"First, NASA does not have a poor-performer problem. Your statement demeans the hard working men and women of this Agency who have dedicated their professional lives to NASA. You owe NASA's rank-and-file workforce an apology. It is outrageous that NASA's Chief Human Capital Officer would imply that poor performance is a major problem at NASA without any evidence to back this up. If you believe that poor performance is such a problem that it should trigger a request for additional legislative relief, why then did you not mention this in your Senate testimony on July 20th about NASA's workforce planning?"
Editor's note: I just have to say that this is getting to be a little silly. The Union folks dump on Vicki Novak for implying "that poor performance is a major problem at NASA without any evidence to back this up" in a paragraph that starts with the equally unsubstantiated statement "First, NASA does not have a poor-performer problem." My question to the union folks: please provide evidence to back up YOUR claim.
4 October 2004: NOAA-N-Prime Satellite Mishap Investigation Report Released
"The Government's inability to identify and correct deficiencies in the TIROS operations and LMSSC oversight processes were due to inadequate resource management, an unhealthy organizational climate, and the lack of effective oversight processes."
Otherwise, armwaving and name calling aside, this letter references problems that continue to plague the agency.