GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Employee tried to mask extent of latest VA data breach

• 28158
  

  This article states: "The VA's technology chief said last month that the data breach would cost the department $20 million." I wonder does this amount include the bonsus the director got for a pat on the back for doing a good job. Let's don't forget how the VA spends the mney alloted to the Department by Congress.

  The money could be better spent on our veterans, widows, and orphans instead the VA Department's employees, federal employees, waste taxpayers money and get rewarded for it - or it seems that away with them getting these bonsuses.

  I have been fighting for a claim that was found at the USCAVC in l998 as being overlooked in the file since l983 and the Court trusted the Secretary to finalize it posthaste. Yet, today it is still not finalized and as a matter of fact, the Montgomery Regional Office closed this remand directive of the Board of Veterans Appeals and violated l9.38 but no one will address this issue and arguments of the VA's own failure to assist in preparation of the claim and now the issue is l983 - 2007 some almost 24 years overdue.

  They had rather waste taxpayers money than keep the promise to our veterans, their widows and orphans which has long been carved in stone: "To care for those who borne the battle and their widows and orphans. (Abraham Lincoln)"

  When does this injustice STOP!

  We can get an investigation into a theft of a computer drive, but we can't get an investigation into the misstating and mishandling of a claim. WHY NOT?

  Shelia Winsett Posted July 11, 2007 11:46 AM
• 28076
  

  With respect to Gary L. There is nothing like over generalizing from two comments (incorrectly I might add) to all of society. One earlier commenter said the employee should probably lose the job, but that the supervisor should have a more serious penalty than is likely to be levied. The other commenter does not defend the employee in the first sentence. So how is calling for the supervisor to be accountable too the same as calling for no personal responsibility? I'm confused by your logic.

  Probably the employee and his/her supervisor failed to read the rules or pay attention to the training they were given. There are rules about sensitive data...which are ignored. And there are environments created by supervisors which make following the rules and not getting fired virtually impossible. Both are culpable. How is blaming the employee but not the supervisor creating a world of personal responsbility? Again your logic is not clear to me.

  As for the story, I'd just like to see the practices at private universities and research firms, or even moreso at private commercial firms.

  David M. Posted July 10, 2007 2:01 PM
• 28067
  

  I must be missing something,I was under the impression that he was being paid by the goverment and had the responsibility of safeguarding the data. I guarntee that he's the guy that makes everyone change their password every 30 days and no 2 passswords can be the same. This has nothing to do with "bossess" its about a jerk not following directives he needs to be gone. The point is the VETERANS are the ones who will end up having to deal with his poor judgement

  dan ketter Posted July 10, 2007 1:01 PM
• 28066
  

  Hopefully, the IG will produce a report that will not only identifies the "complete chain of responsibility" but also pin points the necessary corrective actions and plans. It is obvious that the VA and other Federal agencies are missing the boat when it comes to safeguarding employee information. It is time those responsible, from the one who losses the information to those in her/his chain of command, are made to pay a painful price - just like the ones whose information was lost. Trust me, I know as mine was lost.

  El Oso Posted July 10, 2007 12:31 PM
• 28064
  

  In cases like this... the agency MUST make it clear that they will not shoot the messenger. Employees and contractors must be encouraged to report data spillage ASAP...quote OMB, faster than one hour after intitial disclosure. Something is going wrong inside VA that this keep happening outside of proper response procedures.

  Don Posted July 10, 2007 12:17 PM
• 28056
  

  Comments posted to this article demonstrate the depth of the problem in our society and that is the lack of acceptance for personal responsibility. As an employee we all know the sensitivity of the information we have access to and use on a constant basis. We each have a responsibility to be aware of steps necessary to safeguard sensistive information from loss or theft and excercise those steps ourselves. I choose to excercise my personal freedom to know the rules and follow them and not surrender that freedom to someone else advocating they "should or must be ever present in the workplace" so as to guide my actions and prevent me from making such maistakes becasue i don't knbow the rules.

  That is not to say the managers should have not had an awareness but to try to totally lay the responsibility off on them - come on!

  Gary L. Posted July 10, 2007 10:50 AM
• 28028
  

  The IT person will probably lose their job not that they probably don't have it coming. However the director and other big shots only get a slap on the wrist. You can take that to the bank. That's the way the VA works. Protect the big wheels and stomp on the little guy.

  SATOS Posted July 10, 2007 7:17 AM
• 28024
  

  I am not defending the employee. But, this hardly an atypical scenario. In the bureaucracy of the federal workplace, the first line federal workers are often left to fend for themselves while their boss attends meetings that accomplish little or hangs out with other managers. Bosses need to have a presence in the workplace, not just an occasional office meeting to give everybody a pep talk.

  If the feds hope to prevent data theft or even worse problems, they better figure out how to keep the boss in the workplace and make certain that he/she knows what is going on.

  Robert M. Posted July 10, 2007 6:53 AM