Wednesday, November 28, 2012

Chill Wind for Metro Whistleblowers

From CS:
If ever an organization needed strong whistleblower protection, it’s Metro. At substantial risk to themselves, whistleblowers buck the system, attempting to bring to light waste, fraud, safety violations, mismanagement, and other abuse. Metro itself has recognized the value of whistleblowers, with a whistleblower rights policy that includes purported protections against retaliation for those who speak up. This policy was strengthened in the wake of the 2009 Ft. Totten crash when investigators discovered a culture of retaliation against Metro employees who tried to speak up about potential safety concerns.

Unfortunately, as recent release of Metro documents reveals, a major whistleblower protection is turning out to be pretty toothless. Which is a shame, because it makes it all the harder for would-be whistleblowers to try to call attention to the wrongs they encounter. And as we know too well, Metro has plenty of unsavory practices that could bear some sunlight.

Governmentattic.org, which proclaims its mission as “rummaging in the government’s attic,” obtained copies of the decisions by Metro’s Whistleblower Retaliation Hearing Panel. This is a trio of senior Metro executives, which hears cases of alleged retaliation against Metro whistleblowers.

The documents cover six cases back to November 2010. Although Metro has committed itself to full investigation of problems and protection of employees from retaliation, the documents show the review panel hasn’t exactly been breaking a sweat to get to the bottom of things. The documents show the panel has made minimal independent investigation of cases; for example, deciding to forgo investigation of incidents with those complaining or their supervisors.

In addition to that relaxed approach, the panel has also done scarcely anything to explain the thinking behind its decisions. (Assuming there is any thinking.) It’s important to lay things out, because only in seeing how the panel weighs evidence can would-be whistleblowers evaluate how much protection they’ll get – or not. Put simply, to see what flies and what doesn’t.

Customarily, legal decisions state the rule at issue in a case, present the facts and evidence considered, and then provide a line of reasoning based on things like precedent and case law that allow parties to see how a decision was reached.

What the panel’s decisions do instead is summarily state the outcome and leave it at that. They barely break half a page each. Thus, they’re of no use to anyone trying to gauge when it’s worth laying their career on the line. Any law student would flunk if they turned in work like this. (It’s possible the decisions could be short case summaries, but they are not described that way in the documents released. They are described as the “written decision(s)” of the review panel.)

Put it all together, and the message is pretty plain: Whistleblowers, we don’t have your back.

Whistleblowers take tremendous risks from the start, and the panel is supposed to be the last line of defense against unjust retaliation. But with friends like this, it’s easy to see why whistleblowers would feel an even bigger chill as they weigh whether to step forward.

That’s bad for the employees, but even worse for the agency and the traveling public.
Other items: 
Metro screw ups lead to cell phone delays (Examiner)
Metro paid $35,000 in legal fees over controversial ads (Legal Times)
More details on Woodley Park stabbing (Examiner)
MindMixer site gets trolled, Metro picks up ball and goes home (FixWMATA)

Comments (15)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
I guess this explains why so many Metro employees come to this blog to report problems.

Hats off to all of you with the guts to report problems! Much MUCH appreciated!
hrh king friday 13's avatar

hrh king friday 13 · 641 weeks ago

These whistleblowers aren't being constructive. Thier negative attidue hurts peoples feelings and Metro is going to be suspicious of their intentions. What we need is more bike lanes.
1 reply · active 641 weeks ago
I think your downvoters need their sarcasm detectors fixed.
This is a good reminder as to why Unsuck's WMATA sources are always anonymous.
And that other moron was complaining that you don't reveal who your sources are? That is probably the ONLY way to get fired at metro. Blow the whistle and you're fired. Sleep, crash, drive drunk on crack, kill people, slack off all day, etc... you're fully protected.
But... Spataps said Unsuck should out his anonymous sources...

Just another reason Spataps is a moron...
former employee's avatar

former employee · 641 weeks ago

Metro uses their own system to retaliate against whistleblowers. They have legit weapons. EAP mandated referral, supertintendents manipulating the pick system slots often based around the person who made the complaint that their desire shift or location will not be available. Job assignments changed. This practice is in accordance with union CBA. Metro conduts in house investigation. Fox guarding the hen house kind of thing. Upper management and lower mgmt. is a buddy system. Employee who makes a report of waste, abuse fraud or safety violations is like committing their work life in to a living hell.

Unsuck is the only safe way for an employee to report fraud, abuse, waste and safety violations without the fear of retailation. Many good conscience workers at Metro feel the public has a right to know about the practice that goes on at Metro.
2 replies · active 641 weeks ago
Hey Bud-

Whistle-blowers at metro?
No!

According to Metro there are only happy well paid employees making big bucks in overtime. Why would anyone want to blow the whistle when making over 6 figures a year driving a bus or train?

Oh yea, that's right Bud! I heard the employees making the big bucks don't blow the whistle. The employees making big bucks harass and intimidate those who blow the whistle and the field boss keeps giving his 'buddies" the overtime to keep the whistle blowers in check. Not to mention using scare tactics like writing up employees with fictitious safety violations.

Hey Bud is this true? I even heard of methods like distracting metro employees so they make mistakes and have to go back to their old job after they screw up on their own or with marked bad equipment.

Buddy, man, I get it now!
Booscard2's avatar

Booscard2 · 641 weeks ago

Former employee thank you. Why does the public not want to hear about safety from the people who know the inner workings best.

This agency needs a real overhaul from the top down. That does not mean move the same employees around to other positions and that is all Metro does.

What I heard that scares me is that the training department has persons they just hired to train other employees and they have "zero" experience operating trains or buses. Scary!

What happened to rewarding the internal employees who want the jobs and promoting from within? I may really think about how else I may get to work safely.
Sorry to be OT, but the MindMixer screenshots are hilarious- I snarfed my morning tea.
Stan Dessel's avatar

Stan Dessel · 641 weeks ago

After meeting with several groups of consultants, we decided to issue 18K golden whistles to each and every employee. I even got one.

You're welcome!
Is David LaCosse dead? I'm posing a 100% serious question. There's no way any executive would be able to run a department into the ground as he has and then be totally unheard from.
3 replies · active 640 weeks ago
He has a self-implemented "no interview" policy. Pretty much just locks himself in doors and wont say anything to the outside world. Complete coward. He was moved to the Parts Department after the L'Enfant Escalator debacle. A couple of metro sources have posted on here saying that the Parts Department has gone to crap since he's gotten here. As in some of the parts are in such bad shape by the time they get to the escalator they are deemed unusable.
John, would you be at all able to speculate WHY he is still working at Metro in any way, shape, or form? People who are so truly horrible at what they do tend to get flushed out at some point. This guy has presided over situations in which people have been seriously injured. If you run a ship aground in the Navy, for example, you tend to get shit-canned regardless of rank. How does this guy have any power at all?
Hey Ryan there are others. You have those who were promoted after the crash who were in-charge and then you have those in charge and giving another promotion after being in the drug program. These managers oversee employees who are in safety sensitive areas. What kind of sense does that make.

Post a new comment

Comments by

 
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License.
Site Meter