Should VA Sec Shinseki go?

[wink]

The first official report is in, albeit, "interim". The VA IG report confirms the allegations of off the books appointments and extended wait time, at least in Phoenix. That falsification of records resulted in bonuses for VA managers. It appears that Phoenix isn't an isolated case. Worse, the IG has highlighted these types of issues for over 5 years. Congress appropriated money on Sec Shinseki's watch specifically to improve the type of problems at issue now. We have debated the no defect instinct that some times have seen good men relieved and career's ruined. We know the Navy tradition of holding the captain of a ship responsible even if he isn't on the bridge. So, should Shinseki go now?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-confirms-allegations-at-phoenix-va-hospital/

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1174886-vaoig-14-02603-178.html

 

[picklesuit]

Yes, Gen (ret) Shinseki should "be allowed to resign." However, Shinseki is not the Captain of the ship, he's just the department head. The (metaphorical) Captain of this ship would have been fired long ago if his departments were run this poorly...the buck stops where??
Pickle

 

[Recovering LSO]

Separate question for the Vets here: How is the determination made where you'll be treated. My father is retired and has a host of medical issues but has never been seen or treated at a VA Hospital. He is seen and treated by "out in town" providers. Is it a function of location and proximity to a VA hospital?

Back to the VA scandal, I'm interested in the idea of bonuses. If the VA is a gov agency, are performance bonuses appropriate? I'm ignorant of how many of the agencies (cabinets) are administered, but are performance bonuses typical?

This final question is not a defense of Gen Shinseki's leadership, and certainly not of those directly responsible for the apparent failures, but will his departure help or hinder required reforms? If he goes, the administration MUST immediately identify a capable replacement and not place the responsibility of righting the ship on someone with "acting" in front of their title.

 

[BusyBee604]

If he goes, the administration MUST immediately identify a capable replacement and not place the responsibility of righting the ship on someone with "acting" in front of their title.

My slant is that, while only partly responsible for the decades of poor healthcare and corruption, the honorable Secretary/General will have the grace to resign... IF he isn't thrown under the bus by the POTUS, he should hang in until a suitable, qualified replacement is named. It's such a huge over-blown, dysfunctional bureauocray, it's probably near impossible for any one person to reform, and put it back in order. A voucher program a must emergency fix in the short term.

What qualified high-level executive/keader would even want, or accept this horrific opening?
BzB

 

[loui86dz]

I would prefer that he sticks around and fixes the problem. Washington has a bad habit of dumping people and pretending that the problem is fixed.

 

[bert]

Separate question for the Vets here: How is the determination made where you'll be treated. My father is retired and has a host of medical issues but has never been seen or treated at a VA Hospital. He is seen and treated by "out in town" providers. Is it a function of location and proximity to a VA hospital?

Back to the VA scandal, I'm interested in the idea of bonuses. If the VA is a gov agency, are performance bonuses appropriate? I'm ignorant of how many of the agencies (cabinets) are administered, but are performance bonuses typical?

This final question is not a defense of Gen Shinseki's leadership, and certainly not of those directly responsible for the apparent failures, but will his departure help or hinder required reforms? If he goes, the administration MUST immediately identify a capable replacement and not place the responsibility of righting the ship on someone with "acting" in front of their title.

This has what you need to know for eligibility for medical benefits. Even if you have already gone through a benefits determination on retirement/separation you still will need to fill out the 1010 EZ form. If you go to them for something not service connected (or are below the special categories) you will have to do a means test which will determine what you pay.

Yes performance bonuses are typical in government agencies.

 

[Hozer]

The report will have to indict Shinseki's higher-level folks. His departure will only provide cover for those who will burrow in deeper and the systemic problems will remain.

What about the VISN Directors? Did they have knowledge of this? Those are your dept heads.

If the report shows that he and his command team were unaware or deceived by VISN Directors and their subordinates, then shit-can the VISN Directors and allow him to truly restructure the VA.

Shinseki has to react to what data he is provided by his mid-level technocrats. They are the systemic problem with the VA.

5 yrs is a "quick turnaround" for things in the VA. It takes 10 years to get a building constructed.

The real problem? GS-10/11/12/13's who float around inside the Matrix of the VA. I've been dealing with the VA for several years now on a daily professional basis from the outreach HCHV field operators who get crushed by their mid-level GS's technocrat supervisors who are concerned with paternalism and consider making decisions from 200 miles away good leadership, to the VISN Directors themselves. The civil service hiring and firing is also part of it. Even the motivated ones get burned out after a while and of course, it's generally impossible to fire someone.

The contrast with the military mindset is numbing, which only pisses Vets off even more.

 

[CAMike]

Shinseki leave? I'd rather see the Commander in Chief become more involved in his job. He seems to manage his office by autopilot. Dad probably believes that's what MBA stands for.

Actions always speak louder than words. It's disgusting that he has such a disregard for former MIL members. At least Shinseki's apologized this morning.

 

[wink]

Yes the VA Sec sit atop a very large bloated organization and maybe he can only react to what his upper level mangers feed him. But maybe not. Why hasn't he gotten out more. What sort of engagement has he had with lower level managers and employees? After his own IG made numerous reports of schedule abuses over the last five years didn't he find it odd that the reported wait times were low and people were getting bonuses? Did he not have any input to where the millions of dollars appropriated by congress to fix this went on his watch? He should go to set an example. In government, especially this admin, no one is fired for performance, only political liability. That is likely what is happening as I type. Shinseki only got in hot water when it made the president look bad and he couldn't handle it. Firing the Sec will not necessarily make things better right now and the guy that replaces him may not be any more talented. But in the future top leaders should now their jobs are at risk for performance of their department. There is a bill in the Senate, passed by the House, that will make it easier to fire upper level civil servants for performance (it may be VA specific, not sure). Sen Reed won't take it up. The president should demand it be sent to a vote. If it is VA specific, all the better. A vote linked to this scandal will help ensure passage.

 

[wink]

...

Yes performance bonuses are typical in government agencies.

Let's see what is wrong with this equation, you get bonuses for meeting certain performance goals (which are easily fudged), but it is nearly impossible to get fired for not meeting performance goals. How about if you are part of a performance bonus system you give up certain job security rights under the civil service rules.

 

[Tycho_Brohe]

President Obama just accepted Sec. Shinseki's resignation.

EDIT: Here's the story from USA Today, first one posted that I could find. Sloan Gibson is now the acting sec'y.

 

[lowflier03]

Bit late to the discussion, but in short, yes. This isn't the first failure under his tenure at the VA. While there are undoubtedly quite a few troublesome GS's that should be fired, had he taken the time or interest to see the direction his institution was heading, he would have seen enough to notice the problem and at least raise these issues to his boss.
http://sofrep.com/35480/veteran-amputees-wait-6-months-for-prosthetics-from-va/
A small snippet from the linked article.
"Since being appointed by President Obama in 2009. His list of accomplishments include an internal investigation by the Inspector General (IG) that found his organization guilty of millions of dollars in fraud, waste and abuse (off-site meetings and federal acquisition bribery), and more recently, we’re starting to get eyewitness accounts of massive veteran record purges."

 

[exNavyOffRec]

There are MANY problems with the VA, while there are many that work in the VA that want to do good I have seen quite a few "no loads" who don't care about the customer (veterans), what is worse is some of these people that I have interacted with are veterans themselves!

I know several that have been hired by the VA and I don't know how they were hired, the qualifications they had do not match up with what they do, they only thing they had going for them was they were a veteran.

I don't know if Shinseki's resignation itself will lead to change in the VA, but maybe his resignation in conjunction with the spotlight will cause something to happen.

 

[Brett327]

Talking with some folks here who worked on Shinseki's VA staff, they attribute his inability to make substantive changes to address the various problems with his "hands-off" leadership style. Specifically mentioned was a situation where his staff would routinely conduct completely atrocious, amateurish briefs with outlandish analysis and Shinseki would just sit there and let it slide and not question obviously flawed conclusions. Granted, this is my only first hand data point, but if a Department Secretary doesn't hold his people accountable for shitty staff work because he doesn't want to ruffle anyone's feathers, well, that's probably not the right guy to lead an organization through a period of much needed reform.

 

[Flash]

I sympathize for Shinseki to a degree, he ran a huge organization that has been strained by an unprecedented surge in the amount of folks using and applying for benefits in just the past few years. The second part of teh bill from the last decade of war if you want to think of it that way. My limited exposure to the VA has been favorable and so have several other friends of mine but obviously the department is straining to do its job, I don't envy the next VA Secretary.

Let's see what is wrong with this equation, you get bonuses for meeting certain performance goals (which are easily fudged), but it is nearly impossible to get fired for not meeting performance goals. How about if you are part of a performance bonus system you give up certain job security rights under the civil service rules.

Sort of like medals and FITREP bullets?

While it is harder to fire a federal civil servant than many private industry employees, for very good reasons, they are by no means impossible to fire. I work with several folks who have fired civil servants working for them and you do have to put some effort into it, documenting things correctly and backing up your stated reasons for firing them with more than just assertions, but there are too many folks who are unwilling to put in that modest effort to get rid of someone.