OCC Tag Lines

Everyone should be aware of the OCC new policy on having tag lines attached to email messages.   We have all seen e-mail messages in which employees have added a tag line at the bottom to support a cause, make a statement about their belief/values, or a humorous anecdote.  However, as the system wide message stated, the OCC email system is the property of the federal government.  Consequently, there should be a presumption that anything you send on the system could end up as a matter of public record.  NTEU believes that OCC has a legitimate business concern regarding these tag lines and requests that all employees abide by these guidelines. 

While personal expression is a freedom guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, that right does not extend to expressing yourself using government owned property and equipment.  If you want to express yourself, please use your personal email account, Facebook, My Space, or even your own blog site.  The OCC can take disciplinary action against employees who fail to follow the new policy. 

As noted in the system wide message, mission statements, or links to customer service surveys are allowed.  This would include mission statements regarding employee representation by NTEU leaders such as “A seat at the table, professionalism and fair and equitable treatment of employees…union values that OCC stakeholders count on!  Now more than Ever!”   

2010 Financial Disclosure Forms

It is the annual financial disclosure time.  This year, the forms may take on additional meaning for you.  Traditionally, auto loans obtained from national banks or affiliates has been a cause for concern.  However, this year the purchase of foreclosed property or short sales from National Banks or their affiliates may become a bigger issue.

In the past, OCC ethics officials have tried to clarify or assist employees upon receipt of the disclosure forms, whenever questions came up.  As discussed in Chapter Chatter on Dec 2^nd, however, the OCC is now referring any “potential” violations of law directly to the Office of Inspector General (OIG), which are the standing instructions for OCC ethic officials.  Therefore, in theory, if you simply and honestly presented facts or questions pointing to a possible violation on your disclosure, an OCC ethics official could potentially have no choice in proceeding with an OIG referral , no matter how minor. 

As we have pointed out more than once, if you are a NTEU member or are in the bargaining unit, our stewards and officers can help you in the event that you become the subject of an OIG investigation.  Employees need to understand that with the OIG, there is no such thing as “due process.”  You will not know that a referral has been made, and you may not even know that you are being investigated.  Consequently, NTEU advises that if you have a possible infraction, you should consider reviewing your situation with a NTEU representative prior to submitting your disclosure or even communicating with an OCC ethics official with questions.  

While we would hope for sound judgments to prevail before an OIG referral is made, we encourage everyone to be proactive on this issue.  And, by all means, please let NTEU know immediately if an OIG agent asks to interview you.  You are entitled to representation at any investigatory interviews

Reader Feedback

Performance Evaluation Process:

I don't know if NTEU can have any influence over the annual performance evaluation process.  If so, I think management could be asked if they would look at the sequencing, timing, and other processes around annual PE's with employees, as well as the grievance process for same.  By the time an employee is given their written PE and notification of their merit increase, usually late in December, this has already been reviewed and vetted with the employee's supervisor, their EIC, and more than likely the DC responsible for the area.  Thus knowing it is a fait accompli, employees may be reluctant to question their PE or merit increase or take more formally grieve this, fearing that even if they might win the battle they could lost the war.  Do you know if this subject has ever been broached by NTEU with management, and if not, would this be an appropriate time, when collective bargaining is revisited?

Editor  Comment:  This issue was raised at the January 6^th LMRC meeting.  Management indicated that, although they try to shorten the timeframe, the process itself prevents that from occurring.  It does beg the question: why not change the process? 

State of the Union:

Kudos on both "State of the Union" perspectives.  The first perspective especially struck a chord with me.  Of the four "expectations" going back to 2005, the one focusing on Employee Engagement is the most significant "MRA" or "needs improvement" item.  As noted, a change in culture takes time and often occurs after changes in the top of the organizational leadership.  Change is coming. 

Additional transparency must be pressed by every avenue, including the outstanding Chapter Chatters.  I trust that the political and litigation resources of NTEU stand behind the pressure, particularly whenever "chatter" about Chatter turns even mildly repressive.  

Transparency is just the opposite of what some want.  Have heard a suggestion that confidentiality (or continued secrecy) would help move management toward pre-decisional involvement.  No!  What can lead to genuine involvement, a/k/a employee engagement, is a series of changes at the top, with NTEU and NTEU-friendly forces helping to shape and move along those changes.  When we have senior management interested in working with NTEU to effect culture change, only then will we have pre-decisional involvement rather than some window-dressing.  

For now, Chatter is virtually the only timely source of certain information, and it should hit hard whenever management hews to the secrecy culture.

Editor comment:  The OCC is accustomed to operating under the radar.  Any form of transparency would be a giant leap.  That is why Chapter Chatter has become such an important communication tool at the agency.  Management may be willing to work more closely with the union on pre-decisional matters, but we have already been apprised of their desire for confidentiality; or in other words, maintaining the current general state, lacking meaningful transparency.

***********

Great job on this message and the New Year’s Chatter.  In the current environment and with this particular OCC management, I can only imagine how much you all have to fight just to get anything accomplished.  I’ll bet the agency is on high alert on the two bills and are madly trying to water down the compensation negotiability/bargaining provisions that we’ve advocated for so long (among other things turf-related).  So, keep up the great work.  You all are appreciated by both members and the many freeloaders.

Continuing Education:

An extremely grueling year on examiners…..  but hey…. We did a bang-up job.  And now we get less training and less merit increases.  Love the message they (mgmt) are sending.  And regardless of what they say…. The agency is consciously cutting back on training opportunities this year.

Editor  comment:  Management contends they are very focused on the “optics. ” The money was already budgeted for larger merit increases but management decided to reduce the size of the merit pool because of the “optics.” Did anybody care about the “optics” of growing our already huge reserves by another $60 million as a result? 

I-Metro:

I hope the people attacking the procurement of replacement laptops for OCC employees are ACOs or PCOs with a working knowledge of Federal procurement guidelines and Federal Acquisition Regulations.  There's a lot more to a procurement of goods for a federal agency than creating an employee wish list and making a run to Best Buy.  I'm disappointed the NTEU seems to be purposely underplaying the complexity of this process in an attempt to drive a wedge between employees and management. Do we purposely pander to the disgruntled in order to increase membership?

Editor comment: NTEU is aware of the complexities of the federal procurement guidelines.  However, in reviewing our December 16 comments, we gave kudos to management for several things they did right.  However, we were critical of management in three areas:  (1) We questioned why it was so late in the process, before it was determined that the vendor could not deliver under requirements of the federal contract (relative to second drives).  (2) We questioned the agency’s decision to back up critical and sensitive bank and employee information on a non-government system.  In addition, (3) we questioned management’s failure to involve employees in developing solutions.  As an aside, the replacement laptops were first promised in summer of 2009.  Now we are hoping for a Spring 2010 deployment.  We would disagree that holding management accountable for its decisions and the implementation process is a methodology for driving a wedge.

***********

After watching the instructions, it is clear that accommodating anyone with a second hard drive wasn’t even an afterthought when they selected these new laptops.  

Retention Programs:

Thanks for the update.  It sounds like you have identified a number of important issues.  I am somewhat puzzled however by the need for an employee retention program for employees nearing retirement.  Promotional opportunities are extremely limited at this Agency and often the only time someone gets to progress is when someone else retires or leaves.  This is unfortunate, but is reality.  Perhaps the lack of opportunities is another topic for the NTEU to take up but I would guess that many in the bargaining unit are sitting on the other side of the retention issue. 

As always we want to hear your feedback, good, bad or indifferent. Write us at this website.

A seat at the table, professionalism and fair and equitable treatment of employees…union values that you can count on (through out the year)!!!