In our last post, we started to go over the first official response from NH’s Department of Environmental Services concerning the political blogging of Richard de Seve while on the taxpayer dime – a LOT of Lefty blogging from this staunch Democrat (sufficient enough to be a Delegate for Dennis Kucinich during his run in 2008 for President). In our Right To Know we had several specific items to which DES had to respond, one way or another, and each was addressed (one way or another).
One way or another? Well, if you remember, I singled out that word “responsive” in that last post; that will be discussed. Not to stretch this out, but essentially, here are the possible outcomes:
- The data just does not exist – either it was not captured, plain got lost, or deleted / trashed (based on time criteria) – “No data for you!” (to paraphrase the Seinfeld Soup Nazi)
- The data exists, but pertains to personnel matters, and thus are exempt from RSA 91-A requests – again, “No data for you!” (to paraphrase the Seinfeld Soup Nazi)
- Data exists, but is beyond the scope of our request (i.e., we will not see all of Mr. de Seve’s emails; sure, we asked for emails, but worded such that we were interested only in those outbound of the State’s domain – and not DES work related) – “meh, so what; no biggie – we’re just not that much into you”
- Data exists, it meets our time criteria (1/1/2005 to 3/12/2012) and fits our request – Ahhhhhh – responsive!
So, let’s get started but a wee bit out of order. First up are the HR (Human Resource) type requests – I’ve started off with #3 simply because we’ve already posted it here. Why did we ask for this? We wanted to establish whether or not Mr. de Seve knew that it was wrong to use the State system as he did as he was doing his political blogging. Intent and knowledge are important parts of judging if an action is either right or wrong as “Councilor” Richard de Seve, Esq. would readily tell us if we asked.
Request 3:
3. Copies of Mr. de Seve’s signed copies of the IT Department’s Computer Use Policy that he signs at his annual review, showing that he has read, understands, and agrees to abide by.
Response to Request 3:
As discussed in DES’s initial acknowledgment of your request, the DOIT Computer Use Policy is applicable only to DOIT employees. DES has not adopted the DOIT policy, but has had its own Electronic Communications Policy (“ECP”) in place since 1996, a copy of which was previously provided to you together with a blank copy of the ECP acknowledgment page. DES employees are required to sign the ECP acknowledgment, but DES does not require employees to do so on an annual basis or in connection with performance reviews. The signed ECP acknowledgment is a record that is placed in each employee’s personnel file, but it and other documents like it are not specifically addressed in the DOP rules. Therefore, without waiving any claim of confidentiality that may apply to such a record pursuant to RSA 9l-A or the DOP rules, DES will release the record. A copy of the signed ECP acknowledgment is included herewith.
This is responsive data: that “record” is the signed agreement that this former lawyer knew was a binding agreement – again, we posted it here. And this (no RTK needed for this one). I’ve started off with this one simply because we’ve already posted it here.
When we started in on this project, we noticed that there was a VERY wide variability in when Mr. de Seve was blogging. Now, we considered that perhaps he was working variable hours, different shifts at different times, split shifts, or “flex-time”. Thus, we decided to ask for his time cards; the primary intent was thinking that perhaps Mr. de Seve was an hourly employee – this way, we could do a random check of card times vs his posting times.
Request 4:
4. Further,’we are also requesting the payroll hours of Mr. de Seve as well for the time frame, January 1, 2005 to March 12, 2012 and the signed copies of the Department of Information Technology Computer Use document that is updated yearly and signed by Mr, de Seve at each of his annual reviews.
Response to Request 4:
DES’s standard workday is 8:00 am through 4:00 pm, Monday through Friday. This reflects a 7.5 hour/day, 37 .5 hour/week basic workweek which, consistent with NH Admin. Rule Per 1201.03, accounts for a half hour lunch period that is not considered work time. Also, pursuant to Per 1201.03, the workday includes a 15 minute rest period every 4 hours. Lunch and rest periods do not have to be taken at specific times during the workday. Mr. de Seve is assigned to a 37 .5 hour per week schedule that coincides with DES’ standard workday/workweek. As to the DOIT “Computer Use document” referenced in this request, please refer to the Response to Request 3, above.
OK, no responsive data for this request – only a prose description. Given what we know about his blogging / posting proclivities, it seems that time of day did not matter at all to Mr. de Seve: early in the morning, late in the day, or smack dab in the middle – “fingers to keyboard ho!” for him. There was also the chance that Mr. de Seve could have been a salaried employee, so we had to establish that as a fact (or not) – so we asked!
Request 6:
6. Electronic copies of his “daily work hour” payroll hours if hourly, copies of any documents showing his status as a Salaried employee if that category is correct.
Response to Request 6:
See Response to Request 4, above. Please note that state employees are not categorized as “hourly” or “salaried.” Pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement, classified state positions are either exempt or non-exempt for purposes of federal overtime requirements. Nonexempt employees receive pay for overtime worked at the rate of “time and a half,” while exempt employees do not receive overtime pay. Therefore, non-exempt employees are akin to “hourly” employees, while exempt employees may be thought of as “salaried.” For purposes of compensation for a standard workweek, however, there is no practical difference. In this instance, Mr. de Seve’s internal title is “Compliance Supervisor” and his class specification is “Environmentalist IV.” The Environmentalist IV class specification is an exempt specification under the CBA.
OK, no responsive data for this request – only a prose description, but useful. By the way, “CBA” stands for Collective Bargaining Accord – after all, Mr. de Seve is the VP of Chapter 50 of the SEIU.
Tomorrow – more interesting interim results delivered by the DES RTK dude!
