[House Hearing, 109 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
TELECOMMUTING: A 21ST CENTURY SOLUTION TO TRAFFIC JAMS AND TERRORISM
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE
AND AGENCY ORGANIZATION
of the
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JULY 18, 2006
__________
Serial No. 109-230
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/
index.html
http://www.house.gov/reform
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
34-546 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2006
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866)512-1800
DC area (202)512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail Stop SSOP,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM
TOM DAVIS, Virginia, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
DAN BURTON, Indiana TOM LANTOS, California
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
JOHN L. MICA, Florida PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
GIL GUTKNECHT, Minnesota CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
CHRIS CANNON, Utah WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee DIANE E. WATSON, California
CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
DARRELL E. ISSA, California LINDA T. SANCHEZ, California
JON C. PORTER, Nevada C.A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland
KENNY MARCHANT, Texas BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina Columbia
CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania ------
VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio (Independent)
BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California
David Marin, Staff Director
Lawrence Halloran, Deputy Staff Director
Teresa Austin, Chief Clerk
Phil Barnett, Minority Chief of Staff/Chief Counsel
Subcommittee on the Federal Workforce and Agency Organization
JON C. PORTER, Nevada, Chairman
JOHN L. MICA, Florida DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
TOM DAVIS, Virginia MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
DARRELL E. ISSA, California ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
KENNY MARCHANT, Texas Columbia
PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
Ex Officio
HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
Ron Martinson, Staff Director
Shannon Meade, Professional Staff Member
Alex Cooper, Clerk
Tania Shand, Minority Professional Staff Member
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on July 18, 2006.................................... 1
Statement of:
Green, Daniel, Deputy Associate Director, Employee and Family
Support Policy, U.S. Office of Personnel Management;
Danette Campbell, Senior Telework Advisor, U.S. Patent and
Trade Office; and Carl Froehlich, Chief of Agency-wide
Shared Services, Internal Revenue Service.................. 14
Campbell, Danette........................................ 22
Froehlich, Carl.......................................... 32
Green, Daniel............................................ 14
Mularie, William, chief executive officer, the Telework
Consortium; Joslyn Read, assistant vice president,
regulatory affairs, Hughes Network Systems, LLC, on behalf
of the Telecommunications Industry Association; and Jerry
Edgerton, president of business and Federal marketing,
Verizon Communications..................................... 45
Edgerton, Jerry.......................................... 62
Mularie, William......................................... 45
Read, Joslyn............................................. 54
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Campbell, Danette, Senior Telework Advisor, U.S. Patent and
Trade Office, prepared statement of........................ 24
Cummings, Hon. Elijah E., a Representative in Congress from
the State of Maryland, prepared statement of............... 77
Davis, Hon. Tom, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Virginia, prepared statement of......................... 10
Edgerton, Jerry, president of business and Federal marketing,
Verizon Communications, prepared statement of.............. 65
Froehlich, Carl, Chief of Agency-wide Shared Services,
Internal Revenue Service, prepared statement of............ 34
Green, Daniel, Deputy Associate Director, Employee and Family
Support Policy, U.S. Office of Personnel Management,
prepared statement of...................................... 17
Mularie, William, chief executive officer, the Telework
Consortium, prepared statement of.......................... 48
Porter, Hon. Jon C., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Nevada, prepared statement of..................... 4
Read, Joslyn, assistant vice president, regulatory affairs,
Hughes Network Systems, LLC, on behalf of the
Telecommunications Industry Association, prepared statement
of......................................................... 57
TELECOMMUTING: A 21ST CENTURY SOLUTION TO TRAFFIC JAMS AND TERRORISM
----------
TUESDAY, JULY 18, 2006
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Federal Workforce and Agency
Organization,
Committee on Government Reform,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:24 p.m., in
room 2247, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jon C. Porter
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Porter, Davis of Virginia, Issa,
Schmidt, and Norton.
Staff present: Ronald Martinson, staff director; Chad
Bungard, deputy staff director/chief counsel; Shannon Meade,
professional staff member; Jessica Johnson, OPM detailee; Chad
Christofferson and Alex Cooper, legislative assistants; Tania
Shand, minority professional staff member; and Teresa Coufal,
minority assistant clerk.
Mr. Porter. I would like to thank everyone for being here
today.
With an increase in traffic congestion, fuel prices, time
away from one's family, and terrorist and pandemic threats, the
time is right for the subcommittee to examine the Federal
Government's use of telecommuting for our Federal employees.
Years ago, many of us used to watch with awe when a member of
the Enterprise crew from Star Trek would ``beam them up,''
thus, allowing them to travel instantly from one location to
another. Imagine how life would change if you could literally
be anywhere at one time.
Today, with affordable broadband access, Web casting, e-
mail, Instant Messaging, and digital-quality video streaming,
the only thing which separates the fantasy world of Star Trek
and our modern world is that no one has to actually travel
anywhere. As technology races ahead, it has become necessary
for the Government to adapt and take advantage of these
changes. Taking advantage of available and reasonable
technology has the potential to save millions of dollars in
routine operations, as well as saving the Federal Government
from spending potentially millions more in the event of a
national disaster.
The effective use of telecommuting will provide for
continued Government operations during an emergency or disaster
situation, increased efficiency and productivity in the Federal
Government, and an increase in the quality of life of Federal
employees. All of this becomes more relevant when we consider
the world in which we currently live. To insulate the daily
operations of the Federal Government from the disruption caused
by an emergency situation, it is imperative that the Federal
Government have an effective telecommuting policy that will
allow employees to work offsite in a critical time.
Considering the constant threat of terrorist attacks,
natural disasters, and wide-spread sickness, for example, the
Avian flu, the Federal Government should be able to maintain
operations even in times of a crisis. The importance of
continuity of operation planning was again underscored recently
when the massive flooding forced the Internal Revenue Service
headquarters building to be closed until next year, which I
think everyone is happy about. No, just kidding.
We will hear today from the IRS as to how they have
responded to the disaster. I know that my good friend and
Ranking Member Danny Davis has done a lot of work on improving
the continuity of operation planning for the Federal
Government, and I look forward to learning from him in the
future, if not today, with some of his written testimony.
Telecommuting can also have a huge impact on the traffic
problems plaguing the major metropolitan areas nationwide. In
my home State of Nevada, a Federal employee commuting from his
or her house in Green Valley to an office in Boulder City could
take over an hour. With the national price per gallon average
of approximately $3 and energy costs rising everywhere in our
Nation, consumers and various levels of Government are
increasingly looking at new ways to be more frugal.
While various solutions are currently being explored, such
as hybrid cars, alternative fuels, and expansion of public
transportation, the simple reduction of the number of travelers
on the road is an idea that usually does not come up. Public
transportation and hybrid cars are great, but nothing uses less
fuel than not traveling at all.
Of course, if people are not traveling into work, then they
are not in the offices. Office space, especially in major
metropolitan areas, is incredibly expensive. Not only must you
pay for the actual space itself, you must also pay utilities,
purchase furniture, hire cleaners, and, in many cases, maintain
security. All of this adds up rapidly. The U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office [PTO], reduced annual real estate expenditures
by $1.5 million, as its aggressive telecommuting program for
its trademark attorneys has reduced the need for three floors
of office space in its former Arlington, VA headquarters.
In addition, PTO has seen an increase in production and
output by 10 percent since implementing its telecommuting
program. If all functions of a particular employee's job can be
performed remotely, and there is a clear means by which the
employer can determine that work is getting done to a
measurable standard and even more efficiently, isn't it unfair
to American taxpayers to not pursue telecommuting aggressively
for the Federal Government?
The benefits of telecommuting are not strictly related to
energy, economics, and emergency preparedness. Numerous studies
have shown that teleworking employees tend to be happier in
their jobs, and more productive as a result. Telecommuting can
be instrumental in serving the needs of the family. By allowing
parents to build their lives around their families and not
their long commutes, the Federal Government puts productive
parents at home to attend Little League games and school
recitals.
I fully understand that every employee is not eligible for
telecommuting. But the truth is that there are many employees
in a given office setting who are perfectly suited to be
telecommuters, yet agencies are not currently taking advantage
of it. This may be due to management fears, cultural change, or
perhaps lack of awareness of the available technology or even a
lack of central leadership pushing agencies and managers to the
many advantages of telecommuting.
Notwithstanding the excuses, this has to improve. In his
testimony before the subcommittee last November, Congressman
Frank Wolf testified that ``roughly 60 percent of the jobs in
[the] region are jobs whereby people could telework.'' While 60
percent of all jobs found with the National Capitol Region
qualify for telecommuting, only 12 percent actually do as of
today.
Therefore, nearly 180,000 out of 300,000 employees could
work at a location other than their official work site. Offices
and cubicle spaces can be eliminated, downsized, or shared as
employees come to the official work site less and less. It is
absolutely essential that all Federal employees and agencies
implement an effective telecommuting policy to be prepared in
the event of an emergency, to increase production and
efficiency, and to improve the quality of life of its
employees. The American taxpayers deserve nothing less.
I look forward to the testimony of all the witnesses that
we have today and I would especially like to thank the IRS for
its willingness to testify on short notice, while under very
hectic and, I know, very difficult circumstances.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Jon C. Porter follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.003
Mr. Porter. I would now like to recognize the Congresswoman
from the District of Columbia for opening comments.
Ms. Norton. Thank you.
I appreciate this hearing, Mr. Chairman, and believe that
Mr. Davis, who would otherwise be here unless unavoidably
detained, would say so as well, because it is vitally
important, and increasingly so, to the future of the Federal
work force in terms of emergency preparedness, keeping Federal
employment competitive, and making sure it evolves with new
technologies and new times.
Representative Danny Davis could not be here, but this
hearing concerns a hearing of true importance to him in
particular. Mr. Davis' pending H.R. 3566, the Continuity of
Operations Demonstration Project Act, takes an important step
in addressing the issues we are here to talk about today.
The core issue is this: the great benefits--proven
benefits--that telework has to offer are simply not being
realized by the Federal Government.
Telework is a prudent response to probability. With
hurricanes and other natural disasters, the threat of terrorism
and a flue pandemic all on our radar, we must be prepared to
continue operations in the face of damage and disruption. Just
this month we saw the Internal Revenue Service headquarters
close for 6 months as the result of flooding from severe summer
storms. I know we are happy that apparently the IRS is open. I
am not sure if the taxpayers of the United States are as
gleeful as we are.
To ensure continuity of operations in these situations, we
need a sound telework of telecommuting infrastructure. For an
agency to pick up where nature or an emergency made it leave
off, Federal workers must be able to work from other locations
and must have the technology practice and support necessary to
do so.
This means investments in training, equipment, and
facilities. It means that workers should have telework
experience, and, most of all, it means that careful planning
has to be done to ensure any transition is a smooth and
effective one.
Yet, despite how important telework is to the continuity of
operations planning, agency plans continue to be
underdeveloped, and the necessary time and resources have not
yet been committed. Only 43 percent of agencies have telework
integrated into their COOP plans, and only 20 percent provide
related training.
The problem is not only at this step in the chain.
Government studies have concluded that the specific guidance
needed to incorporate telework into COOP plans is lacking and
that this lack of direction continues to hinder progress.
Such a status quo is unacceptable. While better guidance
needs to be provided, agencies should not have to be chided.
Research shows that program investments in telework will more
than pay for themselves.
COOP aside, telework brings a second set of benefits.
Telework benefits employers. It has been proven to boost
productivity and reduce absenteeism. In its annual surveys from
2003 and 2004, AT&T found that teleworking saves them
approximately $150 million a year, and that it is a first-order
recruiting tool. It also benefits employees. It saves commuting
time and costs for workers and enhances family life and morale.
And it serves the environment, too, by reducing auto emissions
and pollution.
But telework lags its potential here. For far too many
employees, their desire is met with resistance, and their
desire turns to frustration. This is all in the face of the
most significant congressional mandate on telework, Section 355
of Public Law 106-346, which requires agencies to increase
participation to the maximum extent possible.
Despite requirements on each of these points, agency
policies have not fully evolved. Barriers have not been
sufficiently identified, and steps to overcome them have not
been sustained. Investment is under-provided and allotted in a
manner that lacks a strategic focus. Agencies in charge of
Government-wide implementation have not gone far enough in
pressuring agencies to comply with the law, in collecting the
data necessary to understand where we stand and what needs to
be done, or in helping agencies to get there.
In short, telework is essential for both emergency
preparedness and being prepared to build the workplace of the
future. But these are not two separate goals. Instead, COOP is
yet another reason to build a basic telework capacity, and
telework must be structured with COOP needs in mind.
I look forward to today being at the start of a real march
toward this type of integrated policy and toward realizing
telework's true potential.
I also note, in closing, that Representative Davis is
submitting a statement for the record on these points further.
Mr. Porter. Thank you very much.
Chairman Davis.
Mr. Tom Davis of Virginia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Telework leverages the latest technology to give
significant flexibility to managers and workers alike. It can
serve to reduce traffic congestion, which, as we all know, is a
major problem in this region. But telework isn't just common-
sense efficiency. It is also an important national security
consideration as well.
The decentralization of Federal agency functions inherent
in a healthy telework strategy can greatly increase the
survivability of those agencies in the event of a terrorist
attack or other disruptive crisis. Therefore, I have
consistently advocated that telework needs to be an integral
part of every Federal Government agency continuity of operation
plan [COOP].
To promote my strong commitment to telework and its
inclusion in COOP planning, the full Government Reform
Committee has held numerous hearings under my chairmanship. We
have also engaged the GAO to evaluate the Government's COOP
planning process, the inclusion of telework in that process and
the adequacy of Government-wide exercises of COOP plans and
telework.
Our efforts have focused on a number of aspects of
telework. A primary concern has been the status of telework in
the Federal Government. We have encouraged the responsible
agencies for implementing telework policies for Federal
employees, the Office of Personnel Management, to increase its
efforts to increase the availability of telework programs for
Federal workers.
With regard to telework and the COOP planning process, we
have monitored agencies' identification of their essential
functions and their adherence to Federal Emergency Management
Agency COOP guidelines. We directed GAO to issue annual score
cards to assess how agencies were performing their COOP
planning responsibilities. We also obtained GAO's annual
evaluations of agencies' inclusions of telework in their COOP
plans.
The findings consistently recognize that progress has been
made, but that most agencies needed additional guidance and
should take steps to assure that telework was a more prominent
component of their COOP program. Testing of COOP plans is an
essential component of assuring that a plan is realistic and
effective.
In June, 63 agencies engaged in a combined exercise to test
the Government's readiness to respond to disaster, called
Forward Challenge 2006. I have a pending information request
with the Department of Homeland Security to obtain extensive
documents about preparation of the exercise and Hotwash After-
Action reports for each agency's exercise. I am also engaging
GAO in expanded post-exercise evaluation.
Post-Forward Challenge 2006 reports and evaluations will
provide us with the tools to assess how effective that exercise
was and how effectively telework was utilized. Once I have
received those evaluations, we will be in a better position to
determine the appropriate role that the committee and Congress
can play in assuring that telework is more effectively utilized
by every Federal Government agency and is widely available to
Federal employees.
Similarly, we will assess how the committee and Congress
can assure that telework becomes an integral part of every
agency's COOP plan and that future exercises properly test
their telework capability.
I want to thank you, Mr. Porter, for convening this
hearing. I look forward to continuing to work with your
subcommittee on expanding telework opportunities for all
Federal employees.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Tom Davis follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.006
Mr. Porter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We appreciate it.
Mr. Issa.
Mr. Issa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding
this important hearing. You know, when you get to be the last
one to make an opening statement, you certainly don't want to
repeat everything that has been said so well, particularly by
our chairman. But I do think that there are some other
important issues that have not yet been brought up.
Obviously, we have talked about homeland security and the
ability to have continuity of Government even if a physical
facility has been damaged. But I believe that when we speak
about the congestion and the fact that you are going to get a
one-time savings by telecommuting out of Washington, DC, but if
we continue to concentrate in and around the District of
Columbia government agencies, we will revisit the exact same
problem in the foreseeable future.
So as we look at telecommuting and the need for telework,
we need to also recognize, and this committee particularly
needs to recognize, that we have over-concentrated in the
greater District of Columbia area--northern Virginia, Maryland,
and the District of Columbia--we have over-concentrated the
seat of Government. There are agencies galore, including the
Internal Revenue Service, that did not need to be close to
Congress or close to the President. The work, in fact, of the
Patent and Trademark Office, the work of the Internal Revenue,
both of them could be located, and I am certain that Senator
Byrd has planned to have them located in West Virginia for some
time. [Laughter.]
But in fact, as we look at that, we need to recognize that
locations of the few workers--fewer, the better--that actually
have to be in a facility give us the flexibility to begin
looking at decentralizing our facilities and having less and
less people who call the District of Columbia and northern
Virginia and Maryland their home. This, in the case of an
attack on America, would dramatically improve our ability to
have sustainability of our critical people.
I certainly want to commend the work you are doing, though,
on the prime issue here today.
Two more anecdotal comments. One of them, of course, being
that except for that nasty Constitution, I would be advocating
that Congress start telecommuting a little bit. But
unfortunately, we did ratify in the Constitution the
requirement that we meet together and, in fact, meet here.
Last, but not least, as we are going into how, where, what,
and why we telecommute, I hope that we will all recognize that
proper telework technology employed broadly throughout the
Government would prevent the unfortunate, but fortunately no
permanent damage, loss of that laptop by the Veterans
Administration. Unnecessary for that kind of data to be
compromised by being removed from the secure location, and
proper telework would not require that tens of thousands of
sensitive documents or sensitive Social Security numbers be
taken out of a facility. So hopefully that also will fit into
today's hearing, and I look forward to listening to our
witnesses.
Mr. Porter. Thank you, Mr. Issa.
I guess, as a side note, decentralizing Government because
of----
Mr. Issa. Nevada ring a bell as I was speaking?
Mr. Porter. I was going to talk about Yucca Mountain, but
maybe we can talk about that some other time. [Laughter.]
Mr. Issa. You want it located here?
Mr. Porter. I think it would be a great place for storage
of nuclear waste. Anyway. [Laughter.]
Instead of Nevada. [Laughter.]
Again, thank you for your comments. I think this is of
great interest to this committee, and we have brought some
experts today. But first I would like to do some procedural
matters.
Ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative
days to submit written statements and questions for the hearing
record and any answers to written questions provided by the
witnesses also be included in the record. Without objection, it
is so ordered.
Ask unanimous consent that all exhibits, documents, and
other materials referred to by Members and the witnesses may be
included in the hearing record, all Members be permitted to
revise and extend their remarks. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
It is also the practice of this committee to administer the
oath to all witnesses, so if you would all please stand and
raise your right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Porter. I also would like to have the second panel now
stand. And we are going to do this one more time. If you would
raise your right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Porter. Let the record reflect that all the witnesses
have answered in the affirmative. You can, of course, please be
seated.
The witnesses will each have 5 minutes, and we would like
you to please summarize your comments. As I note, you have
submitted full statements for the record.
Today we will be hearing from Daniel Green, Deputy
Associate Director for Employee and Family Support Policy with
the U.S. Office of Personnel Management; Danette Campbell, the
Senior Telework Advisor for the U.S. Patent and Trade Office;
Carl Froehlich, the Chief Agency-Wide Shared Services with the
Internal Revenue Service.
So I would like to thank, again, all of you for being here,
and we will begin with Mr. Green for 5 minutes. Thank you.
STATEMENTS OF DANIEL GREEN, DEPUTY ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, EMPLOYEE
AND FAMILY SUPPORT POLICY, U.S. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT;
DANETTE CAMPBELL, SENIOR TELEWORK ADVISOR, U.S. PATENT AND
TRADE OFFICE; AND CARL FROEHLICH, CHIEF OF AGENCY-WIDE SHARED
SERVICES, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
STATEMENT OF DANIEL GREEN
Mr. Green. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman and
members of the subcommittee, I am pleased to be here today on
behalf of the Office of Personnel Management to talk about
telework. I would like to start by expressing OPM's continued
support for telework in the Federal Government.
OPM continues to work with Federal agencies to support
their efforts to implement telework to the broadest extent
possible. OPM staff members have provided agencies with
individualized guidance and technical support through onsite
visits, as well as providing one-on-one consultation to agency
telework coordinators on an ongoing, as-needed basis.
We have revised the annual agency survey to streamline the
questions and enhance data collection, and are currently in the
process of gathering the data for our next report.
Continuity of operations and pandemic health crisis
planning have continued to increase interest in telework. As
required by the President's National Strategy for Pandemic
Influenza Implementation, OPM is updating its telework guidance
to include information about emergency planning. We are adding
modules to the existing online training courses for managers
and teleworkers, and we are substantially revising the telework
guide that resides on the Interagency Telework Web site.
To assist Federal agencies with their emergency planning,
OPM is preparing a legislative proposal that would allow the
head of an agency to require employees to work from home or
another alternate work site during a pandemic health crisis, if
necessary, to achieve the agency's mission or a performance
goal.
Some widely reported security challenges have also
increased the focus on telework. In our updated telework guide,
we tell Federal employees and their managers that they are
responsible for the security of Federal Government property and
information regardless of their work location. When employees
telework, agency security policies do not change, and should be
enforced at the same rigorous level as when they are in the
office.
Our plans for future activity include a redesign of the
Interagency Telework Web site, continued agency visit, and
continued agency telework coordinator meetings addressing the
developing issues and questions. As part of the redesign of the
Telework Web site, we will be developing online telework
materials designed to assist telework coordinators in promoting
telework in their agencies. We will also be adding to our
training with the development of classroom style sessions for
managers and supervisors that will be offered to all agencies
and interactive Web-based courses facilitated by a telework
expert.
All of this activity is in support of Federal agencies and
agency coordinators to provide them the information, materials,
and training they need to grow effective telework programs. All
of it is fairly basic because telework is not really a
complicated program. Telework is simply an extension of what
most employees already do, which is to use technology for
remote communications. The barriers are more perceived than
real.
Management resistance is often cited as the reason that
telework is not working in an agency or workgroup. For some
managers, managing teleworkers may seem difficult or outside of
their experience. In our guidance about telework, we tell
managers that they need to manage by results, not by presence.
The same set of skills that managers must develop in order to
meet the goals of performance management is what they need to
manage teleworkers. Managers who have mastered performance
management techniques have the skills in place to easily manage
a mixed or all-teleworking workgroup without difficulty.
In summation, I would like to make two main points. First,
telework is not new or mysterious or difficult. It is simply a
way of getting work done that uses the same kinds of
technologies that enable work to be achieved in an agency
office. Second, telework is not a panacea for all our ills. It
is certainly one way to reduce traffic congestion, but it can
only be one piece of a much broader approach to the problem.
Similarly, for terrorism or other emergency situations,
telework represents one method of mitigating the impact of such
events on the ability of agencies to accomplish work, but can
by no means be considered by itself a solution. What telework
can be, has proven to be, is an effective tool to support
Federal employees in balancing their work life and to help
Federal agencies meet their performance objectives.
That concludes my remarks. I would be pleased to respond to
any questions the subcommittee may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Green follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.011
Mr. Porter. Thank you, Mr. Green. We appreciate your
testimony.
Next we will hear from Danette Campbell.
Appreciate your being here, Danette. Thank you very much.
STATEMENT OF DANETTE CAMPBELL
Ms. Campbell. Thank you. Chairman Porter, Ranking Member
Davis, and members of the subcommittee, my name is Danette
Campbell, and I would like to thank you for inviting the U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office to testify today. I commend you for
holding today's hearing and for working hard to ensure that our
Federal Government is in the vanguard of telecommuting efforts.
As PTO's Telework Coordinator, I am responsible for
overseeing the implementation and operation of telecommuting
programs, and I serve as a point of contact on such programs
for the Committee on Appropriations.
As you are aware, the workplace today goes beyond the walls
that surround an office building. Changing the boundaries of
old workplace patterns allows for decreased commute time,
greater control over workloads, and even a more balanced
lifestyle. This all translates into increased employee
productivity and satisfaction, as well as higher employee
retention.
At the U.S. PTO, we are expanding our telework programs to
create a work force that can work anywhere, any time. We
believe that U.S. PTO's decision to implement telework as a
corporate business strategy will help reduce traffic congestion
in the national capital region and, in a very competitive job
market, allow the U.S. PTO to hire over 3,000 new examiners in
the next 6 years.
During my brief tenure at the Patent and Trademark Office,
I have had an opportunity to witness a commitment by PTO
leadership to support the telework initiative, encourage
employee participation, and supply remote workers with the
tools they need to be successful.
Prior to participating in a telework program, each employee
receives instruction on how to access PTO systems remotely. We
have an extensive IT security infrastructure and strong
security policy that work together to ensure that both
personally identifiable information and business sensitive
information are adequately protected from loss or theft. These
protections have been implemented throughout the PTO telework
initiative and help to prevent the possible occurrence of a
sensitive information security breach.
Recently, the Trademark Work at Home program received the
Telework Program with the Maximum Impact on Government award
from the Telework Exchange. This award recognized that
Trademarks has created an extremely successful telework program
that can serve as a model for other Government agencies. This
telework program was praised as an innovative telework
prototype by showing other agencies how to incorporate
measurable performance goals in evaluating the performance of
its teleworkers.
As part of this telework program, 80 percent of eligible
examining attorneys make electronic reservations for their time
in the office and perform the majority of their trademark
examination duties at home. Each employee is provided with the
necessary equipment to establish a secure connection to the
agency's network and automated systems enable users to perform
all of their examination duties electronically.
Trademark Work at Home combines management by objective
with hoteling, which translates into documented space and
related cost savings for the PTO. By incorporating measurable
performance goals in the evaluation of worker performance,
Trademarks has created a model of extremely successful
telecommuting programs for Government agencies.
The Patents Hoteling Program provides participants with the
option to perform officially assigned duties at home. Major
elements of this program include remote online access to all
relevant PTO business systems, job performance tools, patent
information, patent application documentation, and incorporates
the use of collaborative communication technologies. Program
participants can remotely reserve workspace for required time
spent in hoteling suites located throughout PTO's Alexandria
campus. To date, approximately 320 patent examiners have
relinquished their office space to work from home 4 days a
week.
The Patents Hoteling Program positions the agency to hire
new patent examiners without incurring additional real estate
costs, eliminates 4 days of commuting time, and has made patent
examining in the Washington metropolitan region more attractive
to potential candidates who currently reside outside of the
region. This telework program will enable PTO to recruit from a
highly qualified hiring pool and retain existing valuable
employees.
I believe that the U.S. PTO telework programs are
progressive efforts that will continue to serve as models for
Federal agencies and that they are some of the best telework
programs that the Federal Government has to offer.
In conclusion, a successful telework program can mean
better employee morale, higher levels of sustained performance,
and reduce traffic congestion and air pollution. The U.S. PTO
has demonstrated that telework works and is a winning
proposition for our employees, our agency, and for the American
public.
We appreciate this opportunity to testify before this
committee on this important issue. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Campbell follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.019
Mr. Porter. Thank you, Ms. Campbell. We appreciate your
testimony.
Next we will hear from Mr. Froehlich, who is the Chief of
Agency-Wide Shared Services at the IRS. And, again, I
understand you have had some major challenges down the street,
and I appreciate all the efforts to get everything up and
running again.
STATEMENT OF CARL FROEHLICH
Mr. Froehlich. Yes, sir. We have been quite busy, so thank
you, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee for having me
here today to talk about the recent flooding in the IRS
headquarters building at 1111 Constitution.
Just as background, as Chief of Agency-Wide Shared
Services, I manage a portfolio of shared services across IRS:
real estate, procurement, employee support services such as
timekeeping and payroll and travel, and also equal opportunity
management and case processing. That is how we provide our
service to our clients, the clients being the taxpayer-facing
side of IRS.
What happened on June 25th and 26th, as you well know, we
had significant rains, turning Constitution Avenue essentially
into a river. That water came down Constitution Avenue and
flooded into the basement of the IRS. The IRS basement was
flooded to a depth of 5 feet. The sub-basement, which holds all
of our infrastructure, was flooded to a depth of 20 feet. This
is what has caused the major damage. We pumped the first 2 days
about 3 million gallons of water out of the basement of IRS.
The fact that IRS, as it was constructed in the 1930's,
placed all the infrastructure in the basement, the electrical
switchboards, the air handlers, the chillers for the air
conditioning, and what have you, is the reason why we had the
significant delay to move back into the building. That is
really the long lead element, to get the employees back to work
in the building.
We have completed the initial phase of clean-out and
decontaminated. That was completed on July 15th. All the
things, lessons learned you have heard from Katrina, about
moving drywall to prevent mold and what have you, all that
effort was done. It was an absolutely superb effort done by GSA
to get their teams on there on the third day of ripping out the
drywall, the furniture, the carpets, the flooring to keep the
mold problem down. As a matter of fact, we have eliminated that
now. We are in the dry-out mode of what is going on.
GSA is in the process of completing their damage
assessments for the building. GSA is responsible for the
capital investment side of the building; the IRS is responsible
for the maintenance and the upkeep and the cleaning. That is
our agreement. We will have those estimates by the end of this
month. We anticipate, however, for the building to be 100
percent back, it will take, as you mentioned, until the end of
the year, so January timeframe. We are hopeful, however, that
we will be able to do a phased return back to the building for
some of our employees as we bring some of the systems back up
again.
I would be remiss, however, to say that we are also very
concerned that we preclude recurrence of the same incident. We
know basically the means of how the water got in is how the
building was constructed was a contributing factor, and we are
working with GSA now on what are the options to guard against,
either harden the building or perhaps do some sort of
mitigating thing to move some of the infrastructure out of the
sub-basement to prevent such damage again.
Of note, we have never had, in the 70-some odd years of
this building's existence, this type of flooding. But that
doesn't mean we will just assume it doesn't happen again. We
will take that further action.
That is where we are in the building.
As far as business resumption, Agency-Wide Shared Services,
as I mentioned, is a portfolio of those services. As such, we
also provide the cross-business work on a routine basis,
geographically based. In other words, if a business unit in
Philadelphia has an issue, we provide the what is it we need to
do with the union negotiations, what do we need to do with real
estate, what do we need to do with procurement. We provide that
service inside AWSS.
As such, when this incident happened, we established an
incident command center in our new Federal building in New
Carrollton. We have 14 buildings in the D.C. area, and that is
one of them. The command center was charged and provided the
authority to make very quick decisions on what is needed for
business resumption, to implement the COOP plan for the short-
term continuity of operation, and then bring in the business
needs as far as prioritizing our resources as we apply to the
casualty to bring the business of IRS back up again.
We have been fairly successful with maintaining continuity.
As a matter of fact, the taxpayer-facing aspects of IRS are not
headquartered in the IRS building at 1111 Constitution; those
are out in the field. Those were unaffected, obviously, by the
flood.
Even so, by January 5th, which is the next week--or, excuse
me, July, we had 1142 employees back up to work, about 50
percent. And that included all of our critical employees that
were on the COOP operation plan.
On Monday, yesterday, as a matter of fact, we had 96
percent of all our employees back to work. Of those, 873, or
about 29 percent, were via telework, which provided a wonderful
flexibility for us as far as bringing those people back that
were already equipped with the laptops and the infrastructure.
The telework brought them back immediately, so it was not an
issue with them.
I am sure we will have some questions, but I just want to
give you a couple of quick lessons learned.
As we learned from Katrina, COOP is but one element, and
that is the near-term continuity of operation. The business
resumption side is really the hard slug of work, and that goes
on what is best planned and then do you have the right people
in the right place to make the business decision. We will learn
that again on this one and we will get better, and hopefully,
if this ever happens again, we will be better again.
That concludes my opening remarks. I am available for
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Froehlich follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.023
Mr. Porter. Thank you. We appreciate all your testimony.
Where are your auditors located, are they out in the field?
Mr. Froehlich. They are out in the field, exactly correct.
Mr. Porter. We appreciate, again, being able to pick on
you, since you're the IRS. We want 10 percent improvement in
efficiency at the IRS.
Mr. Froehlich. Yes, sir. Revenue that runs our country.
That is what we do.
Mr. Porter. Thank you. And, again, not to make light of a
very serious situation. We appreciate all of your efforts.
Again, thank you very, very much.
I have a question or two. I will begin with Mr. Green.
You said there is 12 percent of the potential 60 percent of
Federal employees in the national capital region telecommuting.
How do you suggest the agencies increase their telework
numbers? Do you have a plan in place? What are you doing now?
Mr. Green. We are there to help them. We have a plan for
the year. We are starting off. In 3 weeks we will be issuing a
new guide to Federal agencies that is coming out concurrent
with the guidance from OPM on pandemic influenza and personnel
issues stemming from that, from the potential from that.
Our new telework guide gives guidance on that and to all
Federal agencies on how best to, in our estimation, implement
telework programs that involve management and employees, and
the planning and development of those programs, and it can be
sustainable programs that not only help in the situation of a
COOP planning for a pandemic or for a terrorist attack, but
also to help with work-life balance, to help productivity, and
to help further the mission of the agency, because, after all,
that is what each agency is primarily interested in, is meeting
its mission objectives.
The second thing that we will continue to do is to offer
onsite visits in consultation to Federal agencies. We conducted
20 such visits in the past year, and my staff is available to
help any Federal agency that requests it. In fact, we go out of
our way to offer our services to agencies to help them
implement their programs effectively.
We are also going to be revamping our training. We are,
right now, working on adding a pandemic module to our online
telework training program, which will soon be available on Go
Learn to all Federal agencies on a free basis while they
develop their programs.
Then we are going to look into, as you know, OPM puts on a
wealth of management training. We are going to work with those
program managers to add robust telework guidance and management
training, because we think that is where the biggest bang for
the buck, reaching out to local managers and helping them
understand how telework works, how it works in coordination
with performance management, and help ease them through what
they may see as a mysterious process. It shouldn't be anymore,
it has been around a while, but I think that is where--another
cliche--the rubber hits the road, is between the manager and
the employee.
All agencies have telework policies. We think that by
reaching out to managers and helping telework coordinators at
agencies reach out to managers and employees is the way that we
can most effectively increase the numbers of teleworkers.
Mr. Porter. Do you think that agencies have enough legal
authority, assuming there was an emergency, to require
employees to telecommute in a state of chaos, possibly?
Mr. Green. There are programs available currently which
would help agencies manage to continue operations and continue
employees working. There is evacuation pay programs and all.
Nonetheless, we believe that after consultation with the CDC
and understanding about, should a pandemic occur, the need for
social distancing, the experts call it, not having people
congregate together in an office or other setting, that it
would be appropriate to give individual agency heads the
authority to require employees to work at home or in some other
distributed location. So we are preparing legislation right now
that we are going to offer to you that would help accomplish
that goal.
Mr. Porter. Congresswoman, questions?
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
It is hard to know how to approach what would seem to be a
natural desire of employees, to avoid the traffic, the hustle
of getting on that highway. You know, for those of them who
don't live in the District of Columbia, I don't know how they
can resist it. But according to the GAO report, there have been
problems on all ends.
Just let me say to my good friend from California, while I
was out of the room, I understand there was some Capital lust
expressed. [Laughter.]
Don't start me on what would happen if you moved
substantial parts of the Government to California, with its
earthquakes. Even my good friend, the chairman, who would have
the IRS employees off gambling in Reno. [Laughter.]
Mr. Issa. You know, there is a reason that the pioneers
kept moving West.
Ms. Norton. Yes. But, indeed, I just want to say that
George Washington and Thomas Jefferson would turn over in their
graves if they thought anybody would want to take the Capital
and piece it out to the provinces. [Laughter.]
Mr. Issa. I note that you noted two prominent Virginians.
The Bostonians may have disagreed even at the founding.
[Laughter.]
Ms. Norton. You notice they didn't get the Capital of the
United States, though.
Mr. Porter. Of course, she missed the part about Yucca
Mountain. [Laughter.]
Ms. Norton. You wanted to move the Capital there, Mr.
Chairman?
Mr. Porter. No, we were going to move Yucca Mountain here.
Ms. Norton. Oh, I see. [Laughter.]
I do want to say for the record, because I think it would
bring some comfort to my two friends to know, that while there
are about 2 million Federal employees, most of them are out
there. There are, you know, perhaps 200,000 or so in this
region. That leaves the rest of the country with all the rest
of them. This is a profoundly decentralized Government, but no
great country fails to have its own great capital where, yes,
it keeps and husbands its great agencies. So you all are going
to have to live with it. Get over it.
We all agree that, in the abstract, this is a wonderful
thing and we would like to see it happen more often, and two
parent families, one parent families, everybody hustling.
Golly, you would think people would hurry to do it. And there
are many reasons, frankly. Because the incentives to do it are
so great on the employee end, there is no question where the
problem lies. It has to lie on the Government end.
You say to a mother who has to leave her child off at day
care and then get on these roads, 295, 395, 95, to get to
Washington. She would rather die than do that. If she does it,
there has to be some sense that she doesn't know what would
happen, she doesn't have enough incentives. So I just want to
say there is no way for this not to be working if the
Government were pressing it--Federal Government, OPM and
company, including OMB--were doing all they were supposed to
do.
Now I fear the opposite. It does seem to me that there is
going to be a huge chilling effect. If you were thinking about
teleworking and you heard about what has just happened to these
laptops, you would think again. First of all, I am sure, I am
almost positive that these were employees who, like many
professionals in the private sector, were just trying to do
their work and to just take work home, or perhaps even to do
teleworking.
Lo and behold, something happens to the computer and it is
front page news. And in the age of identity theft, everybody
can understand why. And when our soldiers in Iraq are among
those who have had their identity gone, you can understand how
this employee must feel.
Well, my question is really a single question to all of
you. I think that most employees have every reason now to say
just one moment, I am not going to be involved in this; can't
be sure this stuff is secure, can't be sure that my laptop
won't be stolen. And yet, really, in your testimony I didn't
hear--that is why I ask the question--much to assure their
confidence that it is all right, it is all right to do.
For example, in the testimony of Mr. Green, we learn that
when employees telework, agency security policies do not
change. Hear that? They do not change, and should be enforced
with the same rigor as when in office. Well, that is bull.
That, if anything, says, OK, tell me how to do that. And who is
going to be blamed if there is either a theft or a security
risk?
Then it says we refer to guidance from the Office of
Management and Budget and NIST for further explication of
security requirements and their application to the telework
environment, like look it up, employees, and then you will
understand what to do.
For PTO, even more serious. You are dealing with people's
intellectual property, you are dealing with patents. And I was
very impressed with how much computer work goes on. And,
indeed, you say on page 2 we are expanding to create a work
force that can be anywhere at any time. Well, before I submit
my patent to the PTO, I want to know all about that.
Ms. Campbell. OK.
Ms. Norton. And before I take home any work, I want to make
sure that if my patent gets stolen inadvertently because of
security problems, either there in the Government, you are
going to take care of me.
Ms. Campbell. Let me----
Ms. Norton. No, ma'am, I am just going to make the point,
then you all can answer.
Ms. Campbell. OK.
Ms. Norton. Mr. Froehlich, am I pronouncing that correctly?
Mr. Froehlich. Froehlich.
Ms. Norton. Froehlich. Now, nobody, of course, wants
anything to happen to their income tax returns. That is guarded
with very heavy penalties. So my question to you, of course,
largely has to do with can anybody even take home anything that
could lead back to one's tax returns? And how does teleworking
work in an agency where that kind of security is almost like
the security we attach to secure agencies that guard us against
terrorism?
So, Mr. Green, I will just ask, beginning with you, why
should anybody take any work home, given what looks to be
rather vague notions that if they would read the regulations,
they would understand how to keep their work out of the office
secure? And I want to know how do they. I take my work home; I
am a supervisor; I want to get it all done. How am I assured
that it will be secure?
Mr. Green. Thank you. Every agency has its own security
policies in place and every Federal employee is required by law
to have security training every year.
Ms. Norton. But the GAO just told us that--first of all, we
know that teleworking and taking home work, simply as a
professional matter, is probably going on where neither you or
others don't know about it. I understand what the requirements
are, Mr. Green. I am asking you another question.
Suppose a hard-working Federal employee looks to the
manual, does what the manual says, takes her work home. I am
going to give you the hard question about it being stolen.
There are ways, of course, to protect work that is stolen by
the way it is--what do you call it?
Mr. Green. Encrypted?
Ms. Norton. Encrypted. But leave that aside for a moment. I
simply want to know if I take it home to some part, to my own
home, how do I know it is secure? Is it secure is what I really
want to know.
Mr. Green. It should be secure if the agency's security
policies are in place and if the employee----
Ms. Norton. What are those policies? There are no
Government-wide agency security policies, is that your answer?
Mr. Green. No, ma'am. There are----
Ms. Norton. Should there be? Should there be, Mr. Green?
Mr. Green. And there are. There are standards. The NIST has
issued several sets of standards and guidance on how to encrypt
data, how to have the inflow of electronic information and
exercise----
Ms. Norton. Well, if the data is not encrypted, you are
saying that the employee should not take the work home?
Mr. Green. I am saying that employees should follow the
security policies, the securities in place depending upon the
type of data that they have, and if they do that, then the data
should be safe. Nothing is 100 percent safe in this world.
Ms. Norton. So there is no agency-wide policy and each
agency can decide for itself what that policy could be?
Mr. Green. Each agency has its own policies, yes, ma'am.
Ms. Norton. I want to just go on record right here saying
you take home your work at your own risk. And I also want to
know if an employee can be punished if in fact something
happens.
Mr. Green. I am sorry, I don't think I said that, ma'am.
Ms. Norton. I am saying it.
Mr. Green. OK.
Ms. Norton. This is the Congresswoman saying, warning, all
Federal employees, if your agency does not assure you, one,
that everything you have has been encrypted and, two, that you
will not be personally punished if there is a security breach,
then you are forewarned that you should not take your work
home. And I think you should issue them that warning. Since you
say each agency has the right to do it, you ought to tell
employees up front, the ones who are in fact reaching out to do
work, what their responsibility is and what they should do if
the agency has not in fact met its responsibility.
Mr. Green. OPM has done that to its own employees. We were
all issued such a policy statement just a couple of weeks ago
and given guidance on how to handle data when they are
teleworking.
Ms. Norton. Ms. Campbell, perhaps you can talk about
intellectual property.
Ms. Campbell. I can speak to our telework programs and how
the information is secure. Our telework systems have many
features that ensure the security and the protection of
sensitive data. However, to address your concern with employees
simply taking hard copy information home, that is a very
difficult thing, I would think, to control unless in fact----
Ms. Norton. I wasn't talking about hard copy. I am talking
about taking a computer home.
Ms. Campbell. Again, I can speak to the telework initiative
at the Patent and Trademark Office and tell you that our
servers are connected to a series of network switches and
routers that are connected to a virtual private network which
protects the servers from outside attack.
Ms. Norton. So if an employee were to take work home, would
it be on a disk or something, that would be encrypted? Or how
would an employee take work home from PTO?
Ms. Campbell. Well, when our workers telework, they are
actually remoting into their system at the Patent and Trademark
Office, so they are not transporting a disk, they are not
transporting a file, per se. They are remoting in.
Ms. Norton. OK, this is important to note. So nobody at PTO
can just take their own laptop home and do work there out of
their own laptop, but they have to have a secure computer at
home that in fact links in to PTO?
Ms. Campbell. Well, actually, we provide the employee with
the laptop. When they are working at home and they remote in to
this system at the office, their hard drive is in, sometimes it
is called a rack and stack, so that when that information is
coming through, it is not residing on that laptop, it is just
passing through. So if that laptop were stolen----
Ms. Norton. So your own rules--not the rules, excuse me.
What is important about what you are saying----
Ms. Campbell. Our systems?
Ms. Norton. Your systems, as opposed to your rules--because
we heard from Mr. Green about the rules--you are saying your
systems do protect against security breaches.
Ms. Campbell. Yes, ma'am, as much as can possibly be in
place.
Ms. Norton. If in fact people are using only your systems,
I would agree. And it does seem to me that is the kind of
thing, particularly after the recent thefts and problems, we
don't want to have.
Now, Mr. Froehlich, you work in an atmosphere that has
always been extremely high security. Would you tell me how,
particularly people's income tax returns, are protected? Can
anybody telework, telecommute, whatever, on anybody's income
tax material from any date forward or back?
Mr. Froehlich. As you point out, this is not a trivial
task. At IRS, it is taken very seriously. Taxpayer information
is all classified as sensitive information. We do have a fairly
lengthy period of time, however, of experience on this because
we have field agents that work in small businesses and work in,
you know, General Motors and what have you, that are used to
remote.
Those applications, as pointed out by Ms. Campbell, are run
encrypted. They are exchange information encrypted.
Now, the slug of work that is important and, really,
lessons learned from Veterans Administration are where are the
gaps. Payroll, for example. Are payrolls encrypted with
National Finance Center. Are those transactions encrypted? Are
Equal Opportunity case files, are those encrypted? And as we go
through a very systematic approach of all the information that
one of our employees could touch, are we taking precautions?
The utopia where every hard disk is fully encrypted is
where we need to go. At some point we are going to get there. I
think we are going to get there pretty soon.
Ms. Norton. Very important what you are trying to do, Mr.
Froehlich, but you are saying to me that all the financial
information is encrypted, except perhaps for payroll
information?
Mr. Froehlich. Payroll information right now is all
encrypted, yes, ma'am. That is one of my personal operations
and I have verified that.
Ms. Norton. Personal information,
Mr. Froehlich. These are for employees.
Ms. Norton [continuing]. Once that information goes to you
from me, is encrypted?
Mr. Froehlich. For taxpayer information the answer is yes.
The question is where are the gaps. And, you know, for employee
records, do we have those fully encrypted? Are those removed
from hard drives, where they shouldn't be? Those types of
guidance, it is a mixed approach. We have technology as far as
one solution, but there is also operator requirements, what are
you allowed to have on your laptop; what are you not allowed to
have on your laptop?
There is a shared responsibility between agency and
employee, and how that is defined is really the training piece
of work that is so critical so people know their roles and
responsibilities. That effort has gone underway with IRS and
continues today. To say that we are done on that would be
premature, but we have gone a long way down this road, learning
lessons from the Veterans Administration.
Ms. Norton. So you are saying that your goal at IRS, you
have a plan to encrypt all of your records and material?
Mr. Froehlich. That is the ultimate goal. What I can't tell
you today is when we will get there and----
Ms. Norton. You have a plan to do--I can understand that
will take a very long time. But I am saying is there a plan
that says the IRS has a plan--I don't know, 10 years from now,
whatever it is--to have encrypted all of our records?
Mr. Froehlich. Right. You have gone about three layers out
of my area of jurisdiction in IRS, but I would be happy to come
back with a formal question on that.
Ms. Norton. Would you submit to the chairman within the
next 30 days whether there is a plan? I think they will be
particularly interested to the IRS to encrypt all your work. I
appreciate what you are saying, because sometimes you can get
tax information on other than somebody's tax form. So it does
matter that your records be encrypted to the greatest extent
possible.
Mr. Froehlich. And we have had several years of managing
the paper, how is that coded, how is that managed, how is that
destroyed. So there is some, you know, process behind this, and
the question is how do we now apply that to the electronic
side, especially in the world of telecommuting, where we now
have far more people carrying information with them on a
routine basis. It is not a trivial problem.
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much.
And thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Porter. Mr. Green, Ms. Campbell, Mr. Froehlich, we
appreciate your testimony today. Thank you very, very much.
Mr. Green. Thank you.
Ms. Campbell. Thank you.
Mr. Porter. Mr. Froehlich, don't worry about losing
alphabet P, it is OK.
Mr. Froehlich. I don't do taxes, I do everything else.
Mr. Porter. Thank you.
If the next panel, please, could come forward.
The witnesses will now be recognized for approximately 5
minutes of testimony. On our second panel today we will hear
from Dr. William Mularie, who is chief executive officer of the
Telework Consortium; Joslyn Read, assistant vice president of
regulatory affairs, Hughes Network Systems, a Limited Liability
Co., who will be speaking on behalf of the Telecommunications
Industry Association; and finally hear from Mr. Jerry Edgerton,
president of business and Federal marketing, Verizon
Communications.
Doctor, welcome.
STATEMENTS OF WILLIAM MULARIE, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, THE
TELEWORK CONSORTIUM; JOSLYN READ, ASSISTANT VICE PRESIDENT,
REGULATORY AFFAIRS, HUGHES NETWORK SYSTEMS, LLC, ON BEHALF OF
THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION; AND JERRY
EDGERTON, PRESIDENT OF BUSINESS AND FEDERAL MARKETING, VERIZON
COMMUNICATIONS
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM MULARIE
Mr. Mularie. Thank you. Chairman Porter and members of this
subcommittee and your excellent committee staff, too. They were
very helpful. I thank you for this opportunity to share my
perspectives. I have submitted my written testimony, so I will
expand on some of the main points.
I was really interested in the title of this hearing, and I
suspect a year or two previous to this, when you talked about
telework and terrorism in the last sentence, nobody would
really understand. But I think through the work of the
Committees on Government Reform and Chairman Tom Davis and
yourself, and my Congressman, Frank Wolf, that the public
better understands now the connection.
So I represent the Telework Consortium. I am funded by the
Department of Commerce to accelerate the adoption of telework
in Government and in business sectors. And although we have
been involved in the advocacy issues in telework, most of our
focus has been to advance the practice of telework through
pilot demonstrations, using advanced technologies, with Federal
agencies, some local and State governments and businesses.
So today I would like to speak briefly on three issues. One
is briefly on the financial burden upon automotive commuters
and taxpayers. And, Mr. Chairman, I think you fundamentally
stole my punch line on this, but I will go through with it
anyway. The second, telework is the core of continuity of
operations planning; and, last, based upon our experiences in
the Telework Consortium pilot demonstrations, the imperative of
broadband access to homes, certainly for all the Government
workers, to every manager and every worker who is tasked with
maintaining the delivery of goods and services in an agency.
So, the financial burden of commuting. I had the privilege
of testifying, Mr. Chairman, before your subcommittee on
November 16th on the issue of mitigating the impact of high
gasoline prices on the American work force. And I did orally a
calculation there, and it is in the written record, but for
someone with a salary of, say, $65,000 commuting 40 miles round
trip, that at $1.25 a gallon, the worker has to spend 2 months
of his take-home pay--take-home pay--to pay for the cost of
commuting. At $3 a gallon, it takes a few weeks more.
Now, the purpose of that testimony was to show that it is
not the cost of gas, per se, but it is the act of commuting.
And as you have said, Mr. Chairman, in your opening statement,
not traveling is really the right solution to this. And also
the taxpayer obviously gets stuck with supporting these
commuters. Road capacity now is really built to try to
accommodate this morning and evening commute, and I think we,
for example, the Wilson Bridge here locally.
We funded a study by Professor Tony Yezer, of George
Washington University, that concluded the taxpayers subsidized
each commuter in the northern Virginia area about $3,000 a year
through the additional infrastructure building and maintaining
necessary for these people to commute. So the taxpayer gets
stuck with this issue of commuting, not only individual.
But as the subject of this hearing is there is a more
critical reason than cost to rethink our commuter society,
namely, continuity of operations. Washington, DC, area is a
target-rich environment, and the targets not symbolic like the
Washington Monument, but they are the human lives here in the
District, and disrupting the functioning of this Government. I
was just noticing in the paper this morning that they said, for
example, half of the riders, the commuters on the Metro are
Federal employees, and there are 50 agency buildings within--on
the Metro stops.
So it is a tremendous presence in this beautiful
Washington, DC, city. So the core of the continuing of
operations problem is that the daily population of Washington,
DC, increases by over 70 percent each day, and the
preponderance of the Federal agencies, the judicial branch,
legislative and executive branches here in the District.
The World Trade Center in New York was not hit in 1993 and
2001 because it was symbolic, but that because, on the average,
it housed over 40,000 people daily in key services like our key
financial institutions. And, likewise, the Pentagon was not hit
here because it was symbolic, but because it held tens of
thousands of people whose critical mission in the Department of
Defense was important to this country.
So my views are that in the aftermath of a terrorist attack
in the District, we have really two problems. One is an
evacuation plan, getting these large number of Federal
employees, legislative and executive branch personnel, out of
the District safely. The second problem, though, is really the
continuity of operations problem, having dispersed now, what
means do we have for intra and interagency communication so
that the critical work of this Government can continue.
And how long will this have to continue? As we heard in the
opening statements, a terrorist attack, the time scale is
probably unknown with respect to recovery. A pandemic, perhaps
up to 6 months. Or in the case of a very simple radiological
dirty bomb, a pea-sized grain of cesium 137 and 10 pounds of
dynamite in the wind, and you can make parts of the District
here uninhabitable for decades.
And so I am concerned that the evacuation of the District
is problematic and that the current continuity of operation
plans, the Federal agencies are not adequate for the
disruption.
Now let's talk about solution. And, again, rather than
calling it telework, let me call it a distributed government.
And it sounds very much like decentralization, so I apologize.
But I think I can best explain a distributed government by an
example.
In 2004, actually, in preparation for Congressman Tom
Davis' hearings, I talked to the chief technical officer of a
New York financial institution which, before September 11th,
occupied 23 floors of the World Trade Center. And I said, well,
what is your reaction now? He said, post-September 11th, they
understood that to ensure continuity of operations, they had to
disperse their people geographically, out of Manhattan, into
several adjoining States, and also have data, their records in
redundant locations on separate power grids, tied by robust
communications.
And his claim now is that any one of their nodes can be hit
and put out of business for whatever reason, and it is business
as usual. He said, our old model used to be that after an
event, the plan was quick recovery. He said that is no longer
possible in this world.
So business as usual. And I wish this would be the motto of
our Government agencies.
So how do we proceed? Well, call it telework or distributed
government, but we need a pre-event-wide geographical
dispersion of a critical asset of agency workers, home-based
assets, broadband. And I think that eligibility has to be
looked at in a different way. Eligibility by the agency heads,
they have to ask themselves a question: do I have remote to
this site I am sitting in now, sufficient people with
sufficient knowledge, with sufficient assets and data to
sustain the operations of this agency if this building
disappears now or if this building is no longer accessible? I
think that is a criterion for eligibility for telework.
And the technology here exists to do all of this in a very
secure manner. The way we started with the Telework Consortium
was with pilot demonstrations. From our experience, you cannot
institute a successful telework program without a small-scale
project. We have been at this 5 years now, and I am a
technologist, but what I did not understand is that telework is
disruptive to organizations.
And thinking about it, since the industrial revolution,
management science has been well studied. You go into a
bookstore and you see thousands of books on management science.
And I remember when I was active in corporations, they even had
a book called Dress for Success. What does dress for success
mean in a telework environment? Or management by walking
around.
So my claim is that it disrupts organization in the sense
that it changes our notion of what work is, particularly people
my age. So we have to have pilot demonstrations to develop
metrics to look at processes and change organizational
processes to accept this new way of doing business.
The last thing is the imperative, which is broadband
access. In our pilot demonstration projects, mostly in northern
Virginia, the surprise that we had was the lack of broadband
access to homes. So we would get an agency and we would try to
outfit people with the telework equipment, and we found out
that they only had dial-up access. So I would suggest and I
would hope that the Federal Government would step in and really
push ubiquitous broadband as an important element of continuity
of operations.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Mularie follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.029
Mr. Porter. Thank you very much for your testimony.
Next we will have Ms. Read, again, assistant vice president
of regulatory affairs at Hughes Network Systems, Limited
Liability Co., who is speaking on behalf of the
Telecommunications Industry. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF JOSLYN READ
Ms. Read. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the
subcommittee. I would like to thank you for holding this
hearing today on telecommuting and for inviting us to share our
perspectives for your consideration.
My name is Joslyn Read. I am here to speak on behalf of the
Telecommunications Industry Association, as well as Hughes
Network Systems.
TIA provides a forum for over 600 member companies, the
manufacturers and suppliers of global communications products
and services, including telecommuting. Broadband access can be
provided over a number of different technologies, including
satellite, cable, fiber, DSL, and terrestrial wireless
technologies, all of which hold great promise and in various
stages of development and deployment. Although TIA members are
involved in all of these technologies, I am most familiar and
active in the satellite area and will focus my remarks
regarding telecommuting to the benefits that satellite
broadband offers.
As background, Hughes Network Systems is the global leader
today in providing broadband satellite networks and services
for large enterprises, governments, small businesses, and
consumers. Throughout the United States today, there are
approximately 300,000 consumer and small business subscribers,
and over 200,000 large enterprise and Government locations
using Hughes satellite broadband technology for day-to-day
networking.
So, Mr. Chairman, my testimony, simply put, today is as
follows: First, teleworking is critical to American
productivity and, as part of continuity of operations plans, is
critical to American readiness during emergencies.
Second, satellite communications is an essential element to
successful implementation of teleworking, as it is the only
communications vehicle that can reach anyone, anywhere, any
time.
Third, Government should support teleworking and do so in
an inclusive manner that recognizes the unique contribution
that satellite has and will continue to make in this effort.
Recent reports have estimated that 28 million Americans
telecommute in some form today. The author of a recent study
has defined teleworking as an advanced form of telecommuting,
which goes beyond simply allowing employees to work from home
or an alternative location a couple days a week and, instead,
enables them to work at any time or place that allows them to
successfully complete their work. The benefits of teleworking
to organizational efficiency and long-term effectiveness for
both Federal and non-Federal enterprises has been well
documented by this panel, and I won't go into those today.
Attaining the benefits of teleworking is only possible,
much as Dr. Mularie has just stated, if teleworkers have access
to high speed broadband communications where they need to do
the work. Satellite broadband is uniquely positioned to solve
many of the teleworking needs of today. Satellite broadband
network infrastructure serves rural, suburban, and urban
customers ubiquitously and equally throughout the United
States. Our speeds today are very comparable to terrestrial
offerings. High speed broadband services by satellite are
reliable, scalable, and cost-effective.
Teleworking plays a critical role, as we have heard today,
in the continuity of operations planning [COOP], for the
Federal Government and non-Federal enterprises. During
emergencies, managers and workers need to maintain critical
functionality from highly distributed home offices and
alternate locations. Teleworking by satellite provides an
additional layer of vital diversity in communications modes to
ensure continuity of operations in business.
Let me explain a little about satellite communications.
Satellite networks are comprised of spacecraft orbiting 22,300
miles above the Earth, with ground-based switching stations, a
few of them, dispersed throughout the United States or relevant
service areas. This distributed national, space-based network
service architecture makes satellite networks extremely durable
and reliable during manmade and natural emergencies.
Satellite communications played a critical role during the
response and recovery efforts resulting from the manmade
disasters of September 11th and the natural disasters we
witnessed last year in this country and abroad. When the
terrestrial Internet, telephone, and broadcast networks went
down, satellite communications maintained business and
residential connectivity for weeks until other damaged
communication systems were restored.
The Federal Government clearly and urgently needs to
accelerate the realization and investment in continuity of
operations plans for working from diverse and alternate
locations. For many employees within the Washington
metropolitan area and beyond to achieve the benefits of
teleworking, a highly effective option is to utilize high speed
broadband services by satellite.
Many, many customers in this area still do not have access
to high speed services, as Dr. Mularie mentioned. Satellite
broadband services constitutes a critical and often sole option
for many workers in the Washington area to participate in
emergency-based COOP preparedness, as well as teleworking
during non-emergency times.
So, in conclusion, we fully endorse the steps already taken
by the Federal Government to introduce teleworking programs for
ongoing operations and emergency preparedness. We emphasize the
high speed broadband connections are critical to effective
teleworking and that broadband by satellite is one of the key
high speed technologies available to teleworkers everywhere
throughout the National Capital Region right now.
In closing, we would like to make the following
recommendations: that the Federal Government agencies
accelerate the implementation of teleworking programs and that
the Congress and the Federal Government define and expand
teleworking programs to include satellite communications as a
required element in all formal teleworking and COOP plans;
compensation to teleworkers for their monthly high speed
broadband services, this would upgrade customers from dial-up
to alternative technologies; compensation to teleworkers for
the broadband customer premises equipment needed to perform
their online duties; and, last, tax credits for non-Federal
employers and employees who engage in teleworking programs.
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I would like
to thank you again for inviting the Telecommunications Industry
Association and Hughes Network Systems to present today. Thank
you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Read follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.034
Mr. Porter. Thank you, Ms. Read. We appreciate your
testimony.
Next, Jerry Edgerton, president of business and Federal
marketing, Verizon Communications. Welcome.
STATEMENT OF JERRY EDGERTON
Mr. Edgerton. Thank you, Chairman Porter and members of the
subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you
today on the teleworking solutions for the Federal Government.
I am pleased to tell you that fast, reliable, secure
telecommunications technology is in place today for the
National Capital Region. At the opportunity to be quite
controversial with my colleagues at the table, we believe that
this capability will further deploy of teleworking throughout
the Federal Government.
I am president of the Verizon Federal, which is a unit of
Verizon Business that is dedicated to serving the Federal
Government. Verizon Business was created through the merger of
MCI and Verizon, and is focused solely on the enterprise
customer, including the Federal Government. We are one of the
three business units of Verizon Communications.
Verizon Business today supports more than 75 Federal
agencies, and we have designed and deployed some of the most
complex government networks in the world. Through the FTS 2001
contract, we are the premier provider of advanced
communications solutions to the Federal Government. And through
the Washington Interagency Telecommunications Systems [WITS],
Verizon Business delivers voice, video, and data solutions to
the Federal agencies in the Washington, DC, area.
We are proud of our track record in helping Government
agencies meet the business requirements, and look forward to
working with our Federal customers and the GSA to implementing
teleworking solutions that are reliable, secure, and cost-
effective to a greater number of Federal employees.
The need for teleworking in the Federal Government is
greater than ever before, and it goes far beyond enabling
employees to work remotely. Teleworking should be the
cornerstone of every agency's business continuity plans,
especially here in the National Capital area with its high
concentration of Federal employees.
It doesn't take a major national disaster or national
emergency to close down a Federal office building, as was
witnessed in the last weeks when several days of rain showed us
what can happen at the IRS. It is important that the agency's
have a well defined and executed business continuity plan so
that operations continue seamlessly and that Federal employees,
regardless of where they are located, are able to perform
critical job functions.
Through the evolution of traditional communication
services, wireless communications and advanced applications,
the definition of teleworking is rapidly broadening. Agency
specialists can handle constituent calls from their own homes.
Federal employees can attain training sessions via Net
conferencing. Large agency meetings can take place via
collaboration capabilities.
The tools available today make these important functions
entirely possible, helping to improve productivity and reduce
cost, and many agencies are already using these capabilities.
Through our FTS bridge contract and ultimately, and ideally,
through the networks contract, we will offer additional
collaboration services that will further enhance the
teleworking experience of Federal workers.
Technology is leading to a virtualization of the Government
work force that will yield tremendous pay-backs and reduce
direct costs, recovery of lost time, favorable environmental
impacts, reduced infrastructure costs, and, more importantly,
improved service to the citizens. Done properly and with the
right technology solutions, teleworking Federal employees will
function as well or better than they would in their agency's
offices.
Undoubtedly, barriers remain that prevent agencies from
reaping the full benefits of telecommuting, but technology is
not one of those barriers. Existing technology fully enables
workers to work remotely today.
Verizon recognizes the vital role that communications
technology continues to play in sustaining our Nation's
economy, improving productivity, and providing Federal agencies
with the tools needed for effective constituent services and
efficient operations. Broadband technologies enable many new
applications that are revolutionizing the workplace.
Nationwide, Verizon has made billions of dollars of network
investments that have resulted in new products, services, and
integrated services over fiber optic cables, wireless
networking, and digital subscriber services that enable high
speed connections.
Our services include fiber to the premise, or what we call
FIOS; a personal broadband wireless service, or EVDO; and DSL,
or digital subscriber lines, all of which are available today
and making ubiquitous high speed access a reality. Our
wireless, wireline, and global networks create a web of
connectivity that supports Federal employees as they move
throughout their day through the different roles in all of
their different environments.
We believe that the keys to success for any Federal
teleworking program are security, reliability, and agency
endorsement.
Security must be a top priority for agencies, for employees
and for service providers. At Verizon, we deploy end-to-end
network security, meaning that no matter where the work is
located, no matter what information they are seeking, no matter
how they are getting online, we provide the same high levels of
network security for teleworking employees.
Establishing and managing high security levels eliminates
the need for teleworkers to keep confidential data bases on
their work-at-home computers, making data more secure and
employees more effective while working remotely.
A telework employee is only as effective as his or her
broadband connection, so network reliability is critical to the
success of any teleworking program. These new communications
technologies are highly reliable and cost-effective means of
increasing employee productivity by using high speed broadband
access.
A successful teleworking program is one in which remote
working looks no different than the time spent in the office,
where a teleworker's day is spent in meetings, doing research,
using the phone or the computer, the same tasks that they would
be doing in the office. For those workers with a need for the
social interaction that an office provides, collaboration
tools, such as instant messaging and video conferencing, are
helping fill that gap, as well as serving as an effective
management tool.
Teleworking is the right thing to do for the greater good.
To name a few, it increases employee productivity; it helps
protect the environment by reducing traffic congestions and
demands; it helps agencies retain seasoned workers by providing
an alternate workspace and a quality of life; it provides
disabled workers with increased ability to work from remote
locations; and, finally, it provides a basis for continuity of
operations by dispersing the work force.
When savings on office space and utilities and so forth are
factored in, I believe that the cost to agencies is more than
offset by the benefits. In fact, I would urge the subcommittee
to continue to conduct regular oversight on agencies'
teleworking initiatives and conduct periodic reviews on their
process. A teleworking and continuity of operations scorecard
will continue to be an effective tool to help ensure that the
potential benefits of teleworking are fully realized by the
Federal agencies and their employees.
At Verizon Business, we are committed to working with our
Federal customers to make continuous improvements in the
delivery of governmental service. We look forward to working
with the Congress and our agency customers to drive innovation
in the business of Government.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Edgerton follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.041
Mr. Porter. Thank you very much. The three of you are very
lucky today, since the balance of the panel isn't here, so I
promise I will be easy on you, OK?
Is there a profile--maybe that is not the right term, but
is there a particular type of employee that we should be
looking for? I know we are talking numbers. There are 300,000
whatever numbers and 12 percent--and I am not going to quote
the numbers right--that probably could telecommute, but is
there a certain employee we should be looking for that should
be doing this? Because I know some folks today that work via
technology, and they are not very happy with this type of
arrangement. I think they are more on the people side and
prefer to have the atmosphere.
But is there a profile, is there a type of person we should
be looking for? Or is there a science yet to help us determine
who that person is?
Mr. Mularie. I interviewed yesterday Mr. Joe Hungate, who
is CIO of the Department of Treasury Tax IG, and they have had
a tremendous successful telework program. Ninety-five percent
of their people are eligible for telework, and not only workers
in the sense of GS-whatever, but also managers and directors
telework. So the culture of the agency is really being
transferred from sort of coming to a place to really a virtual
agency organization. In this case they do audits, so this is a
reasonable thing to do in a distributed manner.
Mr. Porter. A reasonable thing to do what?
Mr. Mularie. To have a dispersion of these people, because
they are out usually in the field doing audits. But as a result
of this, they have been able to shrink their space here within
the District; they don't need the space they originally did.
And I think that the lesson I learned from the Treasury
Department is that the managers, the executives should be out
as part of the telework experience. So in answer to your
question, I think the total agency should view itself as
eligible in that sense for telework.
Mr. Porter. And I have to come back to this, but it seems
to me the manager is really the hub of this, to make sure that
they are comfortable also, and understanding how to do
appraisals and performance standards. I think that would be
critical. But has there been research done--and, again, not
that I am opposed to this; I am just asking questions, because
I think there are a lot of folks that would probably flourish
in this environment.
But are there studies that have been done as far as
performance? Again, I don't necessarily think that 95 percent
really would be eligible from that type of personality without
the proper coaching, the proper encouragement, the hands-on
management. Some individuals need that, and left on their own,
aren't necessarily going to be as efficient. So have there
actually been studies done?
Mr. Mularie. Well, there are two ways to view that. One is
current telecommunications technology and, as Mr. Edgerton
said, services. From my laptop, Mr. Chairman, I can talk to
you, I can see you with full video, I can hear you, obviously,
good voice, and we can collaborate on a document or show the
latest in cartoons or whatever. So technology allows for a
great degree of socialization, as opposed to the old way of
telework, where you had a fax machine and a telephone and your
computer. So the advances in technology make this remote
experience more real and more like it would be in an office
environment.
With respect to studies done with this, the study I saw
talked about this cultural issue with respect to telework and
really destroying this whole idea we have built up since the
industrial revolution of what work is, and I think that is the
core reason for managers being resistant, because that is not
the way they were trained and raised. Management science is 150
years old. So I think that is why we talk about pilot
demonstrations so they can look over their shoulder and really
experience this new world.
Mr. Porter. I just think it would be difficult for Coach
Tom Osborne, when he was with the Cornhuskers, to telecommute
from a coaching perspective from a football team.
Mr. Mularie. I think Coach Tom Osborne could have won at
home from a telephone. [Laughter.]
Mr. Porter. Well, probably a bad example. [Laughter.]
Tom could do it well.
But I think that there is a certain science, and I expect
that, as it evolves, we will learn. And I would expect that the
telecommute individual is going to be--in my opening comments--
in many cases coming into a bricks and mortar office
periodically. But I do know that there is a certain amount of
that interaction, and motivation I think is critical. I would
hope we wouldn't swing too far away from the hands-on coaching
that I think is critical on performance.
Mr. Mularie. Yes, mentoring is important, sir.
Mr. Porter. The rest of you, what do you think?
Mr. Edgerton. Well, I would like to contrast this to
today's office environment, which basically is a series of
cubes filled with terminals. And I don't think that is
necessarily a conducive environment for work. I think the
advent of applications and computer technology and so forth
have changed the metrics by which we measure and manage the
work force. So I think a cube at home would certainly be a more
desirable environment than a cube in the office. So I think
there is a lot to be said for----
Mr. Porter. Especially if you saw the movie Office Space.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Edgerton. Well, same concept, except on the words.
Mr. Porter. I understand. Thank you.
Ms. Read.
Ms. Read. Yes, thank you. I actually would probably come in
between the answers here on both of my flanks, in the sense
that, speaking from Hughes' perspective, we are a global
company. I can't speak exactly to the personalities of
individuals, but the personality of companies, and certainly
companies are becoming more and more global, so I believe that
ours is not a bad example.
We have offices in Beijing, in India, in Brazil, in London,
in Germany. We are in many, many countries. Our offices, our
sales force is always on the run. Everybody is moving,
everybody is communicating. Even our operations center is fully
redundant. If something were to happen in one place, we can
operate from another. And we are very well connected.
I have been with the company for 6 years now. There are
some people that I have collaborated with substantially on
projects who I have actually never seen; wonderful people. We
produce great things together, but we do this all by telephone,
computers, whatever.
So I think as companies become more dispersed and more in--
at least I can speak for the enterprise side, not so much,
perhaps the Government side--that the telecommuting is actually
just another step of the same thing.
Mr. Porter. I guess I should probably have a picture taken
of my office at home and carry it with me wherever I go, make
sure that the camera is always on the picture I carry with me
to the beach or whatever. [Laughter.]
And I make light. I think this is a tremendous tool with
some obstacles because of a cultural change. But technology is
in dog years, as you probably know better than I, and it is
changing rapidly, as are the techniques and tools. But I see
this as a great opportunity for us to be more efficient. I hope
we don't lose that hands-on management skill that I think
really can make or break a superstar.
But from the technology side, what are some of the things
that are on the horizon to even help more? I know we talked
about the two-way cameras and having the interaction, but what
else is on the horizon, from a technological standpoint, that
is going to make it even easier to do telecommuting and
advancements? Is there something that is happening we should
know about?
Mr. Edgerton. Well, I think the Verizon commitment to its
fiber to the home and fiber to the premise project is probably
the best example of that in the sense that we have made a
corporate commitment to build to over 6 million homes in the
next year, and that basically is putting I guess the fastest
possible service to the home level, which really now enables
the capability not only from video, but the fastest possible
applications. It should be no different than sitting in your
office or sitting next to the mainframe, exactly. So just that
kind of capability and investment.
The applications will then follow. Then the work suites
that have to then accommodate the higher speed. I am not sure
what the weakest link in the chain here is, but we have
certainly made that investment and are encouraging it. We see
that as a significant opportunity, a significant change.
Mr. Porter. Ms. Read.
Ms. Read. Yes. I would echo that, again, broadband is
really the backbone of this whole experience. If you can't
communicate, whether it is by fiber or DSL or satellite or what
have you, cable modem, it is all-critical to have that
connection or mobility. And we haven't mentioned BlackBerries,
but, of course, that has been pretty significant as well.
Mr. Porter. Terribly. [Laughter.]
Ms. Read. But in terms of advancements coming on the
horizon, we do see a lot of retrenching additional
infrastructure being built on the terrestrial side. Satellites
cover the entire country. What is interesting and we are very
excited about at Hughes is a new satellite system that is about
to be launched in the first quarter of next year. This is a
program called Spaceway; it will bring dramatically higher
speed broadband service to the entire country by satellite. So
for those homes that find that the options in front of them are
not suitable, for whatever reason--can you hear me?
Mr. Porter. Speaking of technology. [Laughter.]
Ms. Read. Technology, yes.
Mr. Edgerton. I think that is a satellite connection.
[Laughter.]
Ms. Read. You have my mic. [Laughter.]
Certainly, we have the new technologies coming in for
satellite broadband as well. So there will be great
complementary services coming out in the satellite arena within
the next 6 months, 6 to 12 months.
Mr. Porter. Doctor?
Mr. Mularie. Mr. Chairman, I shall not be deferred from my
excitement over video, audio, and electronic whiteboard on your
PC over the public Internet the same way you can send an e-
mail. I look at and I speak with and I share the morning
cartoon out of the Wall Street Journal or New York Times or
something with my colleagues in Northern Sweden, and they are
there. I meet their children.
And as Ms. Read said, I had the experience of having this
relationship with a physician at Tulane University for many
months, where we would look at different medical applications,
and I went down to Tulane, physically walking down the hall and
I said, hi, Bill. He said, we haven't met formally. What he
meant is we haven't shaken hands.
Seventy to 80 percent of what human beings transmit is non-
verbal, so seeing is really an important part of this. And the
broadband technology as an enabler allows you to do this thing
just beautifully now.
Mr. Porter. Well, as we talk about telecommuting, my wish
is that, as the business community is advancing its technology,
that our educational community would also latch on. As you
mentioned, the office space has not changed in 150 years. The
classroom has not changed in 150 years. And I think to be
competitive--and this is just editorial comment--for us to be
competitive in the global market, we are going to need to do
more of this.
And I would hope that your companies and your associations
could get more engaged, if you are not already, in the
educational community and helping some cultural changes there,
which comes back to the satellite access and the broadband
access is limited for education as it is, I think, in the
business community parts of the country, but you see satellite
becoming a more and more beneficial part of this.
Also, from a security perspective, I know the problem we
faced with September 11th, when the only things that worked
here was BlackBerries. My fear, again, without a redundant
system, is what happens if a substantial part of our work force
is in fact telecommuting and the systems are down. Then what
happens? Please.
Mr. Mularie. The public Internet is a wonderful robust
infrastructure, if our friends at Verizon can get us the
broadband reach to that infrastructure. The Internet worked
beautifully on September 11th. We were doing video conferencing
from California to the Naval Research Lab here in Washington.
So you are right, the things that are--the public telephone
systems, which are oversubscribed, are useless in terms of
emergency, but riding this Internet is really a robust
communications infrastructure.
Mr. Porter. Ms. Read.
Ms. Read. I would like to echo the points of Dr. Mularie.
During September 11th, the satellite networks were absolutely
functional. The Internet was functioning perfectly well. Our
plug-ins to the Internet were no problem and our customers were
finding seamless communications. So, again, it wasn't an issue
of the particular link that satellites provide as being
something that was congested or disrupted as a result of
emergencies.
Mr. Edgerton. It probably is not well known, but there has
been a significant effort throughout the National Capital
Region to improve the wireline and the fiber optic
infrastructure servicing most of the buildings. Most Government
agencies now have multiple access and fiber rings serving their
facilities so that you are not limited to single points of
failure.
Also, a significant development has occurred in the area of
what we call broadband wireless, or EVDO, where about 161, 180
metropolitan areas now have PC-accessible broadband, which is
not like BlackBerry and is not like cellular, but runs on
similar systems. So we actually have broadband access available
now in those locations. So there are significant ways, other
than what we saw in the last few instances for alternative
services.
I am reminded of the fact that I may be a technology freak,
but I do have satellite at home. I have Direct TV, I have
satellite access for data, but I also have cable. And I do have
BlackBerry. [Laughter.]
Ms. Read. Which do you like better?
Mr. Edgerton. Well, I like them all. And my wife still uses
dial-up. [Laughter.]
She is the Luddite in the family.
Mr. Porter. Well, I appreciate your testimony today, the
first panel and the second panel. And I mentioned hopefully
into education we can learn and the cultural change, also into
the area of health care. Technology can save so many lives,
especially in rural parts of the country. But also I want to
make sure that, as we move forward, we do it for the betterment
of our customer service as Federal employees and the Federal
Government. And I know that our constituents are demanding
faster and more efficient, accurate service. I think this can
be a great tool and this is a part of that process.
So let me again say thank you very much for your testimony.
I see great things happening for the Federal Government.
Thank you all, and the meeting is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:07 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[The prepared statement of Hon. Elijah E. Cummings and
additional information submitted for the hearing record
follow:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.064
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.066
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.068
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.069
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.070
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.071
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.072
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.073
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.074
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.075
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.076
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.077
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.078
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.079
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.080
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.081
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.082
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.083
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.084
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.085
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 34546.086