In a brief statement on Thursday, Yosemite National Park Superintendent Don Neubacher announced his retirement as of November 1. In his resignation letter, Neubacher, 63, pointed to a number of accomplishments during his six years at the helm of one of the nation's most iconic parks, but says, "I regret leaving at this time, but want to do what's best for Yosemite National Park. Our employees, our park, and our partners are some of the best in the nation."
His announcement comes just a week after a Congressional hearing regarding harassment at a number of park units, including Yosemite. The House Oversight Committee Chairman, Jason Chaffetz, a Utah Republican, described a hostile work environment at Yosemite, as the "result of the behavior and conduct of the park's superintendent." The committee said last week that over 20 Park Service staff had complained to them about the hostile environment, bullying, and sexual harrassment. During that hearing, four other National Park Service units were discussed as well, including Cape Canaveral National Seashore and Grand Canyon, Yellowstone and Yosemite national parks.
Yosemite National Park's Chief of Fire and Aviation Management, Kelly Martin, told the committee that there was a "hostile work environment in Yosemite where dozens of individuals have come forward with personal statements of demoralizing behavior to include acts of bullying, gender bias, and favoritism." She then described, as an example, an experience as the victim of a peeping tom at Grand Canyon.
Superintendent Neubacher, according to Chaffetz, did not agree with the assessment that his conduct was to blame. Committee Ranking Member Elijah Cummings said, "No employee in the federal civil service should ever be afraid to come to work."
Comments
Wild Places--
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I, too, have a pretty thick skin & much disdain for the pervasiveness of the term micro-aggressions. But there is a lot of obnoxiousness and lack of respect that doesn't rise to the legal "hostile work environment" standard, and not complete bullying. That still runs off good folks, or at least wears them down, makes less work get done, and helps kill morale. Folks don't whine, they leave. My perspective is that the legal standard isn't enough: there needs to be a simple edict to respect each other so that the mission is accomplished and the work gets done efficiently. I tried to use the term de jour micro-aggressions to label that intermediate level of impairment of effective working relationships, giving it a meaning that I could back. Perhaps that term is beyond saving.
Also, I'm talking about field operations, not about management track. I don't run in management circles.
_________________________________________
As an update to the article & my comments: on Sunday Patty Neubacher announced her resignation as a PWR deputy regional director. Apparently during his hearings Rep. Chaffetz accused her of using her position in the regional office to protect him, although that wasn't widely reported at the time. I don't know about that; superintendents of flagship parks are SES and have a lot of power relative to regional offices where someone nominally supervises them. Don Neubacher was one of the 2 park superintendents (Dan Wenk @ Yellowstone is the other) who are paid more than Jarvis; so are the deputy director for operations & IMR regional director.
I don't know Patty nor Don as individuals nor as managers. My guess is that Patty and Don asked for him to be moved from Yosemite to PWR, instead of them becoming a 1200 mile long-distance marriage with him in Denver. [Before he moved to Yosemite he was superintendent at Point Reyes, a much more reasonable distance to the PWR office then in Oakland.] When that request was rejected, the writing would have been on the wall.
anonymous, thanks for your interesting posts. I do think it is very important for employees to have the opportunity to report misconduct. For the employee, it is a risky undertaking and sometimes expensive or a career ending decision. I have no firsthand knowledge of either the Yellowstone or Yosemite allegations of either sexual harassment or hostile work environment except to know the IG inspections started last week and many employees are being interviewed. That said, the retirements of both the high ranking officials in the Pacific Far West Region, seem a little bit of a railroad job. Both sides of the story should be out on the table regarding the allegations before these type of punitive actions, transfer offers., etc. are made, at least in my view.
Of course, Mr Mackie, there is always the possibility that people resign ahead of legal findings because they don't want to be immobillized in the public eye when said findings erupt. I don't know - just wild guessing here.
And Patty Nuebacher was one of the best NPS leaders there ever was, her husband was a victim of the Senior Executive Service, easy to move them, they can't turn them down. Nothing has been proven other then Don was hard to work with and had a temper. The real loss here is Patty, and it was collatoral damage. Your right, many of us are concerned over the direction the Park Service is moving in, but not for the reasons cited by the headline slashing events. It's the low bar of proof and evidence and the sudden rush by our own NPS administration to be oh so politically correct. When the doers are all gone, good luck getting the job done with nothing but complainers and talkers.
Rick B., always a possibility, as I am acquainted with both individuals, I must admit I was blindsided by the hearing. I do think the allegations were serious, the person testifying took a great risk and the issues of women in the workforce are relevant and need great improvement, not just in the parks but other public agencies and the private sector. It will be interesting to see the IG investigation results, but I do feel the media has tried and convicted the park superintendent before a proper investigation was completed. Much was accomplished in Yosemite under Mr. Neubacher's tenure, the record will show he did much to improve the park.
I'm not sure about the standard of proof for SES employees, but for GS employees in an administrative disciplinary matter, it is the proponderance of the evidence which is more likely than not. It doesn't necessarily require an extensive investigation to gather enough evidence to meet this burden. I think this is important to keep in mind when considering whether an agency is acting on insufficient information.
I don't know the parties involved but I imagine being a dual career couple at this level in the same region would place one or both in some challenging situations when it comes to use (or misuse) of position. For instance, NPS employees supervising spouses in an acting role probably happens more often than it should, considering how common dual career couples can be in individual parks.
I worked at Yosemite for a couple of months back in 1993. The housing was deplorable (old trailers) and I never felt like I belonged, unlike the other 9 units of the NPS system where I worked.