NASA Employees Fight Invasive Background Check 354
Electron Barrage writes "Longtime JPL scientists, many of whom do not work on classified materials, including rover drivers and Apollo veterans, sued NASA, Caltech, and the Department of Commerce today to fight highly invasive background checks, which include financial information, any and all retail business transactions, and even sexual orientation."
For additional information... (Score:5, Informative)
Levers (Score:5, Informative)
I held a TS with SBI once upon a time. The main reason for background checks, as I understand it, is to ferret out any levers that could be used against you by hostile agent. Too much debt? We'll get you out of trouble if you give us info. Cheating on your wife? With a man?! It would be a shame if we had to call her. Think of your kids.
It's not that they're morally judging you, its that they're making sure that you're not unduly susceptible to influence.
It's not fair, but it's not about fairness.
-Peter
Re:thats the stupidest thing ive heard... (Score:1, Informative)
Checking "yes, I have" does not automatically remove you from the clearance pool. Answering "Yes, I currently do" likely will though. I know several people with TS that answered yes. Not as huge of a deal as you might think.
Re:thats the stupidest thing ive heard... (Score:4, Informative)
The current background check (on everybody who works at a federal facility - not just JPL) are pretty lenient:
http://editthis.info/images/jpl_rebadging/a/ab/S uitability_Matrix_mods.pdf
You have nothing to worry even if you are a regular pot-smoker, or were convicted of not paying your taxes, or committing any car-related offense short of vehicular manslaughter. I mean - Assault, Harassment, Forgery -- none get you into column "C"....
Looks like they're finally implementing PIV (Score:5, Informative)
Basically, everyone getting a PIV card has to pass a background check. However, it seems that asking those scientists and engineers about all that data mentioned in TFA is a bit excessive. The standard has an informational appendix (appendix C) that specifies what sort of checks should be done. It even specifies two levels of checks for different security levels. Looks like someone got a little bit too anal when deciding what checks to do. The checks mentioned in FIPS-201 seem reasonable, though. Can anyone that knows about background checks explain what they are exactly?
The cards themselves seem pretty good. It is pretty clear that the designers of FIPS-201 cards do not trust the wireless interface, making all biometric/sensitive information available only on the wired interface, unlike those e-passports every government is promoting. Pretty interesting reading material.
Re:you missed one... (Score:3, Informative)
It isn't a government job. JPL'ers are employed by Caltech, which is a private university.
Did my SF85P last year about this time. (Score:3, Informative)
On another note, I don't recall my 85P [opm.gov] form asking me if I was a homo or not, and I also don't recall retail transaction request. They did ask how much of what kind of debt I was in, I'm guessing to see if I was desperate for money or not. Yes they did ask about illegal drug use, but there was a time limit on it. I don't recall, but it wasn't to many years, four or so. All in all, I don't think much of the form was unreasonable, sure it was a pain in the ass to fill out, but it wasn't unreasonable.
If you want to see the form for yourself, here it is [opm.gov].
As for being at the JPL instead of the Cape or Johnson? Suck it up. This is for every federal position. Expect your postal carrier to be grouching about the form to.
Re:you missed one... (Score:5, Informative)
Contractors are being screened first, actually. Civil Servants have already had a background check, so to resolve the glut of overdue checks, the government is hiring one of Bush's friend's companies to do all the screening. And once they do their screening - unlike any background check in the private sector - the information is available to any government agency complying with HSPD-12.
Which, I believe, despite Griffin's protestations, is only NASA at this point.
Posting anonymously for obvious reasons. I work at Ames.
Re:Pointless (Score:4, Informative)
If you don't work on matters of national security, where is the concern with improper influence or motives? If someone's job puts them in a position where they might pose a threat to the safety of the country, they ought to be vetted and cleared appropriately. If not, filling out a questionnaire ought to be sufficient - though some of those questions are pretty fucking nosey, IMO, given that this is simply for getting an access card to allow you into places you've been going in the past anyway.
Re:Pointless (Score:2, Informative)
Yes they have access to explosives at their jobs -- but so do the people who manufacture said chemicals and transport them, and last I checked, those employees didn't have to go through government background checks. There's a big difference between requiring a background check for a top secret job designing spy satellites and requiring one for a visiting professor doing research on solar physics -- research that is bound to be published.
Re:Pointless (Score:4, Informative)