"Wake up, Neo. The Matrix has you. Follow the white rabbit."
Just as the malicious Matrix of movie fable has enslaved and exploited the human race, turning them into nothing more than electrical storage batteries that power the machines, so the disciplinary matrix is being utilized by unscrupulous correctional managers to wage political warfare against ethical employees who expose the corruption of management's political cronies and allies.
Morpheus asks, "How far down does the rabbit hole go?"
In theory only, does the operating policy of the California Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections (CalDORC) require the Hiring Authority1 to locally conduct investigations or refer to OIA, reports of employee misconduct for the initiation of fact-finding inquiries into the allegation(s). In reality, politics, rather than substance, seem to determine which reports will find their way into an investigative folder and which reports will find their way into the "round-file".
One can determine whether or not their report of employee misconduct has found its way into the trash can by determining whether or not they have been summoned, to the office of an investigator, as a (complaining) witness, in a timely manner (usually within a year). It is usual in investigations that, when the interviews begin, the complaining witness will be the first interviewed to validate the written report and provide additional, relevant information that has not been mentioned in the initial report.
Exemplary of this pick-and-choose process of selective referrals is the California Institution for Men in Chino.
As regular readers of this blog know, there have been a variety of reports, submitted long ago, alleging employee misconduct, that have been reported directly to the Warden which, apparently, have made their way to the dump. Complaining witnesses are still awaiting their interview after almost a year with no investigations in sight.
Of particular note within the pages of this blog, as reported, is the misdemeanor Labor Code violation committed against a CIM Correctional Officer, so it was reported, that was directed by CIM's Warden. This Correctional Officer wrote a written report of employee misconduct to the Warden on August 24, 2005, a report which seems to have drifted into the administrative black hole from which it has yet to emerge.
Then there is the report of employee misconduct that was filed on Tuesday, November 29, 2005 which, based on information gathered by a prior institutional investigation, alleged that a peer employee had been dishonest in the filing of a false report of employee misconduct. This November 29, 2005 allegation was supported by the exculpatory conclusion of the initial investigation. Once again this report seems to be drifting toward the singularity.
There are, at all prisons, Teflon® employees who are, seemingly, exempt from accountability for their misconduct and the California Institution for Men is no exception. On the other side of the coin are the employees who are persecuted for their adherence to their departmental training and policy regarding the compulsory reporting of employee misconduct.
Clearly, those designated as the "Hiring Authority" will embrace a standardized punitive system for employee misconduct (commonly referred to as "The Matrix"), as such a system gives them an excuse to be as harsh as they wish while allowing them to blame others for their draconian decisions.
There would seem to be a logic in such a system that standardizes punishments as long as all reports of employee misconduct are referred for investigation and the results of the investigations are, objectively and fairly, analyzed. However, due to local political considerations, all reports of employee misconduct are not created as equals and some will instantly cross the Event Horizon on their way into the abyss, never to be seen or heard from again, while others will be immediately dispatched for the requisite inquisition and bloodletting, oftentimes targeting known whistleblowers who are merely complying with CalDORC policies.
This has a chilling effect on those who have joined CalDORC with an internal set of ethics in place. By word-of-law they are being taught, by Sacramento, that, technically, they should comply with the reporting of all employee misconduct. However, by local example, they are being taught that, pragmatically, if a report is filed against a local political pundit, it could mean the kiss-of-death to their career. In other words, be careful who you report.
This converts an otherwise laudable concept into nothing more than a tactic to identify whistleblowers for later persecution.
The disturbing question this leaves is, "Who is left with promotional potential?" The answer to this question may also answer the age-old question, asked in disgust at State Senate hearings regarding mis/malfeasance in CalDORC, "Where do you get these people?" Obviously from the shallow end of the gene pool - those that are left when all of the ethical employees have been silenced.
Unquestionably, CalDORC will ignore this inconsistency which standardizes and centralizes only one aspect of employee discipline within CalDORC, yet ignores the, oftentimes, political process which subjects one employee to the disciplinary system while immunizing another for the same or similar acts. It is these "Teflon Dons" and their meteoric rises within CalDORC who will ensure controversy and failure for decades to come as they move into, ever increasing, positions of power.
My message to all of CalDORC's watchdog agencies is simply this:
You should develop an alternative which replaces the Hiring Authority as the sole arbiter of employee misconduct referrals. They have been compromised by local politics and are ineffective for this purpose. This decision making should be centralized and removed from local politics.
Remember the CalDORC Promotional Formula:
Promotion = TGP2 (Throw Great Parties, Take Good Pictures)
Lorraine Bradley
__________________________
1 Pursuant to §31140.3 of the Departmental Operations Manual, "The Hiring Authority is an individual authorized by The Director to hire, discipline, and dismiss staff." Within the Institution's Division, this would be the Wardens of the individual prisons.
NOW - TAKE THE POLL
(There will be one pop-up advertisement after you vote. Just click the "X" in the upper right hand corner to make it go away. This keeps the voting process FREE.)
No comments:
Post a Comment