Here's a post from the Federal Eye blog on the Washington Post.

More or less, NTEU has come along after helping unionize CBP officers and decided to jump into the fray and gain members. Except AFGE has been then longer and according to Mr. O'Keefe it's going to be: That and read the comments and see just how crappy TSA management is when it comes to our side.

So from a TSO perspective, how exactly do you see the TSA management as being crappy?

As a manager, I am sure that my perspective is a little different. The main complaints I hear from TSOs are that managers are too strict about sick leave and that we are too willing to write people up.

Many officers argue with me that sick leave is a benefit that the agency gives them to do with as they please. But that is not the standard that the agency has established. Sick leave is given for officers who are too ill to come to work have family members who require care. It is given as an insurance policy. When officers use excessive leave, it is the manager's responsibility to ensure that it is being used for legitimate medical needs.

I consider myself fairly liberal with regard to sick leave, however I have recently had to do an airport audit of all our officers. Full time TSA employees earn 4 hours of sick leave per pay period, or 104 hours a year. On a traditional schedule (five 8 hour days per week) that is over 10 sick days a year. I simply do not accept that the vast majority of people need to use 10 sick days each year. Certain people are sicker than others, and some people will need to use more sick leave at certain times. It is an insurance policy, you save it so that you have it when you need it.

My audit discovered that of the officers that have been with TSA from the beginning, over ninety five percent had used all but 20 hours of their sick leave. Some of them had serious medical conditions, but most think of sick leave as entitlement that they can use for non medical purposes.

The other concern is that managers are far too willing to use the disciplinary process. My experience has been that TSA has been far too willing to accept unacceptable behavior from its employees. Early on, I witnessed officers take actions that should have resulted in removal. As I rose through the ranks to manager, I saw many get away with all sorts of things because no one documented anything. Supervisors would tell an employee to knock it off, but the same types of behaviors would repeat over and over.

Since I learned early on that nothing happens without documentation, I tend to go to the other extreme. I know that everyone is capable of making mistakes, and I have made my share of them. However the way things get done in the federal government is to follow the disciplinary process.

Castro Benes

Ninety five percent used all but about 20 hrs? Not shocking in the least bit given that people who work in unpleasant surroundings often will do just about anything to escape. I work at a job that gives me sick time as well and have rarely taken time off unless absolutely needed. At a previous job that had management bullying the employees that wasn't the case and I had around 20 hours of sick time.

This looks like a management issue and that managers who use intimidation, ridicule, humiliation, etc as management tools should be terminated and replaced with managers who lead by example and who motivate those they supervise. Sounds like TSA might also be setting itself up for a worker to go postal. Wonder how that one would get spun by Blogdad Bob?

You might also look into the number of prescriptions written for anti-depressants. If that is significantly high then you have a serious problem on your hands.

So if someone abuses their sick leave it's their manager's fault...?

Do the 104hrs maximum per year roll over?, what is the total maximum that can be accrued?

Yes, sick leave rolls over every year and there is no cap on how much sick leave an employee can have in their bank. Vacation time is capped at 250 hours. Anything over 250 has to be used by the end of the year or you lose it.

I didn't say that. Just saying that management may be generating a problem with workers abusing sick leave as a symptom. Look into the reasons sick leave is abused as it may be symptomatic of deeper problems within the organization.

A former coworker of mine shot himself. His suicide note was taken by the police and never revealed (suspect that it named names and places that would have gotten to politically connected into trouble). He hung on for a couple months before dying. I visited him a couple times and he made a comment that was rather chilling "if I had transportation the morning I shot myself I would have taken care of the guy you and I worked for, and some of the other managers before shooting myself."

I think one needs to be careful here. I can think of a variety of reasons why people use sick leave and are not lying in bed shivering or coughing up blood.

For instance, this week I took off two sick days because I was feeling off. A bit of a headache, some sniffles and a bit of a annoying cough. I would have been able to do my job and complete my goals for the week, but decided to stay home and rest. I ended up at the doctor's office and found I had a bronchial viral infection. Nothing major, but I certainly would not want to expose my co-workers to a respiratory viral infection.

By the standard you gave above (i.e sick leave is for officers who are too ill to come to work), I would be abusing the sick leave policy.

Under HIPPA, I'd be extremely surprised if you could get that sort of information on your employees.

It's extremely difficult to make that sort of determination in the case of one employee requesting sick time.

On the other hand, if Manager Alpha's employees, taken all together, use 15% of their accrued sick time in a given year, while Manager Baker's employees use 95% of their accrued sick time, there may be a sign than something is wrong in Baker's area. Maybe it's Baker; maybe it's someone else in Baker's area; maybe it's something unique to the environment. But at that point, someone should be taking a look.

And "abuse" of sick leave is extremely hard to determine. Excessive stress can lead to physical illness.

The thing is different companies have different policies.
I don't work for the TSA, but I am sure you will all see the point of the examples I will give.
I work for a company that has a 14 day per rolling year sick allowance - then it is a (supposedly non-automatic) warning. No "saving up the days" from year to year. And just for good measure, if you are off both sides of a rest day, the rest day gets added to the sick.
I've seen the "added rest days" at Easter when a colleague got a warnig for having 9 working days off, plus, two weekends, plus good friday, and easter monday, all of which, for that employee, were rest days! 9 consecutive work days + 6 rest days in between = 15 days = warning. There was, of course, medical documentation to back up the sickness, the company always requires a note from a physician with a very short diagnosis after 7 days (again including "middle" rest days).
If the physicians note is not forthcoming, the company withholds those days pay until it is.
The "non-automatic" warning was still issued, though.
3 warnings without a clear year between each (to "reset" the count) and you are out.

One of my colleagues had no days sick at all for 11 years. then he was sick for about a month (of course, with supporting medical notes etc.). He got a warning.
Another colleague was hit by a motorcycle (which left the raod and hit him on the sidewalk) as he was walking home. Straight to the hospital.
He was called in for a sick warning whilst still off-work, and still on crutches. And it was issued. As he works in a part of the company with a warehouse-type environment, then he can't really do his job sitting down, or with crutches, can he?
How is he supposed to avoid the sickness? He was just walking along the sidewalk minding his own business, when he was injured.

Then take me.
I am currently off work with a "massive bilateral pulmonary embolism" (that's what the doctor wrote on my hospital notes), and multiple emboli in one thigh, and a suspected small liver clot. I have been off for about 2 months. I hope to return on light-duties soon.
I expect to get a sick warning when I return.
But what am I supposed to do?
Not get a blood clot?
Not have it move to my lungs?
Not get the clots in my leg and liver?
I am on special blood treatment, because I didn't respond properly to the standard "rat poison", so maybe I should have been born with "typical blood"?

I'm not exactly a "sick-note" either - that was the first time I have been to hospital for more than 25 years.


When warnings become arbitrary, sick time tends to gets treated as an allowance.
They also distract employees from the job they are supposed to be doing, and are therefore counter-productive to the employer.
That's why I am against the idea of formal limits.
The reason why formal limits are so popular (however they are set) is because it makes the manager's job much easier.

To get really top-class managers, a company has to offer appropriate pay, benefits, training, and support. But most settle for "average" managers, because they are cheaper - but then, of course, they will only do an average job.
Top-class leaders motivate their staff, so they perform better (and motivated staff take less sick - there are endless studies to back this up).
Average managers control their staff, and that has been shown to lower morale, and statistically shorten life expectancy (both of which increase sick leave).

+1

Lao Tzu
No offence to the manager (castrobenes) who posted above. I am sure you are an exceptional individual. But I am equally sure that you know that some of your managerial colleagues are not.
The statementis, I am sure just a temporary aberration, and does very little indeed to motivate staff. Anyone can punish, or follow a set of guidelines, but the job of a leader (aka manager) is to lead. Otherwise managers just become an unnecessary drain on a company's resources (as their direct production is usually minimal - their role being the motivation of others to produce more output/quality), and in the case of government, quite justifiably lead to calls for "smaller government" and contracting-out jobs, neither of which will benefit the control-based manager. (The motivational manager, will of course, be able to find a new job much more easily!)
Poor business practices are a recipe for disaster in both the public and private sectors.
For modern business (which apply just as well to government jobs!) practices, I would suggest an exploration of The Toyota Way - which is why they have just trashed GM (not the most modern employer)


But the whole topic seems to have moved away from the title.
I wonder if the main topic of the post will be discussed.

I would think that a 22% turnover rate in a position that pays almost double the private industry scale would be evidence enough of a management deficiency.

You can't blame the TSO's for that.

Before a person accepts a job of any kind don't you feel that the job seeker has studied the company a bit, knows of issues such as high turnover rates and makes a decision to accept those things?

I blame Congress for that.

The TSA should never have been created.

Nothing against you personally, but if the issue is that rampant, when might you come to the conclusion that there's either a lack of professionalism and/or dissension among the front liners?

Unless you have a situation like mine, where I had use or lose and had leave denied continuously (never be indispensable). Two years in a row I had leave restored because I could show a stack of denied leave requests. The manager in question was given a letter of reprimand after the second time, which means forget about your step increase for the next five years, suckah!