Privatizing Information Technology Services in WV Is your personal data held by the government of West Virginia safe and secure? Not if the Office of Technology is successful with the plan to privatize information technology services in West Virginia.
After the privatization of the essential government function of the management of personal data and information, there is no guarantee that any personal data currently maintained by employees in the state of West Virginia will continue to be maintained in this state, much less in this country. PEIA couldn’t even protect employee data when it privatized certain services to a contractor in Pennsylvania. Last year the US Department of Agriculture further warned the WV Secretary of DHHR that the outsourcing of key application processing duties to for-profit organizations is an unwise use of State and Federal resources that undermine program accountability. The privatization of information technology services represents an unacceptable security risk exposing the personal data of every citizen of West Virginia.
Other states that have privatized information technology services have experienced dramatic cost increases, significant declines in customer service and the loss of hundreds of highly skilled employees with the institutional knowledge and expertise that is necessary to maintain information technology systems. Once information technology services are privatized the damage to the states infrastructure and budgets are frequently irreversible. Because information technology services are complex, highly skilled and rapidly transforming, out of all of the government services, privatizing information technology is the most difficult to accomplish and the privatization of information technology services is seldom cost competitive.
WV’s Chief Technology Officer is yet to identify what the cost of providing this service is compared to what purchasing these services from the private sector will cost. Even IBM stated in their “secret” efficiency study that IBM cannot provide information technology services at less cost than the state can provide these services for in house.
In his July 10, 2010, STATEMENT FROM THE GOVERNOR REGARDING THE ALCAN VOTE, Governor Manchin said “West Virginians deserve to have quality, secure jobs and the opportunity to work. In this current global economic downturn, we are forced to fight harder each day to keep and create good jobs.” Governor Manchin should be fighting just as hard to keep these information technology jobs here in West Virginia not privatizing these good jobs at a higher cost to the taxpayers, compromising our information security and crippling the state workers ability to perform our jobs.
The West Virginia Public Workers Union calls on the West Virginia Legislature to require the Office of Technology implement any comprehensive statewide technology plan with at least a modest amount of transparency and require that a cost benefit analysis of this deal to privatize West Virginia‘s information technology services be conducted before the states valuable human resources are squandered away.
STOP the privatization of information technology services! July 16, 2010 - Texas Warns IBM of Outsourcing Contract Failures
Government Technology News
http://www.govtech.com/gt/articles/766425July 15 State technology employees protest outsourcing plans
Charleston Gazette
http://www.wvgazette.com/News/201007140770West Virginia Public Workers Union opposed to the privatization of information technology services - Associated Press (AP) Articles July 14, 2010
Charleston Gazette
http://www.wvgazette.com/ap/ApTopStories/201007140321Charleston Daily Mail
http://www.dailymail.com/ap/ApTopStories/201007140346Herald-Dispatch
http://www.herald-dispatch.com/news/briefs/x1653456106/W-Va-state-workers-oppose-privatizing-tech-jobsAdditional Resources on the Privatization of Information Technology Services in West Virginiai Stock Analyst article on WV NET takeover -
http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewiStockNews/articleid/4209308Article on tech services outsourced to IBM, called a "failure." -
http://chestertontribune.com/Business/138%20nisource_admits_outsourcing_jobs.htmArticle on Outsourcing IT services -
http://www.governing.com/topics/technology/Is-IT-Outsourcing-Still-In.htmlArticle State data outsourcing still possible
http://wvgazette.com/News/201006080897?page=2&build=cache Article State may outsource IT Work
http://dailymail.com/News/201006080972?page=2&build=cacheArticle on the: Economic and Institutional Constraints on the Privatization of Government Information Technology Services, Darrell A Fruth, Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, Vol. 13 No. 13, Summer 2000.
http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v13/13HarvJLTech521.pdf Comprehensive Grievance Workshop August 7, 9:00 am to 3:30 pm There will be a UE Local 170 Steward Council Training Workshop in Morgantown, WV on Saturday, August 7, from 9 a.m. until 3:30 pm. Lunch will be provided.
This workshop will be on Comprehensive Grievance Training, taught by our own Local 170 Chief Steward, International Staff and the WVU Institute for Labor Studies and Research. This workshop will be on Comprehensive Grievance Training. This workshop is free to all union members. All union members are encouraged to attend.
All union members, all chapter officers and all shop stewards are encouraged to recommend this comprehensive grievance training to any interested union member. For more information call the Union Hall at 304-699-4401 and register or to find out more information leave a message for our Chief Steward, Steve Thompson.
Directions
The Steward Training will be held at 400 Knapp Hall, 29 Beechurst Ave., Morgantown, WV
Driving from the South, follow I-79 North toward Morgantown.
Merge onto I-68 East via EXIT 148 toward Cumberland, MD.
Take the first exit, US-119 exit, EXIT 1, toward UNIVERSITY AVE./DOWNTOWN.
Turn LEFT onto US-119. Continue to follow US-119 for 4 miles which turns into Don Knotts Blvd and into Downtown Morgantown. Knapp Hall is approximately .1 miles beyond the Shell Station on the left.
Should tenure matter? There’s a commercial that questions the practice of banks offering special teaser terms to attract new customers that says: “Even kids know it’s not fair to treat new friends better than old friends.”
It has been the longstanding practice of state agencies to ignore considerations of seniority when making promotions, work assignments and other decisions that preferentially benefit some public workers and not others. Because of this, the vestiges of favoritism, cronyism and patronage — not to mention retaliation and discrimination — continue unimpeded, despite the purported reforms of a civil service system governing employee relations.
Even before the current freeze on merit raises, commonly known as the Puccio Memorandum, seniority wasn’t necessarily valued in decisions about who would receive pay increases. The reasonable expectation that the longer an employee satisfactorily performed the duties of a position, the higher they would be within the appropriate pay grade — the principle of step raises — has never been a given. As a result, in the absence of a statutory cost of living adjustment, almost all state workers have seen steady declines in their standards of living.
The blanket freeze on discretionary raises, however, has only exacerbated the unfairness endemic in public employment. As it currently stands, the two available ways to gain an increase in salary are to seek reallocation to a higher pay grade or to apply for openings posted as promotions from the worker’s current classification.
Although the system of classifications used for state workers is notoriously outdated, the state’s division of personnel has proved generally resistant to requests for reallocation, as evidenced in the high number of grievances filed for DOP denials. Similarly, there are a significant number of grievances filed over hiring choices made for posted positions, a large number of which, unsurprisingly, cite seniority and length of work experience as grounds for contesting selections made.
Using figures supplied by the grievance board for the 2008-2009 period in order to get a ballpark estimate, classification and selection grievances totaled 1,623. If the general classes of nondisciplinary grievances are added, which includes transfers, bumping, discrimination and other matters of preference potentially addressed by statutory seniority rights, the total is 2,394, or well more than half of all grievances filed for that two-year period.
“Feeling harassed? Discriminated against? Are you unfairly paid? Is your workplace unsafe? This is a wake-up call.