Letters

As one of the GSA regions that have worked under reinvention lab status for more than five years, we have enjoyed great success on many fronts. Being a lab offered the promise of freedom and the opportunity to encourage innovation. I am confident that our contribution to GSA's national success in moving ahead with a true business, bottom-line focus, has been significant.

Being a lab also held the promise of some protection and tolerance for mistakes made while we forged new ground. The Mid-Atlantic Region is now being reviewed by no less than 10 audit teams from the General Accounting Office, the GSA inspector general's office and others. My sense is that we are about to experience the payback of being a lab.

As your article, "Experiments in Excellence" (July 1999), stated, it seems there is little interest in the labs any longer and little hope that we will see the protection that was part of the bargain, by the time all these auditors are finished.

Jan Ziegler

Assistant Regional Administrator

Public Buildings Service

Mid-Atlantic Region

General Services Administration

The Two Faces of MSPB

I read your article on the Merit Systems Protection Board ("Fair Game," May) with more than a passing interest.

I have been defending myself for the past few years against the Army's latest allegations against me--flagrantly disregarding my duties as the GS-14 director of contracting at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. I have faithfully served in this position since March 1986. As a longtime whistleblower, I am all too familiar with the bureaucratic methods of the Office of Special Counsel and MSPB.

I am long past the point of believing that the system created to protect whistleblowers does its job. I assure you that many whistleblowers do not like the MSPB's decisions.

Just trying to fulfill one's official duties can be a living hell for many federal whistleblowers. Having witnessed the planned militarization of my encumbered civilian position and having experienced an indefinite detail out of my position for the last three years, I no longer have any faith in the system or those responsible for upholding it.

Robert K. Bristow

Director of Contracting

Fort Leavenworth, Kan.

Logistics an Endangered Field

Your May article, "Logistics Log Jam," left me quite concerned for the future of the logistics career field in the Air National Guard. I do not understand why the Army is choosing to privatize its supply operation. If the Army had not neglected to keep its computer supply systems up to date or to keep its people trained and informed, it probably would not be in this predicament.

I agree with the Defense Department's "total asset visibility" philosophy, and I agree with the push for better logistics management. However, I disagree with the statement "Because supply lines are slow and unreliable, the smart supply clerk orders twice as much as he needs, or he orders it again 30 days later, just to make sure it comes in." That does not apply here at the 193rd Special Operation Wing.

As a supply clerk, I order what we need and follow up on the requisitions that are placed on back order. Although supply lines may be slow at times, with today's technology, your asset can be found. A spare part needed in peace or war can be tracked anywhere in the world on the Internet with a simple tracking number provided by the shipper.

Believe it or not, a smart supply clerk does not want to have excess on hand. Thanks to Fedex.com and DHL.com as well as some of the others, you may find that your spare part is just hours away from repairing that downed aircraft.

The key to having good supply clerks is education, morale, room for growth and advancement. A little pride in the unit's mission can go along way. The supply clerk should continue to have the opportunity to deploy with the unit to handle real-world contingencies. I hope the Air Force and the Air National Guard will be smart enough to realize that training is ongoing in the logistics field. I do not want our career field to be contracted out as it was in the Army.

TSgt. Regina I. Stoltzfus

Headquarters, 193rd Special Operations Wing

Pennsylvania Air National Guard

Middletown, Pa.

Truth or Dare

Your article "Dangerous Truths" (April) appears to be the flip side of previous writings. "Joe versus the Bureaucracy" (October 1995) reported that the Veterans Affairs Department had cast off total quality management in favor of reinventing regional office operations. What was not said was that in 1988, Congress had moved to place veterans' claims processing under judicial review in order to end complaints of due process failures, such as lack of fairness and equal protection. While the VA initially attempted to reform its operations (through TQM and other initiatives), it soon became apparent to the agency's proponents of paternalism that the legal and ethical baggage attached to a judicially oriented system was a threat to business as usual.

Michael D. Thorpe

Former Hearing Officer

Veterans Affairs Department

Salt Lake City, Utah

Write to Us

Government Executive, 1501 M St. N.W., Suite 300, Washington, D.C. 20005 or e-mail us at letters@govexec.com . Name, title and agency must appear on all correspondence. Letters may be condensed.