoughts
nancy wilson Posted Thursday, August 28, 2008 4:26 PMI just read through the report. Let's treat it for what it is - political BS. He makes no distinction between LWOP and AWOL. He lets you believe that AWOL employees are getting paid even though they are not showing up - idocy! He makes grandiose doomsday predictions based on unscientific assumptions - like the reason why budgets have increased is because of AWOL employees and the need for more resounces to "pick up the slack". What a crock. My budget actually has decreased in buying power because of the increasews in fuel and steel prices, not employee absence, even though the amount of the budget is up. Fact is I can't remember the last time I put someone on AWOL as a supervisor. Usually it leads to disciplinary action. We don't take a non-chalant attitude towards someone not showing up for work without a legitemate excuse. I suspect it is true in most of the federal government based on my associates in other agencies. As usual this is just a cheap shot on an easy target - federal employees - so the good Senator can get votes at home by tapping into peoples' negativity. Typical.
JT Posted Friday, August 29, 2008 8:27 AMI would just like to ask how the appropriation bills are going this year. As far as I know, zero (i.e. less than the previous Congress). Perhaps they are all working hard, but if they cannot keep the government functional, what is accomplished? Or is that the point?
Opel Posted Monday, September 1, 2008 10:29 PMThis is a prime example of a senator who has not taken the time to read and understand applicable Federal laws, rules and regulations. Isn't it scary these elected officials have such control over our lives as Federal employees. Our USDA budget has been cut drastically as a result of the three trillion plus mounting debt. The majority of Federal employees have been doing more with less for several years. We take pride in the service that is performed. The senator wants to spend more money to further harrass Federal employees. Shame on you!!!!
Human Resources Specialist/Federal Employee Posted Tuesday, September 2, 2008 10:31 AM