Not policy and procedure for either of the two companies I’ve worked for. Maybe it’s different at the third.
that’s easier said then done. In my almost 20 years experience I have never had a security questionnaire that did not involve at least 10 minutes of correcting mistakes.
2 Likes
If it’s a T4R or T5R case with no issues I can get those done in 25-30 minutes.
1 Like
What you are describing is not standard practice industry wide and unnecessary
3 Likes
I agree with you. Although they say “don’t work off the clock” they have to know Investigators are going to. It’s just so wrong.
1 Like
You betcha they know. They don’t care as long as the case gets closed. I just hate the pay system. They should be paying based on experience, not on how many testimonies you can pump out in a day. That leaves all kinds of room for cheating and working off the clock so people can get more money.
2 Likes
The whole contractor business for DCSA has become a total sham. The Big 2 care nothing about national security, their employees or DCSA except that they are all cash cows to them. Sad.
10 Likes
So I may just be naive since I have no ambition to be some Super Investigator Six someday, but how is working off the clock “more money”? If you make $40 per hour but it takes you 2 hours to accomplish the work and 1 hour was “off the clock” then really you only made $20 per hour. That’s not really making “more money”.
1 Like
I also had a similar conversation with a GOV supervisor who was interviewed by someone he had worked with, that person retired and became a contractor. He said the contractor asked him if the SUBJECT was a “good guy” and when the supervisor said yes, the contractor left.
3 Likes
Wow, I did not realize people were doing interviews like that. I guess I should not be surprised though as every profession has lazy people who cut corners. I guess with this profession I just don’t think about it because I am by myself and do not see my coworkers so I am not constantly reminded how crappy they may be. That’s crazy though! I definitely would not want to be the one having to answer for the reporting in court if something about one of my Subjects went south and they found out I was cheating my way through!
5 Likes
“Obvious errors or inconsistencies” include but are not limited to: “Please explain how Subject started his new job in GA in 10/2013 but didn’t move to GA until 11/2013,” “Subject was unemployed from 5/2015 until 7/2015, please explain his activities and support during this time,” “please explain how subject could work at the same time for Zyx Company and the National Guard/Reserve at the same time” and so on and so forth.
2 Likes
I left CACI as a level IV investigator and came to Peraton as a Level VI. At CACI, we got at least a little credit for things we wrote off, and at Peraton, we do not. The required SU’s are about the same for both vendors, but without that little bit of credit for the write offs, it is impossible to make these metrics. I won’t work off the clock and have not made level VI numbers since I came here. They keep sending me out of my area (out of state even), the drive time is not accurately accounted for, and we don’t get credit for writing off items, even though it takes exponentially more work to put out the honest efforts for a write off than it does to just do the item itself. When we get the emails showing everyone’s numbers on the team, I just roll my eyes knowing that most of those people HAVE to be working off the clock. I can say with all honestly I am running around like a maniac and it doesn’t matter. It’s exhausting and still not good enough in their eyes. I’m probably going to have to ask to be bumped down a few levels. I never had any issues at CACI, but here…. Maaaaaannnn. This is something else.
4 Likes
I think sending out those lists of everyone’s performance data is a conscious effort to put undue pressure on investigator’s to produce source units that may or may not be “real”. It’s just bad practice and bad leadership. Reminiscent of the Wells Fargo accounts debacle. The ethical get penalized and the unethical get production bonuses.
7 Likes
There is a new “suggestion box” at Peraton. I think I am going to “suggest” we get some credit for write offs. You are correct, they take more time “exhausting all efforts” and documenting such efforts than if we actually got the record or interviewed the Source.
2 Likes
Not to mention it’s illegal. That’s why they use sid’s or other employee identifiers when they post numbers. If they ever use names on production lists you have a one way ticket to financial retirement. However we all know which sid belongs to each person and they know it. They’re just pushing the envelope to pressure employees while trying to not get sued.
Also, to those working off the clock everyone has your name and number you’re not fooling anyone! There’s clearly no way you can produce those numbers without working off the clock. Most of us who’ve been on the contract any amount of time know who you are and have identified you as a sucker. May you get caught and terminated, even though you’re supervisor is so proud of you and encourages you to keep it up so they can get their bonus on the back of your illegal activities. You’re screwing all the honest employees over because of your mental issue/need for self esteem and kudos from this job. Get a hobby or volunteer somewhere for self esteem. For those who think you’re climbing a ladder good luck it’s a ladder to nowhere and someday you’ll figure it out after you get fired jk.
6 Likes
Our team used to use peoples names when the FM provided performance data. People on the team complained and they just recently changed to SIDS.
There’s nothing illegal about the company posting performance data. That data belongs to the company - they can put it on a billboard if they want to.
Is it ethical or nice or wise or productive? No. But is it legal? Yes. To paraphrase a great man: You don’t own your performance metrics, son. The company does.
2 Likes
I talked to an attorney about this and was told it’s considered an evaluation which affords a right to privacy and should not be disclosed. Obviously he was lying according to your information.
3 Likes
For the sake of argument, if it were illegal as you say, to make public to other employees performance data, and this is why such information is listed using SIDs and not investigator’s names, why then does the company not take more precautions to keep SIDs private? When leaving a case message an investigator’s SID is shown on the case message along with the investigator’s full name and contact phone number. If metrics were an issue that needed to be kept private then SIDs would be more closely guarded and not freely listed as a signature that goes out to all staff assigned to the same case. Cite a federal law that prohibits an employee’s metrics from being posted and I will stand corrected. Also, there are actual performance evaluations done that are separate from the metrics.
Just because you say there is no “law” against sharing an employees performance data with other employees doesn’t mean a labor lawyer could not take this issue to court who successfully argue and win this in court. Privacy laws (as all laws can) can be interpreted and argued in many ways. Any labor lawyer will tell you that ALL employees have an expectation that their work performance is kept confidential. Sometimes ethical decisions on privacy can bode well for a company in the long run and not so well in a lawsuit.
3 Likes