Letter to the Editor

I have to agree with many of the readers responding to the article about limited (ab)use. [Letters to the Editor, March 22 and March 26, 2001.]

Although it makes sense on both sides, the issue that most comments focus on is that the user will abuse the resource. I have to agree.

But look at it from management's perspective. It's not a matter of focusing on the use of resources or equipment. It's another form of management indiscretion: How can managers target an employee who is doing the same thing everyone else is but make it seem that this one individual is not using government equipment in a limited way.

I can see this ending up costing President Bush's new budget more tax dollars than he expected in legal costs.

Frank Kenisky
Office of the Inspector General
Department of Veterans Affairs

WRITE US

We welcome your comments. To send a letter to the editor, use this form.

Please check out the archive of Letters to the Editor for fellow readers' comments.

Featured

  • Comment
    customer experience (garagestock/Shutterstock.com)

    Leveraging the TMF to improve customer experience

    Focusing on customer experience as part of the Technology Modernization Fund investment strategy will enable agencies to improve service and build trust in government.

  • FCW Perspectives
    zero trust network

    Why zero trust is having a moment

    Improved technologies and growing threats have agencies actively pursuing dynamic and context-driven security.

Stay Connected