Social Security Case Study

PAD 702-04 SPRING  2020 CASE STUDY

A problem has developed in the regional office of the department of social security. a significant percentage of individuals who have visited this office over the past year have subsequently been victimized by identity theft. specifically, their personal information including name, date of birth, address, income for the past year etc… has been compromised and used to file false tax filings. these filings have led to income returns yielding several million dollars.  to date, investigators have not determined whether such filings are the work of social security employees or whether the social security computer system has been hacked by outside parties. if such hacking has occurred it may be attributable to either of two causes:

1. Social security employees have failed to follow proper procedures in entering such information into the social security computer system in violation of department policy.
2. There is some previously unknown design flaw in the privacy protrection aspect of the social security system which has enabled hackers to gain access.

note however, no other branch appears to have experienced such a problem…the regional office employs 20 individuals as customer service agents. any one or more of these agents could be involved in the scheme, provided it is an “in-house” scheme or the result of some internal negligence.

acting upon the advice of outside consultants who have stated that if this situation were the product of “in-house” employee corruption it would probably be due to one of three causes:

1. employees with a need for money due to some financial hardship experienced over the past two years
2. employees with a need for money due to a drug or gambling problem
3. employees with hostility towards the department due to some feeling of mistreatment.

none of the subject 20 employees have exhibited any obvious illness, debt or resentment….

in order to rule out employee corruption, the department has ordered all 20 employees to undergo the following….

1. a mandatory drug test
2. a mandatory lie detector test

the results of this requirement were as

2 people refused to take the drug test and were immediately fired

2 people refused to take the lie detector and were suspended w/o    pay pending a hearing

16 took both the drug and lie detector tests

1 failed the drug test and was suspended w/o paypending a hearing

1 failed the lie detector and was suspended w/o appending a hearing

1 took the lie detector and results were inconclusive …suspended w/ pay pending another test

note… *      both fired individuals immediately filed lawsuits for unfair   termination

•   party with inconclusive lie detector test also sued     claiming unfair labor practice
• although the consultants have linked drug use to possible corruption, the likelihood  is almost negligible
• there is a similarly weak link between financial indebtedness and employee corruption relevant statutes and policies…

statutes…

1. By law, social security employees have a property right in their jobs and all entitled to all procedures and protections without respect to any adverse action taken.
2. The results of a lie detector test may not be admitted at a criminal or civil trial may be used in an administrative termination hearing
3. The 5th amendment provides a right against self-incrimination

policies…

1. Employees have a duty of cooperation with an internal investigation and may be terminated for “failure to cooperate” with an internal investigation.
2. Employees who are subject to possible adverse action shall be advised of their Garrity/ kalkines warnings
3. All social security employees have the right to a hearing on the allegations prior to imposition of any adverse action