USGS Director (Former NASA Astronaut) James Reilly Retaliated Against Whistleblower (Update)
Top Interior official retaliated against whistleblower, watchdog says, The Hill
“The leader of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) retaliated against an employee who filed a complaint against him, according to an internal watchdog. The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) for the Interior Department said in a new report that [former NASA astronaut and] USGS Director James Reilly had agency personnel reassign someone who had complained about him to a different job and concluded that the reassignment “qualified as personnel action under the [Whistleblower Protection Act].”
Alleged Reprisal by USGS Director, USGS OIG
Keith’s 7:07 pm note: But wait, there’s more:
– Trump official stalls polar bear study that could affect oil drilling in Alaska, Washington Post
– USGS chief: Coral killed by pineapples, goats (and climate), E&E News
– The Trump Team Has a Plan to Not Fight Climate Change, Wired
– Trump officials deleting mentions of ‘climate change’ from U.S. Geological Survey press releases, Science
Keith’s 10:30 pm update: Looks like the political types at Department of the Interior are rather touchy about this – this is how they responded to a @NASA Watch tweet about this posting. FWiW – after 25 years of reading IG reports, they are rarely wrong.
The @doioig report is wrong in its legal & factual conclusions. The admin employee requested to be reassigned, pay and grade level maintained and still reported to a GS-15. As an astronaut, geologist, navy veteran & public servant, Dr. Reilly’s record & tenure is above reproach.
— Interior Press Secretary (@DOIPressSec) October 30, 2020
In my experience, OIG findings are usually not wrong.
Why would anyone allow the IG of an agency to investigate its leader? Seems like an obvious bias in the outcome. The underling was not getting justice.
The USGS does not have an Inspector General. The OIG in question is the OIG for the Department of the Interior, which the USGS is part of. They report to the Secretary and Deputy Secretary of the Interior, and _not_ the head of the USGS. He’s actually about two rows further down in the org. chart. In general, the various OIGs in the US government are set up to be independent from the organizations the report on and politically neutral, although the independence isn’t complete, and political neutrality is sometimes patchy.
“political neutrality is sometimes patchy”
The presumption that political neutrality is sine non qua is being hammered throughout the government. The obvious cases include FDA and Fauci’s agency; witness, too, so-called ‘SharpieGate’ over at NOAA.
Our trust in government is under attack as a political tool by the right. It is foolhardy, and shortsighted, to say the least.
At some point, folks will realize just how much we do trust our government, and how much we properly rely on non-political science. Personally I think it is happening now.
To be reviewed next Tuesday.
From personal experience within NASA with a discrimination case and then subsequent personnel action, if I ever saw an excuse like the one provided here, that because the guy is an astronaut he is beyond reproach, I would then know that in all likelihood the astronaut/manager was guilty of wrongdoing and that the IG failed to do their investigatory job. Astronauts are often prima-donnas who don’t take the time to familiarize themselves with the law, can be counted on to skew the law; and they often have failed to familiarize themselves with ramifications of violations. If they have violated the law they deserve the same harsh treatment as anyone else.
In my case we went before a panel at the Office of Personnel Management. The astronaut and others who tried to defend him were found “guilty”. I was paid a small sum but my career was wrecked. The astronaut was ultimately forced to resign and went to work in another industry, which may have been a light sentence. If I had chosen to pursue a full blown legal trial, there is a good chance the astronaut would have been found guilty not only of the original violation, but of perjury as well.