This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Personnel News

Union Letter To Goldin – Lack of Adequate Response

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
July 19, 1996
Filed under

International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Headquarters Professional Association (NHPA)
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Washington, DC 20546-0001
July 19, 1996
Mr. Daniel Goldin
Administrator
NASA Headquarters
300 E Street SW
Washington DC 20546
Dear Mr. Goldin:
Due to the lack of adequate response to our letters and communications to your management team represented by Mr. Christensen, we are obligated to write this letter to you. Your management has indicated that full responsibility for the RIF and downsizing actions are by your direction. Therefore, we deserve a response from you.
We were very disappointed to receive the July 12 letter from Mr. Christensen on downsizing of headquarters. His response dealt exclusively with issues raised in our May 2 letter. Our May 10 letter generated a tremendous outpouring of support and consensus from all levels of employees throughout the organization, from secretaries to high-level managers. However, Mr., Christensen’s response was totally unresponsive to the significant concerns raised in our May 10 letter involving the process by which NASA is proceeding with headquarters downsizing.

It is important for you, in managing NASA’s downsizing, not only to understand the employees’ perspective, but also to react appropriately when such significant concerns and warning flags are raised to you. To date you and your management team have not only been completely non-responsive, but have handled employee concerns in an arrogant, condescending and adversarial manner. You have lost touch with the employees who are the cornerstone of NASA. The employees have accordingly lost trust in your capability to manage and lead our organization.
You and your senior advisors have refused any meaningful dialogue with NHPA which represents our employees. We are continually “apprised” of actions after-the-fact and our efforts at constructive input are trivialized and ignored. You proceed with your plan while we are told that no decision has been made while you go ahead with your action.
Reducing the workforce is only part of downsizing. Downsizing is part of a broader strategy which includes examining core missions and programs, reducing or eliminating functions, and redesigning or reengineering systems and management processes to reduce costs. There has been no focus on the headquarters function and how best to accomplish that function. Few of the downsizing initiatives implemented by your management team to date have been cost effective. Nor have they addressed any issue other than reducing the numbers of headquarters employees. Your focus has been solely on reduced numbers, not improved efficiencies.
Your previous announcement to downsize NASA Headquarters using RIFs was a sign of management failure. RIFs are extremely costly in terms of both dollars and the negative effect on the workforce. Finding and keeping knowledgeable people is more important now than ever and is crucial to NASA in meeting our future goals. Many of NASA’s initiatives over the years have been aimed at breaking down barriers, building teams, and integrating across centers and organizations in order to achieve a sense of common purpose and goals. Years of progress toward achieving these goals were wiped out when you posted the plans for RIF on the bulletin boards April 17, 1996, and then continued to proceed in the callous manner of the last several months while denying your actions. Preventing RIFs is management’s responsibility. To do that, you have to do many other things right, including managing projects, people and resources in a way to instill trust and confidence and to ensure that projects can be accomplished in the safest and most efficient manner possible.
The same concerns we identified in our May 10 letter still remain. Mr. Christensen mentions that many of the employees’ concerns addressed in our letter may have been answered in your letter to Senator Barbara Mikulski. Unfortunately, in our opinion, your letter does not even come close to answering our concerns. Please provide an answer to our May 10, 1996 letter.
We strongly suggest that one of the highest priorities for you and your management team is to start rebuilding the badly damaged management/employee relationship by responding in an appropriate manner when concerns are voiced to you and by treating NASA employees with respect.
The manner in which this entire downsizing effort continues to be handled has caused great stress in the workforce. Since we do not understand the reasons for the chaotic way in which NASA management is proceeding, we can not explain or support to the outside community or our families why these changes are taking place. How can NASA hope to achieve great and worthy goals when our management can not unite, lead, and inspire the workforce? We are greatly concerned about the future of our agency and our ability to function and provide a product to the nation.
As you have periodically stated, NASA’s greatest resource is its employees. It is essential that those employees become committed tot he direction the Agency is taking. We do not understand that direction, what you are doing, or why you are doing it.
Donald D. Teague
President

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.