![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ethics group files lawsuit over Forest Service outsourcing
By SHERRY DEVLIN of the Missoulian http://www.missoulian.com/articles/2...nal/news07.txt Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics filed suit against the U.S. Forest Service on Wednesday, challenging a decision to hand over analysis of public comment on major agency decisions to private contractors. "We think the public deserves to have its comments read by the government, not by the private sector," said Andy Stahl, FSEEE's executive director. "Government employees are regulated by strict conflict of interest and ethics rules that do not apply to private contractors." Filed in U.S. District Court in Missoula, the lawsuit claims the Forest Service violated a newly enacted federal law by "outsourcing" its content analysis teams in Missoula and Salt Lake City. The 2004 Interior Appropriations Act requires the Forest Service to conduct a public-private competition and to demonstrate cost savings of 10 percent or $10 million before any agency function is given to the private sector. The Forest Service neither conducted a public-private competition nor showed a cost savings before eliminating the content analysis teams, FSEEE's lawsuit said. Already, about 20 members of the Missoula team have lost their jobs to the privatization effort; at one time, the Missoula team had 30 employees. "We think the management of federal lands is something the government ought to do," Stahl said in an interview from his Eugene, Ore., office. "We are not pleased with the way the government is proceeding with outsourcing." By handing over public comments to private companies, the Forest Service opens the door to bias from special-interest groups, in Stahl's estimation. "Let's say the Forest Service proposes a new rule to delist the spotted owl," he said. "The public comments could be analyzed by a company whose clients include major timber companies. There will be conflicts of interest; we can see it coming." Forest Service officials did not want to comment on the lawsuit Wednesday, saying they had not seen the suit and do not comment on pending litigation. But in earlier interviews, both agency officials who presided over the content analysis team's outsourcing said the Forest Service will be "more resilient and nimble" if it relies on private contractors to evaluate public comments. Public comments come and go, so the content analysis team's workload fluctuates wildly, officials said. Now private companies - not taxpayers - will pay for any down time. But the privatization process has been "awkward," conceded Pam Gardiner, the agency's deputy director of ecosystem management coordination. Stahl said FSEEE attempted to discuss its concerns with Forest Service officials before filing suit, but received no answer to repeated requests for information. "I would define it as getting the runaround," he said. "One person referred me to another person who referred me to another and another. We had no choice but to sue them." The Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2004 became law on Nov. 11, and - according to Stahl - was clear in the limits it placed on the Forest Service's discretion to contract out jobs previously performed by 10 or more federal employees. On Nov. 11, there were still 18 Forest Service employees assigned to the content analysis team, he said, so the act protects their jobs. FSEEE is the national environmental group that recently filed suit against the Forest Service over the agency's firefighting policies and practices. Stahl said the group's membership totals 12,000 people, of which about 500 currently work for the Forest Service and "the balance are owners of the national forests." Five of the nine members of FSEEE's governing board are Forest Service employees, one works for the Bureau of Land Management and three are retired from the Forest Service. Board members, not the group's general membership, approve all of FSEEE's litigation, Stahl said. The Forest Service started looking at jobs it could hand over to private contractors after the Bush administration issued a call for "competitive outsourcing." Over the past two years, the agency studied 2,340 jobs, according to deputy chief Tom Mills, and decided to offer 243 of those jobs to private contractors. Just two agency functions were eliminated during the first round of outsourcing: the content analysis team and a computer hotline. Still under review are 1,200 information technology jobs and 124 employees assigned to fleet and road maintenance. Reporter Sherry Devlin can be reached at 523-5268 or at ------------ http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...type=printable JEFF BARNARD, Associated Press Writer Wednesday, December 3, 2003 ©2003 Associated Press URL: sfgate.com/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2003/12/03/state2112EST7366.DTL (12-03) 18:12 PST (AP) -- GRANTS PASS, Ore. -- An environmental group is suing the U.S. Forest Service, claiming it acted illegally by trying to lay off government workers who analyze public comments on logging and other projects and replace them with private contractors. The lawsuit was filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Missoula, Mont., by the Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, based in Eugene. It alleges the Forest Service failed to do studies to show a private contractor could do the job for less money, as required by a provision of the 2004 appropriations bill funding the agency. "Under the Forest Service proposal, no longer will the public be listened to by our government," Andy Stahl, executive director of the organization, said in a telephone interview from his office in Eugene. "Our comments instead go to a private corporation which massages them and then gives a digest to the government of what the private corporation says we said." The appropriations bill requires when considering whether to outsource any function performed by 10 employees or more, the Forest Service must study whether it can save 10 percent or $10 million, whichever is less, the lawsuit said. Stahl said the lawsuit was brought only after the Forest Service refused to go back and study the issue. Created in 1997, the Content Analysis Team grew to nearly 60 full-time staff split between Missoula, Mont., and Salt Lake City, Utah, the lawsuit said. The team analyzed public comments on controversial Forest Service projects such as a Clinton administration rule outlawing logging in undeveloped portions of national forests known as roadless areas and the salvage and recovery plan for forests burned by wildfire in Montana's Bitterroot Valley. Forty-one members of the team were told last March that their jobs were being put out to bid, despite a cost estimate showing they could do the job for $425,000 a year less than private contractors. The move was part of a Bush administration initiative to determine if a variety of government jobs could be done more cheaply by private contractors. Forest Service spokeswoman Heidi Valetkevich said the agency had a policy of not commenting on pending litigation. All of the employees affected by the outsourcing were either temporary or on a limited term of employment, she said. The bid for the contract to replace the jobs has been extended to Jan. 5. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Republicans, Bush support 85$ national forest use fee | Bill Carson | Fly Fishing | 1 | November 12th, 2003 03:19 PM |
Bush's war on the national forests - In support of the Landless Tlingits from Alaska's National Forest Tongass :-) | John Elliott | Fly Fishing | 2 | September 30th, 2003 02:00 AM |