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.
Coronavirus

NASA Goddard Is Confused About Its Own COVID-19 Polices (Update)

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
July 31, 2020
Filed under ,
NASA Goddard Is Confused About Its Own COVID-19 Polices (Update)

Keith’s 5:12 pm update: This is the response that NASA GSFC News Chief Dewayne Washington sent me: “We truly appreciate the innovative spirit displayed and sought to highlight the employee and her accomplishments. Upon further review, however, we don’t have the ability to distribute lab equipment to all those who may request it or to validate the safety of uniquely-configured home lab workspaces. Moving forward, lab/technical equipment will remain on center. If access to the center is required for work, there’s a process for approving proposed on-site work in Stage 3 and part of that process involves ensuring the proper workspace COVID-19 safety protocols are established for employees.”
I sent a second inquiry to NASA PAO and GSFC management: “I have added a link on my original NASAWatch posting to the full text of the internal GSFC memo issued by Raymond Rubilotta which mentions the working at home issue stating “we will take appropriate action against those who violate this policy”. I am trying to understand how GSFC can publicly praise someone and then publicly criticize the exact same activity that GSFC just publicly praised them for. Can you send me the text of the actual policy that governs doing this sort of work at home? Is this a GSFC-specific policy or a NASA-wide policy? I am certain a lot of my readers across the agency are going to view this inconsistency with some concern – as if they do not have enough to worry about already.”

One hand at GSFC clearly does not know what the other is doing. And when the center director takes a week off his “pinch hitter” deputy jumps the shark and blasts an employee who showed initiative – initiative that GSFC officially promoted. And then another employee takes that direction and issues another memo. And yet the GSFC magazine lauding that employee is still online. And all that GSFC PAO can do is punt with a non-answer. Lets see if there actually is a “policy” for this sort of thing and if GSFC will send it to me – or (much more importantly) that they will share with their employees. And if there actually is a poloicy, it will be interesting to see if GSFC explains why they never told anyone about it.
Raymond Rubilotta said in his memo “we will take appropriate action against those who violate this policy”. So is the employee that GSFC lauded for working at home going to be punished? That’s what Rubilotta said he’d do. I’m sure the dumbest lawyer on Earth could point out that this employee had been officially complimented so a reprimand is probably the most idiotic thing GSFC thing could do. If he is not going to take action then why did he threaten to in the first place?
No one at NASA can ever admit to making a mistake.
Keith’s original 11:00 am note: NASA has asked its employees to work from home during the pandemic. Indeed, an official NASA GSFC publication featured someone from GSFC being creative and working at home – and features them on the cover of the publication. Then Goddard management turns around and says that their own policy prohibits the practice that they just lauded. Really? This is not the way to encourage people to be creative during the pandemic. Safety and liability are one thing. Lauding and then condemning someone for being creative is another. NASA Goddard really needs to get their act together.
Innovating at Home, Cutting Edge, NASA GSFC
“Even though the funding hadn’t been approved at the time, there was another concept I could work on at home,” Novo-Gradac said. It involved designing and validating a wedge-shaped, 3D optical target for measuring precise drift of the other spacecraft flying in formation. “I don’t need 100 meters of range to validate that technology. I can do it on a small bench at home.” While she continues to make purchases and design parts on a computer for the original project, the IRAD program agreed to shift most of her funding and labor to the second, mid-year IRAD request for now. “I had to bring home about 10 different instruments,” Novo-Gradac said. “My family room had a perfect countertop with an upper deck. Other than having to haul home all that equipment, the experiment was a very manageable thing to bring home.”
From: GSFC-Communications
Date: Fri, July 31, 2020 10:04 AM -0400
To: GSFC-DL-ALL
Subject: Center Policy Prohibits Lab and Technical Space Work at Home
A MESSAGE FROM THE CHIEF TECHNOLOGIST
Dear Colleagues,
It has come to our attention that our recent CuttingEdge cover story about Goddard technologists working from home was in violation of a center policy prohibiting lab and technical space work at home.
Performing lab/technical space work at home is strictly against our center’s policy. If there are reasons for which you cannot perform your work at Goddard, please speak to your supervisor. Performing such work at home is potentially dangerous, and we will not risk your health and safety.
Peter M. Hughes
Chief Technologist
*For internal purposes only.
Keith’s 2:09 pm update: Apparently the (acting) GSFC Center Director “Pinch Hitter for Dennis” was the impetus for this 180 degree turn with regard to employees working at home. Note that he says that he says “we will take appropriate action against those who violate this policy” while the center’s own publication praises the same behavior.
NASA GSFC Internal Memo: Message and Updates from the Center Director, NASA GSFC
“Hello, everyone, Dennis is on leave this week and has asked me, like an understudy in the theater industry, to step in for him providing the weekly update. … Raymond J. Rubilotta Associate Center Director, a.k.a. “pinch hitter for Dennis”
“Policy on Performing Lab Work at Home
It has come to our attention that because of the teleworking posture many of us still find ourselves in, several employees have taken it upon themselves to perform laboratory/technical space work at home or in their personal facilities. We do not need to go into detail on the associated risks, but it is both against our center’s policy and potentially dangerous. Performing lab/technical space work at home is strictly prohibited and we will take appropriate action against those who violate this policy. If you must perform lab work and are not classified as Stage 3 or 4 personnel, have reservations about coming to center, are up against a deadline, or for any other reason are unable to perform your work at Goddard, please speak to your supervisor to find the best remedy. You, our employees, are our greatest resource, and under no circumstances will we risk your health and safety.”

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

21 responses to “NASA Goddard Is Confused About Its Own COVID-19 Polices (Update)”

  1. rb1957 says:
    0
    0

    We had the same “pointy haired boss” approach here … policies prevented staff from working at home (until a customer complained “peoplestaff are being placed at risk working closely together in your office … send all staff on our project home”).

    A different part of the discussion is ITAR (and Controlled Goods) … which obviously shouldn’t be taken home (without approval).

    • jimlux says:
      0
      0

      There’s no particular problem with having export controlled information at home, assuming your home isn’t full of non-US-persons and you’re not storing it in the open. If it’s on a computer and you’ve got data-at-rest encryption (as pretty much all NASA computers do), I don’t see a problem.

      It’s not like you’d have to go to a special secure location to participate in a meeting discussing spacecraft design. There are ways to securely transfer files around, and there are controls on the meeting software (why consumer Zoom isn’t used, for instance, although there is a “government Zoom” similar to “education” and “health care” Zoom which do provide protection)

      • fcrary says:
        0
        0

        Taking export controlled or classified material home can be a problem. As one scientist at LANL found out a decade or so ago. But this woman’s work at home doesn’t look like anything which would raise concerns of that sort. They seem to be saying that her work at home could, potentially, involve occupational health and safety issues, and that’s not allowed. Actually, it doesn’t. But getting permission for that, and convincing the appropriate managers of that (and maybe some insurance companies), isn’t an easy thing to do. She didn’t get the appropriate permissions to do something safe and reasonable under the current circumstances. If you’re a civil servant, not getting approval through the appropriate channels to do something is frowned upon, no matter how sensible the something is.

        • Joseph says:
          0
          0

          Direct management approved the work, property passes were issued, and the work was applauded by many. This had enough attention that the article was written to highlight how great all this was.
          As to the other remarks, this setup is about as risky as setting up a stereo system. There is clearly nothing there that requires a safety audit. So, the safety remarks are BS.
          All NASA computers are DAR encrypted to safeguard ITAR, EAR, PII, etc. and everyone was instructed to take those home. So this is not about that.
          It was only after the praise that someone higher up invented the story of a “rule violation”. No such rule appears to exist, and management has changed the justification no more than three times as to their rationale. Nothing that they mentioned is in the work at home checklist. No violation existed. Since the story keeps changing, it is pretty clear that management is making it up as they go.
          BTW, the GESTA union would like to talk to anyone else impacted by this arbitrary rule.

        • jimlux says:
          0
          0

          Classified info, I’ll buy. Export controlled, not so much.
          But yes, there is a “appropriate use of government resources” and a “occupational safety” issue. However, there are processes for these.

  2. Michael Spencer says:
    0
    0

    “NASA Goddard Is Confused”

    So is everyone else.

  3. Tally-ho says:
    0
    0

    Rarther than a knee-jerk banning of all “lab work”, why not approve at the management level on a case by case basis. It doesn’t sound like this engineer is doing something particularly dangerous (heavy machines, lasers, chemicals, noise, etc). Personnel safely work from home all the time. They aren’t worried about the liability of personnel tripping on their way to their laptop at home.

    • kcowing says:
      0
      0

      Or the lithium batteries in the NASA laptops catching fire, or NASA employees leaving the laptops with employee personal data in cars where they are stolen. There are JPL employees driving Mars rovers from their homes what if their cat jumps up on the laptop and … This is all just silly. NASA GSFC should just admit their error and apologize to everyone.

      • ThomasLMatula says:
        0
        0

        Being in the Beltway you should know by now that Bureaucrats never apologize because they are never wrong. After all they are just following the procedures and policies they were told to follow.

        As the author Ellis Parker Butler demonstrated in his great 1905 short story “Pigs is Pigs”, common sense is forbidden to co-exist with bureaucracy. Nothing has changed since…

    • fcrary says:
      0
      0

      It’s the other way around. They aren’t issuing a knee-jerk ban on lab work at home. Before COVID-19 and working at home every came up, I think that was the policy. The problem is that circumstances have changed, and allowing safe lab work at home, when possible, _should_ be allowed on a case-by-case basis. But they seem to be sticking to the old policies, and saying they aren’t willing (or able) to make case-by-case exceptions for the new conditions and working reality. That’s bureaucratic inertia and reliance on old rules which no longer make sense. It’s not a reaction, knee-jerk or otherwise, it’s a failure to react.

      • Joseph says:
        0
        0

        Keith has asked for the policy and none has been forthcoming. Rumor is that this was an arbitrary decision by a temporary center director and that there was much disagreement in the meeting but that he was inflexible.

      • Joseph says:
        0
        0

        This is what happens when you leave a facilities manager in charge. Little understanding leads to bad decisions for all.

  4. ThomasLMatula says:
    0
    0

    To paraphrase the great Forrest Gump, Bureaucracy is as bureaucracy does…

  5. fcrary says:
    0
    0

    Oh, and after rereading the statement from the Associate Center Director at GSFC, “our employees, are our greatest resource,” I remembered an old Dilbert cartoon. In the cartoon, the manager said that, although the company had previously said that employees were their greatest resource, they had just the checked the costs and benefits. Employees were now considered the company’s twelfth greatest resource. And number eleven was carbon paper.

    I’m sorry for being rude about this, but… Employees who come up with innovative ways to deal with a crisis really are the most important resource an organization can have. If it doesn’t follow all the official rules, then a good manager should just turn a blind eye to that. Especially in the case of a serious and unexpected crisis, which the COVID-19 events certainly are.

    • Joseph says:
      0
      0

      Again, this was approved by managers, property passes were issued, and there was no violation of the work at home checklist. Ray just got his knickers in a knot.

  6. Kodos13 says:
    0
    0


    no one at NASA can ever admit making a mistake

    1986 – “that O-ring is fine as is.. safe to fly”
    1999 – “imperial measurements, metrics…ehh, what’s the difference?”
    2003 – “debris may have struck and damaged the orbiter wing?…nope; don’t need pictures!”

    No accountability, either.

    • kcowing says:
      0
      0

      I am not sure that this instance of stupidity at NASA rises to that level. Its more like an over reaction in the wrong direction.

  7. Winner says:
    0
    0

    For the Dragon undocking, SpaceX Hawthorne mission control all wore masks and socially distanced; Houston mission control – no masks.
    What does that say about NASA?

  8. Joseph says:
    0
    0

    The directive to GSFC was to provide reasonable accommodations due to COVID. Apparently some in management haven’t gotten that message. There are many people that work there who themselves are at risk due to their age alone and many others that have underlying medical conditions. Further, they may have family members in similar situations. This absolute policy is a de facto assault upon all the at risk individuals at GSFC. As such, even the dumbest lawyer should be able to transform this into a massive age discrimination lawsuit and/or a violation of the American’s With Disabilities Act. I wonder when a smart lawyer will file the class action suit.

  9. Michael Spencer says:
    0
    0

    Replace “GSFC” with “Private Company A” (with no NASA business). What changes?