Trump administration wants to un-fire nuclear safety workers but can’t figure out how to reach them

[rjs330]

The people at the highest levels are the least likely to know the names and personal info of employees. That sort of thing is usually delegated to HR and the employees' immediate supervisors. It sounds as though these people were dismissed without an exit interview

Way to totally miss the point.

No, but people move and go on vacation when fired sometimes. Most "paychecks" these days are direct deposit or debit cards for seasonals.

They were just let go. They all immediately packed up, moved, went on vacation and changed their phone numbers? In this very thread we've been told that who they are is so secret that know one knows anything about them.

No, something else is going on.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Trump administration wants to un-fire nuclear safety workers but can’t figure out how to reach them​

What?.....the workers are too stupid to list a phone number?......then they deserve to stay fired.......

 

[Pommer]

Trump administration wants to un-fire nuclear safety workers but can’t figure out how to reach them​

What?.....the workers are too stupid to list a phone number?......then they deserve to stay fired.......

The government made a mistake but it’s up to the employees to fix the problem?
Charming.

 

[That Guy 11200]

What nonsense. No such thing as top secret information on these people? How do they get vetted? Fill out an application and then all information gets shredded.

If they are so vital to national security then why arw rhey running around lose and probatiinary employees and no one knows where they are or what their phone number is? No one knows who their family is?

That is such malarkey and you know it.

I was giving the DOGE incompetents the benefit of the doubt. It's entirely possible they simply deleted the employees from the database after sending out the letters to fire them.

 

[ozso]

More sensationalism and hype. That seems to be all we get from several news agencies. That and hatchet jobs.

 

[Pommer]

More sensationalism and hype. That seems to be all we get from several news agencies. That and hatchet jobs.

Move along, nothing to see here!

 

[ozso]

Move along, nothing to see here!

In this case rather it's objectively examine what's actually happening.

 

[rjs330]

I was giving the DOGE incompetents the benefit of the doubt. It's entirely possible they simply deleted the employees from the database after sending out the letters to fire them.

But you don't know right? You have no idea what happened. This is all speculation.

 

[rjs330]

In this case rather it's objectively examine what's actually happening.

At this point it appears that none of US know what is going on. We are all speculating about what's going on with probationary employees.

 

[ozso]

At this point it appears that none of US know what is going on. We are all speculating about what's going on with probationary employees.

Much ado about nothing.

 

[civilwarbuff]

The government made a mistake but it’s up to the employees to fix the problem?
Charming.

Have you ever filled out a job application that DOESN'T include asking for a phone number to be reached at?
If they didn't put it down then they are sooooo stupid they deserve to stay fired.

 

[RDKirk]

In all fairness, the computer system(s) that kept their government and civilian contact info so separated was probably designed and built long ago under who knows what administration and maintained over time through various administrations. Likely nothing political on either side with this screw-up regarding difficulty contacting them. Whoever was in office at the time (Biden, Trump, Obama, Bush, Clinton, etc) probably did not have nor wanted any visibility into how this agency handled its employee records.

I say this after 25 years in IT in a very large, very old company where trying to contact someone who has been let go can sometimes be very hard just due to the difficulty of accessing the person's personal contact info. Decisions to do it that way usually stem from some combo of security (keep company and personal data separate) or cost and dumb management ( "Why would we ever need to contact a terminated employee?!!? We fired them! We never want to talk to them again!")

Look - I am not saying there is not waste, fraud, abuse, etc. There most certainly is. But sometimes (like in this case) the blame for the mess is bureaucracy + time + poor management = really bad processes and systems that are largely non-partisan and continue to operate in the same horrible way regardless of who is in charge until they are dismantled / replaced or fixed.

Is it even legal to keep the contact information of someone who is no longer an employee of your company? In a large company, that could be a considerable amount of data...that you have no legal reason to maintain.

 

[RDKirk]

Have you ever filled out a job application that DOESN'T include asking for a phone number to be reached at?
If they didn't put it down then they are sooooo stupid they deserve to stay fired.

Is it even legal to keep the contact information of someone who is no longer an employee of your company? In a large company, that could be a considerable amount of data...that you have no legal reason to maintain.

 

[RDKirk]

What nonsense. No such thing as top secret information on these people? How do they get vetted? Fill out an application and then all information gets shredded.

If they are so vital to national security then why arw rhey running around lose and probatiinary employees and no one knows where they are or what their phone number is? No one knows who their family is?

That is such malarkey and you know it.

Their background investigation reports are not themselves be classified, but For Official Use Only, and might very well not include current contact information. That would be only address, and it would not go into the background investigation until the next background investigation update.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Is it even legal to keep the contact information of someone who is no longer an employee of your company? In a large company, that could be a considerable amount of data...that you have no legal reason to maintain.

Yes, it is.

 

[JustaPewFiller]

Is it even legal to keep the contact information of someone who is no longer an employee of your company? In a large company, that could be a considerable amount of data...that you have no legal reason to maintain.

Note - this is US only. European privacy laws are much more strict and your mileage may vary there.

There is no federal law against it. I am not aware of any of the state specific privacy laws that prohibit it. The last I was involved in it, they did not, but that may have changed. Usually the reasons of security, privacy, not keeping old data around are among the reasons for getting rid of it. Although, some companies may have a records retention policy that requires it to be kept X long.

There are several valid reasons to keep the contact info around for awhile - maybe you want to hire them back, maybe the left $ in some retirement account, maybe they are suspected of taking some confidential info with them when they left, etc.

In any event, the data is often still around somewhere. Finding out where it is and getting access to it is another matter all together.

 

[RDKirk]

Note - this is US only. European privacy laws are much more strict and your mileage may vary there.

There is no federal law against it. I am not aware of any of the state specific privacy laws that prohibit it. The last I was involved in it, they did not, but that may have changed. Usually the reasons of security, privacy, not keeping old data around are among the reasons for getting rid of it. Although, some companies may have a records retention policy that requires it to be kept X long.

There are several valid reasons to keep the contact info around for awhile - maybe you want to hire them back, maybe the left $ in some retirement account, maybe they are suspected of taking some confidential info with them when they left, etc.

In any event, the data is often still around somewhere. Finding out where it is and getting access to it is another matter all together.

Well, I found this:

U.S. federal agencies are subject to restrictions on maintaining personal data, including telephone numbers of former employees. The key laws and regulations governing this include:

1. The Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. § 552a)​

• Limits the collection, storage, and use of personal data by federal agencies.
• Agencies must only maintain information that is relevant and necessary for official purposes.
• Former employees’ personal data should not be retained indefinitely without a specific legal or operational reason.
• Individuals have the right to request access to their records and correct inaccuracies.

2. Federal Records Act (FRA)​

• Governs how federal agencies store and dispose of records.
• Personal data must be disposed of according to retention schedules set by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
• Agencies cannot retain outdated personal information indefinitely without proper justification.

3. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)​

• Personal contact information (e.g., phone numbers) is generally exempt from FOIA disclosures under Exemption 6, which protects personal privacy.

4. Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) Program​

• Personal data, including telephone numbers, may be categorized under Privacy CUI and require specific safeguarding measures.

Restrictions on Retaining Former Employees' Phone Numbers​

• Agencies must have a legitimate reason (e.g., pension administration, security, or legal obligations) to keep such records.
• Retention schedules vary, but outdated contact information should be deleted after its official purpose has expired.
• Unauthorized retention or disclosure of such data can lead to legal consequences under the Privacy Act.

In 2018, the CUI replaced the old FOUO program that I was familiar with. The FOUO program required us to remove office contact information of former employees. For instance, I would be prohibited from keeping someone who had been discharged from my unit in my own personnel file. Of course, there would be records for that person stored elsewhere within the federal government...but as his former supervisor, I could not keep them because I would have no reason like pension administration, security, or legal obligations. I suspect the CUI has not changed that aspect.

If were someone fired by presidential order, I suspect my commander would insist on seeing everything go into the shredder by close of business.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Trump administration wants to un-fire nuclear safety workers but can’t figure out how to reach them​

What?.....the workers are too stupid to list a phone number?......then they deserve to stay fired.......

^ <———- The point












———> U

 

[Tropical Wilds]

This must be that efficiency I keep hearing about



First they're fired, now they're not fired. And it's not like nuclear safety workers do anything useful anyway.


View attachment 361125

 

[JustaPewFiller]

Well, I found this:


In 2018, the CUI replaced the old FOUO program that I was familiar with. The FOUO program required us to remove office contact information of former employees. For instance, I would be prohibited from keeping someone who had been discharged from my unit in my own personnel file. Of course, there would be records for that person stored elsewhere within the federal government...but as his former supervisor, I could not keep them because I would have no reason like pension administration, security, or legal obligations. I suspect the CUI has not changed that aspect.

If were someone fired by presidential order, I suspect my commander would insist on seeing everything go into the shredder by close of business.

Ah - ok. I should have included that in my disclaimer.

I didn't work with federal agencies and regulations may very well be different there.