To cry or laugh. Can't decide.

[Hyena Dandy]

Mikoyan, explain. I mean, should EVERY public employee have their office number made public? Should the President's personal extension be public information? He'd never get work done.

[FArchivist]

We pay taxes and therefore pay their salary.....If they want privacy, work for a private company.

Excuse me?

First, you don't pay their damn salary. Once your taxes leave you, that's the government's money, not your money.

Second, they're not your employee. They are the employees for the federal government. You are not the federal government. Your link to the federal government is through the representatives you elect and that's it.

Third, are you actually saying that they should have no privacy at all? That I should be able to demand any and all private information from a government employee? "Bitch, give me your teenage daughter's phone number. NOW. You're a civil SERVANT, so SERVE ME. OBEDIENCE, GET YOU SOME."

[Rageaholic]

Isn't their work number enough?

[Panacea]

But if you were legitimately dealing with PR Officer Alpha, he'd likely give you his number or extension. So I don't know, I'm not seeing a huge deal here. If anyone needs to screen their calls, its Homeland Security. I can't imagine the sheer level of daily insanity that tries to call them, and I imagine it would translate into harrassment of individuals pretty quick if they weren't funnelled through a screening process.

Do you have any idea how hard it is to do your job when you've got a lunatic calling to harrass you your entire shift? I do, and believe me, its fscking hard to do your job around it and the legal countermeasures to stop it move at a glacial pace. In my case it was a just local line and only one person. Multiple that by an entire country and public relations officer or not, you would never get shit done with the amount of crazy calling you at your desk all day.

I see what you're saying, and you've got a point.

What bothers me is really the lack of consistency. Some government agencies publish the extensions of the person doing the same job, and DHS refuses. It doesn't look good and sets a poor example.

There should be a consistent policy: all the numbers are published or all aren't.

What I see here is more effort by an agency known for its arrogance and inefficiencies to conceal its workings from the general public.

[Andara Bledin]

So, does that mean that since I have my number listed in the phone book, we should force everybody else to have their numbers listed in the phone book?

It makes as much sense.

^-.-^

[Hyena Dandy]

What I see here is more effort by an agency known for its arrogance and inefficiencies to conceal its workings from the general public.

How would having their personal extensions reveal their workings? We can find out WHO their employees are. The only information it adds is what their numbers are, and how to contact those employees, personally, any time you like.

[Gravekeeper]

There should be a consistent policy: all the numbers are published or all aren't.

I disagree. Certain types of agencies are much bigger targets for call volume ( crazies, cranks, etc ) than others. I know this first hand, though my work NDA prevents me from elaborating for security reasons. Just suffice it to say I've been in the filter position.