We have people that are managing three employees. There are three of those GS-14 managers in one area in particular as an example. Then there is the Director 15, Deputy Associate Commissioner, then the Associate Commissioner. Is the level of management necessary, or could the same work be accomplished if we combined this group with another office? It is very possible- standards need to be provided and evaluations need to be made. The GS-15 Director (as an example) frequently complains that he has nothing to do. He completed a masters degree by writing all his papers in his office and spends a lot of time chatting and not doing anything. In this example, there is no oversight or accountability. The individual has said, he would like to work but if it's not provide he will not complain. I think these types of examples are what is giving government a bad reputation. This is not the only example by the way, there are times when you walk in the hallways, and you look at many employees that are doing absolutely nothing and this is the case, day after day. Working in operations, this provides for a very negative portrayal on fairness when comparing to the compensation. The employees that make the least amount of money are working the most. I think it ought to be the other way around, shouldn't that be the ethical standard? Am I wrong to think this way?
Idea No. 6765