Wouldn’t it be great if we could use that list to get suggestions for improvements from all employees? With content analysis by whomever volunteers, or perhaps the FS would give us a grant? Or we could sub to one of the Keystones…
Here’s Andy’s response:
Mason & Chad,
As you may know, FSEEE has the FS employee database on one of our non-governmental servers. Not every employee — about 35,000 — but most. We obtained these data using 100% legal means. We used no government equipment in doing so.
Using this database, we email a complimentary copy of our quarterly newsletter to FS employees. Any employee who wishes is welcome to unsubscribe. Few have done so. Here’s a screenshot of our last newsletter mailing. I suspect these open and click-through rates exceed the Chief’s typical emails to all employees. (I tell you these facts only to demonstrate the apparent usefulness of our communications with FS employees).
Imagine that others enjoyed the same ability to communicate directly with their governmental civil servants. A command-and-control authoritarian bureaucracy would blanch at the prospect. On the other hand, an open organization with nothing to fear would welcome it.
If more people felt connected to our government and its workers, maybe federal employees wouldn’t be the endangered species they’ll become on January 20.
Sincerely,
Andy Stahl
Executive Director
Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics
PS: There is nothing more off-putting to the public than to call (800) 832-1355, which the FS lists on its web pages as its contact phone. That phone number goes to a USDA call center whose operators have never heard of the Forest Service.
6 thoughts on “Andy Responds to FS Response on Employee Directory”
The “Forest Service Web Team” responded as follows:
On Nov 15, 2024, at 8:50 AM, FS-Webmaster wrote:
Hello Mr. Stahl,
Chad Douglas asked that we follow up with you regarding the email you sent him earlier this week. We checked the AskUSDA phone number (800-832-1355) to ensure it’s working correctly. We verified that it is.
AskUSDA is staffed by a team of customer service representatives from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Eastern, Monday through Friday (closed on federal holidays). They find answers for the public based on subject or USDA agency. When they don’t have an answer, they send the question to us. The team is always staffed to ensure the best service to the public. You can also contact them by email or live-chat on the AskUSDA website and they will find you an answer or point of contact. You can also enter your subject or USDA agency directly into the search bar and a list of “knowledge articles” will populate.
Additionally, we are working across the entire Forest Service to ensure regions, research stations, forests, grasslands, districts, program areas and staffs have up-to-date contact information listed on their websites to provide the best possible service to the public.
Please let us know if you have more questions or need anything else.
Sincerely,
Forest Service Web Team
I replied:
Forest Service Web Team:
I don’t know why the Forest Service has chosen to cut itself off from the public. I do know that it was the agency’s own choice; not one imposed by USDA. For example, your sister agency, NRCS, has publicly available employee directories, and contact information for its key staff, including chief, readily available on its website.
We look forward to working with the new administration to restore public trust in the Forest Service.
Best regards,
Andy Stahl
Executive Director
Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics
“nothing more off-putting”? I can think of a few….failure to respond to repeated emails and telephone messages over long periods of time regarding basic forest administrative services. Disparity in treatment according to “what” records are being requested and “who” is doing the requesting.
Maybe Musk’s DOGE office will take individual names.
I struggle with the apparent need for everyone to have access to an employee directory, especially one that includes emails. Most employees, at least at the Supervisor’s Office and District levels (I never worked at the RO/WO level so can’t speak for them) have more work to do than they have time to accomplish it. Many employees receive 50 or more emails a day and managers receive well over 100 per day. They don’t have time to read a bunch of emails not work related. Just as businesses have customer service people, supervisor’s offices have front desk people and at least one public affairs specialist to deal with public inquiries. I don’t understand why a special interest group, such as a national group like FSEEE (I used to be a member) or a local group should fill inboxes with “junk” mail. If that is allowed, why not CVS and auto warrantee solicitations?
Mike, I understand what you’re saying. At the same time, up until a few months ago it seemed to be working OK for everyone. But maybe employees were being spammed, we don’t know. As a person who used to work with appeals, we used to talk about being clear on “facts found and conclusions drawn”. In this example, we get the conclusions but not, apparently any of the facts.
Also, I feel that I have legitimate reasons to contact employees (and I think the other signatories of the letter feel the same way). And your comment also makes me wonder, as Andy pointed out,since we can look up people in FS R&D and at NRCS- why it might not be a problem for them, but it is for NFS.
So I think there are various frustrations here.. one is for the employee directory. The other is for phone numbers that go into impenetrable phone trees. Another is for phone messages left and not returned. Oh, and forms filled out with no one ever contacting us. It’s not that the FS is bad, it’s just that it’s uneven with some terrific and some .. not.. and no apparent place to complain. Say if it were your bank that made it difficult to find out things, you would go to a different bank. Citizens, taxpayers, the public.. don’t have that option.
I understand your frustration, Sharon. One year I was tasked with training all employees in customer service and during those sessions, lack of time for employees to be responsive to the nonstop requests for information from both internal and external sources was voiced often, especially during field season.
One year I tracked all my hours working and I learned I put in over 200 hours I never received any kind of compensation for. And that wasn’t even a bad year. Many of those extra hours were attributable to following up with information requests. It’s in my DNA to be responsive and I was a little envious of those people who could just walk away from their work at the end of the day. And quite frankly, they should be able to leave work behind and be with their families at the end of the day.
Many of the specialists, in particular, received multiple information requests every day, but during field season they were out of the office the entire day trying to gather the data they needed to complete the NEPA documents they would work on during winter and spring. I couldn’t even track them down during field season. There was a lot of pressure from the RO and WO to meet targets. But, this was on the Rio Grande NF, a budget bottom-feeder, so maybe other forests had more personnel to comfortably handle their workload.
I believe the solution should be national forests need to put money into their front desk coverage and the front desk personnel should be well trained. Additionally, public affairs specialists and line officers need to be responsive to information requests.
One other thought, Sharon. It seems like the USFS spam filter is pretty sensitive. I routinely checked my spam folder and quite often found emails from special interest groups and the public in it. I wonder how many unanswered emails are because they ended up in the person’s spam folder?
(I tell you these facts only to demonstrate the apparent usefulness of our communications with FS employees).
The “Forest Service Web Team” responded as follows:
On Nov 15, 2024, at 8:50 AM, FS-Webmaster wrote:
Hello Mr. Stahl,
Chad Douglas asked that we follow up with you regarding the email you sent him earlier this week. We checked the AskUSDA phone number (800-832-1355) to ensure it’s working correctly. We verified that it is.
AskUSDA is staffed by a team of customer service representatives from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Eastern, Monday through Friday (closed on federal holidays). They find answers for the public based on subject or USDA agency. When they don’t have an answer, they send the question to us. The team is always staffed to ensure the best service to the public. You can also contact them by email or live-chat on the AskUSDA website and they will find you an answer or point of contact. You can also enter your subject or USDA agency directly into the search bar and a list of “knowledge articles” will populate.
Additionally, we are working across the entire Forest Service to ensure regions, research stations, forests, grasslands, districts, program areas and staffs have up-to-date contact information listed on their websites to provide the best possible service to the public.
Please let us know if you have more questions or need anything else.
Sincerely,
Forest Service Web Team
I replied:
Forest Service Web Team:
I don’t know why the Forest Service has chosen to cut itself off from the public. I do know that it was the agency’s own choice; not one imposed by USDA. For example, your sister agency, NRCS, has publicly available employee directories, and contact information for its key staff, including chief, readily available on its website.
We look forward to working with the new administration to restore public trust in the Forest Service.
Best regards,
Andy Stahl
Executive Director
Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics
“nothing more off-putting”? I can think of a few….failure to respond to repeated emails and telephone messages over long periods of time regarding basic forest administrative services. Disparity in treatment according to “what” records are being requested and “who” is doing the requesting.
Maybe Musk’s DOGE office will take individual names.
I struggle with the apparent need for everyone to have access to an employee directory, especially one that includes emails. Most employees, at least at the Supervisor’s Office and District levels (I never worked at the RO/WO level so can’t speak for them) have more work to do than they have time to accomplish it. Many employees receive 50 or more emails a day and managers receive well over 100 per day. They don’t have time to read a bunch of emails not work related. Just as businesses have customer service people, supervisor’s offices have front desk people and at least one public affairs specialist to deal with public inquiries. I don’t understand why a special interest group, such as a national group like FSEEE (I used to be a member) or a local group should fill inboxes with “junk” mail. If that is allowed, why not CVS and auto warrantee solicitations?
Mike, I understand what you’re saying. At the same time, up until a few months ago it seemed to be working OK for everyone. But maybe employees were being spammed, we don’t know. As a person who used to work with appeals, we used to talk about being clear on “facts found and conclusions drawn”. In this example, we get the conclusions but not, apparently any of the facts.
Also, I feel that I have legitimate reasons to contact employees (and I think the other signatories of the letter feel the same way). And your comment also makes me wonder, as Andy pointed out,since we can look up people in FS R&D and at NRCS- why it might not be a problem for them, but it is for NFS.
So I think there are various frustrations here.. one is for the employee directory. The other is for phone numbers that go into impenetrable phone trees. Another is for phone messages left and not returned. Oh, and forms filled out with no one ever contacting us. It’s not that the FS is bad, it’s just that it’s uneven with some terrific and some .. not.. and no apparent place to complain. Say if it were your bank that made it difficult to find out things, you would go to a different bank. Citizens, taxpayers, the public.. don’t have that option.
I understand your frustration, Sharon. One year I was tasked with training all employees in customer service and during those sessions, lack of time for employees to be responsive to the nonstop requests for information from both internal and external sources was voiced often, especially during field season.
One year I tracked all my hours working and I learned I put in over 200 hours I never received any kind of compensation for. And that wasn’t even a bad year. Many of those extra hours were attributable to following up with information requests. It’s in my DNA to be responsive and I was a little envious of those people who could just walk away from their work at the end of the day. And quite frankly, they should be able to leave work behind and be with their families at the end of the day.
Many of the specialists, in particular, received multiple information requests every day, but during field season they were out of the office the entire day trying to gather the data they needed to complete the NEPA documents they would work on during winter and spring. I couldn’t even track them down during field season. There was a lot of pressure from the RO and WO to meet targets. But, this was on the Rio Grande NF, a budget bottom-feeder, so maybe other forests had more personnel to comfortably handle their workload.
I believe the solution should be national forests need to put money into their front desk coverage and the front desk personnel should be well trained. Additionally, public affairs specialists and line officers need to be responsive to information requests.
One other thought, Sharon. It seems like the USFS spam filter is pretty sensitive. I routinely checked my spam folder and quite often found emails from special interest groups and the public in it. I wonder how many unanswered emails are because they ended up in the person’s spam folder?