Debbie Lesko

Mrs. LESKO

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Black lives matter. My two grandsons, who are Black, their lives matter. I don't want anything bad to happen to them. My life matters. White lives matter. Hispanic lives matter. Asian lives matter. Native American lives matter. Quite frankly, all lives matter. Police officers' lives matter, too. What happened to George Floyd was terrible, and bad cops or cops that do bad things have to be held accountable. But we have to recognize that the vast majority of law enforcement officers are good, honest people trying to help our community and protect our community. We can't throw the baby out with the bathwater, as the saying goes. We need a bipartisan bill because you guys know, I know you are passionate, I know you believe in this, but you also know that this bill that you are pushing through without negotiating with Republicans on is not going to go anywhere. So, if you actually want something done, you have to negotiate with Republicans because, after all, they have a majority in the Senate, and we have a Republican President. I ask that we work on a bill that not only holds police officers that do bad things accountable, but that does not undermine law enforcement so that they can do what they need to do to protect our society. I have talked to numerous law enforcement officers and police chiefs in my district. All of them, every single one of them, said there are portions of this Democrat bill that would undermine their ability to protect us in our communities. Now, there are other parts of this bill that I support, that Republicans support, that the President could sign. So why don't we try to unite on the things that we can agree on? It has been said before that in Judiciary Committee none of the Republican amendments were--you voted them all down. Democrats voted them all down. And then Senator Scott said that he offered 20 amendments to the Democrats in the Senate, and they rejected them. So, if we really want to get something done--and we should get something done--let's try to work together instead of pushing through a bill that you haven't reached out to Republicans to negotiate on. I also am very dismayed by what is happening around our country. I know people are upset, and I applaud the people who are peaceful in their protests.

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I ask all Members, both Republican and Democrat, to call on the people who are violent out in our streets, people who are looting, people who are tearing down statues, people who are setting up autonomous zones--in the one in Seattle they killed somebody there--please, let's try to heal our country together.

Mrs. LESKO

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, both bills under this rule are absolutely terrible and should be rejected. First of all, you have the proxy voting and remote voting. This has never been done in the history of the United States--not during the Civil War, not during previous pandemics, and we shouldn't do it now. When you have nurses going to work, when you have grocery store workers going to work, when you have everybody else going back to work, we are setting a terrible example by saying: ``You don't have to show up to work. Just give your voting card over to somebody else.'' It is terrible. And then when I offered an amendment in the Rules Committee yesterday saying, ``Okay, if you don't show up to work, you don't get the travel allowance in your MRA,'' that was rejected by every single Democrat Member on the Rules Committee. And then Speaker Pelosi's bill, I call it the Keep People Unemployed Act, because that is what it is. It will incentivize people to stay unemployed. It extends the $600-per-week unemployment payment through January 31 of next year. It mandates all businesses continue the Family Medical Paid Leave Act for another year, and it says that when you apply for SNAP, food stamps, that the $600 per week that you are getting doesn't count towards income. So now you are going to have people that are sitting at home getting paid more than they did when they worked and getting food stamps. I already have businesses in my district that say we need to hire back these people because Arizona is back open. They can't hire the people because the people are getting paid more to sit at home. In addition, it gives $1,200 to people that are here illegally. Why are we not prioritizing U.S. citizens? It lets criminals who are convicted of murder and rape, just because they are 50 years old or older, out of prison. And it federalizes elections, mandating that there is same-day voter registration and that everyone is mailed a ballot. This is a ridiculous bill in this combined rule, and I ask my Members to vote ``no.''

Mrs. LESKO

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the life of Charles ``Chuck'' Alan Strange from Surprise, Arizona. He was loved by many including his wife, Rosie, his three children, Alan, Chris and Laura, his two sisters, Barbara and Carolyn, and grandchildren and great grandchildren. Chuck served honorably in the Army for 21 years, including as an Army Ranger for 3\1/2\ years in combat in Vietnam. During his service, he was awarded: 7 O/S Bars--(7) six month deployments overseas; Bronze Star Medal with 12t-3rd Oak Leaf Cluster; Republic of Vietnam Armed Forces Honor Medal; Republic of Vietnam Service Medal with one Silver Star and three Bronze Stars--5 Campaigns; Army Commendation Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster; Air Medal 1st and 2nd Awards; Meritorious Service Medal; Good Conduct Medal 1st-7th Award; National Defense Service Medal; Republic of Vietnam Campaign Ribbon with Device 1960; Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry with Palm and Bronze Star; Combat Infantry Badge; Vietnam Ranger Badge; and Expert Rifle Badge with M-14 Bar. He was a member of the Peoria Chamber for more than 15 years and served on the Board of Directors as well and many other positions. Chuck also served on the Peoria & Surprise Regional Chambers and was honored with the Lifetime Achievement Award in Surprise. He was active in many charities and volunteer positions including Luke Air Force Base, Military Affairs and the Rio Vista Veterans Memorial Wall. On this day, we as a community honor him and ask those who knew him to pray for his family during this time of mourning.

Mrs. LESKO

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, first, I want to say that I am praying for comfort for all of the families that have lost someone to COVID-19. I also want to pray for the families and those people that are in the hospitals now sick from COVID-19, that they have total and complete healing. And I want to thank the healthcare workers, the grocery store workers, the truckers, everybody that every day is putting their health at risk and their family's health at risk to keep the economy going and to help Americans. And it is really good to be back here today in Congress working and continuing to do our job during this crisis. You know, two weeks ago, in the Senate--it was two weeks ago now--the Senate Republicans put up a bill to help continue funding for small businesses so they could pay their workers. Two weeks--two weeks--we have been waiting around while Democrats have been delaying it. And why? I don't understand why. I have had businesses, just like all of my fellow Members of Congress, that have called me and said: I need the money; I need the money from this program, or my business is going to go under. Two weeks ago this could have happened. But, no, in those two weeks, millions and millions more people filed for unemployment insurance. And why? We could have done this funding for small businesses so they could pay their workers two weeks ago. I am thankful that we are finally-- finally--getting it done. Now, the rule talks about Speaker Pelosi's oversight committee. Maybe that is the reason that Democrats delayed funding for small businesses and their workers for two weeks. Why do we need another oversight committee? Speaker Pelosi said, oh, it is going to be all bipartisan. I am sorry; I don't believe it. And the reason I don't believe it is because since the beginning of 2019, I have served on three committees, including Judiciary Committee, and in every single committee, the entire goal has been nonstop to criticize President Trump and try to influence the 2020 election. And now you are going to tell me that you are going to have another oversight committee, even though every standing committee has oversight on this, and we have inspector generals and the CARES Act has oversight. Now we need a ninth committee to do oversight, and it is supposedly going to be bipartisan? I am sorry. I call BS. And the reason I know this is because of past history. While Democrats were focusing on impeachment, the President was working on coronavirus.

Mrs. LESKO

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor two brave police officers, Officer Alicia Hubert and Officer Marissa Dowhan, both with the Phoenix Police Department. On Sunday, March 29, 2020 these two officers along with Commander Greg Carnicle responded to a domestic disturbance call where a tragic shooting took place. It was devastating to hear that Commander Carnicle was fatally shot and Officers Hubert and Dowhan were both seriously injured. It is situations like this, that remind us what our men and women in blue sacrifice daily for the protection of others and I can't thank them enough. On this day, we honor both Officer Hubert and Officer Dowhan for their bravery, sacrifice and commitment to our community and wish them a full recovery.

Mrs. LESKO

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I rise today with great sadness over the passing of Commander Gregory Carnicle from Peoria, Arizona. He was beloved by many. He was a loving husband to Ann, father to Rachel, Cecilia, John and Veronica and grandfather to four with two more on the way. He began his career as a patrol officer in June 1989 and was a 31- year veteran with the Phoenix Police Department. He is the first Phoenix Police Commander to lose his life in the line of duty. He was a well-respected leader and hero to many. We are eternally grateful for his service to our community and state. On this day, we as a community honor him and ask those who knew him to pray for his family during this time of mourning.

Mrs. LESKO

Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support the CARES Act, and I look forward to Arizonans and Americans across our nation receiving the benefits of this bill during this difficult time. I support this relief package to help workers, small businesses, hospitals and healthcare workers, and to increase production of needed medical supplies and treatments. America is strong, and we will get through this by working together.

Mrs. LESKO

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I thank Representative McGovern for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. Madam Speaker, the rule before us today, the Senate amendment to H.R. 2486, contains the text of two pieces of legislation, H.R. 2214 and H.R. 5581, along with the Senate version of the Affordable Prescriptions for Patients Act of 2019 as a pay-for. Also included are S.J. Res. 68, a resolution to direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran, and H.R. 6172, the USA FREEDOM Reauthorization Act. By combining all of these bills together, Democrats have prohibited the minority, meaning the Republicans, the ability to offer a motion to recommit on the floor. The only thing I can think of is that I guess they are afraid we might pass our seventh MTR, as we passed one last week. H.R. 2214 eviscerates the President's ability, under the law, to limit who may legally enter the United States. President Trump has utilized existing law to determine which countries fail to meet international standards of information sharing or identity management, or were at a high risk of terrorism or public safety concern, and the executive orders he issued reflected that determination. The majority is now seeking to prevent the President from ever using that authority again. The bill terminates the executive orders currently in place and ceases ``all actions taken pursuant to any proclamation or executive order terminated'' by the bill, which means that all information sharing on terrorists, criminals, and other security threats would cease. The seven countries specifically targeted with travel restrictions in Executive Order 13769 were actually countries that were determined by Congress and the Obama administration to be countries of particular concern for terrorism activity. This bill contains onerous reporting and consultation requirements that would effectively prevent the President from acting quickly in the event quick action would be needed. For example, H.R. 2214 requires consultation between only the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security. However, this does not cover many emergencies the President needs to respond to. For example, in the event of a disease outbreak, including the novel coronavirus, the Centers for Disease Control would need to be consulted with respect to suspending entry of certain populations. The combined rule also includes H.R. 5581. This legislation would require the Department of Homeland Security to ensure that every individual who is subject to a secondary inspection would be guaranteed access to counsel or anyone of their choosing within an hour. This definitely would have serious logistical and practical consequences for CBP's ability to quickly and efficiently screen travelers and carry out the mission of facilitating unlawful trade and travel. CBP conducts over 17 million secondary inspections each year. Can you imagine that, for every car, a CBP officer is looking at a screen, when there is the X-ray machine of the car, and they radio over to the CBP officer at the port of entry and say: ``Hey, look in the trunk''? Then, they would have to wait an hour if the person objects and says, ``Oh, I want counsel,'' or, ``I want my relative to come within an hour.'' I mean, this is just way onerous. This combined rule also contains S.J. Res. 68, a resolution to direct the removal of the United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran. First, I want to note that Secretary Pompeo testified in front of the House Foreign Affairs Committee that ``we are not'' engaged in hostilities against Iran. Thus, the joint resolution is unnecessary. While Congress has a constitutional duty to authorize the use of military force, we should not be issuing blanket prohibitions without taking the time to develop an appropriate Authorization for Use of Military for the Middle East. The net effect of the bill may be to make many U.S. counterterrorism operations in the Middle East illegal. Rather than handcuffing our Armed Forces, we should be providing them with the tools they need to effectively combat terrorism against America and Americans abroad. Lastly, this rule contains H.R. 6172, the USA FREEDOM Reauthorization Act. This bill reauthorizes expiring provisions necessary to defend the United States, while also including significant reforms to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to restore accountability. In order to ensure that past FISA abuses, like those against Carter Page, never happen again, numerous reforms are included to protect the American people from both terrorist threats and government overreach. For example, the bill requires the Attorney General to transmit rules to ensure that FISA applications are accurate and complete. The Attorney General would also be required to approve, in writing, a FISA investigation of an elected official or a Federal candidate. Also, the FISA court will now transcribe hearings, with DOJ giving FISA applications and relevant materials to Congress in a timely manner, to ensure we can conduct appropriate oversight. It also creates a new division within DOJ, a compliance officer, that will specifically look at these FISA applications to make sure they are accurate. Although I am pleased with much of the FISA reform bill, it is unfortunate that it is included with a lot of other bills in this rule, controversial bills that I don't like. Therefore, I urge opposition to the rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), my good friend.

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Oklahoma.

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, before I yield time to my friend, I want to point out again that Mr. Cole has been here a long time, and when he says to the public on the floor that when Republicans used this process of combining the bills together in a rule that it was to expedite it over to the Senate, I believe him. And so I believe that their motivation is different, and that is to prevent the minority from having a motion to recommit. Madam Speaker, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Woodall), my good friend.

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy).

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy).

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. We have obviously had a heated debate today, and it has been interesting. Of course, we disagree on a number of things. Madam Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will amend the rule to immediately bring to the floor Leader McCarthy's bill, H.R. 6177, which would require Members of Congress to disclose delinquent tax liabilities and wage garnishments. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Rodney Davis) to further explain the amendment and the leader's bill.

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. In closing, I urge my Democratic colleagues to bring to the floor border security measures that will help us help those who are truly in danger and in need of asylum. We can all agree these are issues that need to be fixed. Now let's work together for all our constituents to get things fixed. Madam Speaker, I urge ``no'' on the previous question, ``no'' on the underlying measure, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mrs. LESKO

Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Mrs. LESKO. I am in its current form.

Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I first want to say that the vast majority of TSA officers are good, hardworking professionals, but there are some bad actors. On February 6, 2020, the State of California announced the arrest and prosecution of a former TSA screener, resulting from an FBI investigation. According to the criminal complaint, the TSA screener used ``fraud or deceit to falsely imprison a woman going through security'' while stationed as a travel document checker at Los Angeles International Airport in June 2019. The screener insisted that the woman passenger needed extra screening in a private elevator, where he told the passenger to reveal her ``full breasts'' and to ``lift her pants and underwear.'' The victim in the case stated that she complied with the TSO's instructions out of fear. Fortunately, this offender was immediately fired by the TSA. However, under this bill, H.R. 1140, if it passed, this predator could be on the Federal payroll for months or even years. But this is not an isolated incident. In addition to the sexual predator at LAX, in the last 5 years alone, a screener in Boston was caught luring teenage girls into posing for nude photos; a screener at LaGuardia molested a female college student in the airport bathroom; and two screeners in Denver plotted to grope attractive men. My amendment is simple. It would enhance aviation security and protect the flying public by preventing the TSA from hiring any candidate with a history of sexual misconduct, offenses involving minors, or terrorism. This amendment is identical to an amendment offered by my Democratic colleague, Ms. Underwood, which was not offered here today. The Underwood amendment was made in order by the Rules Committee. The rule was supported by every Democrat in the House. Republicans strongly support the Underwood amendment. We were disappointed we did not have an opportunity to vote on it earlier. The Underwood amendment preserves the authority TSA currently has to prevent the hiring of candidates with a history of sexual misconduct, offenses involving minors, or terrorism. The Underwood amendment is so important because current law bars a litany of criminals from working in sensitive roles at airports. The amendment simply ensures that current safeguards remain in place. There is no reason that someone with a conviction for sexual assault or terrorism should be a TSA employee. To be clear, the Underwood amendment, my amendment, would prevent the hiring of sexual predators like Harvey Weinstein. We have two options today: adopt the Underwood amendment and keep sexual predators off the Federal payroll, or reject it and reward sexual predators with a paycheck from the taxpayers. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support the motion to recommit, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mrs. LESKO

Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with great sadness over the passing of Colonel Ronald Lord from Goodyear, Arizona, a loving husband to Mayor Georgia Lord of the city of Goodyear, which is in my district. He was a caring and kind father, grandfather, and great-grandfather, and he was loved by many. While serving as a fighter pilot in the United States Air Force during the Vietnam war, he bravely fought against hostile North Vietnamese forces. Ron was an American hero, and we are eternally grateful for his service. On behalf of the Arizona Eighth Congressional District, I extend my deepest condolences to Ron's family and loved ones as they mourn their loss.

Mrs. LESKO

Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I thank Representative Scanlon for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, this bill has six main aspects that I have major concerns with. First, the bill eliminates TSA's unique personnel management authorities created in the Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001, commonly known as ATSA. This legislation moves employees of the TSA into the government pay schedule. In 2001, when Congress created TSA, the decision was made not to do this in order to give the agency flexibility. At present, the TSA Administrator has authority over employee pay, hiring, termination, and discipline. TSA has repeatedly told us that placing the screener workforce under title 5 would tie the agency's hands related to national security policy, workforce management, and collective bargaining. Specifically, TSA would not be able to continue a one-step removal process for employees found to have committed serious security breaches or misconduct, such as allowing unauthorized access to secure areas or allowing threat items and illicit contraband through the security checkpoint. TSA's ability to move employees to different checkpoints based on passenger volume would also be curtailed. Currently, TSA can set new security policies TSOs must follow and move TSOs between checkpoints to manage passenger volume. Under this bill, however, both actions would be subject to collective bargaining and the security measures could be limited as a result. TSA's ability to set security screening policies, such as when and how to conduct pat-downs, would be negotiable with the union instead of being driven by national security imperatives. In fact, the bill eliminates the TSA's authority to immediately fire employees for serious misconduct, including sexual assault, drug and alcohol abuse, arrest, theft, and intentional security breaches, such as allowing guns, knives, and explosives past the checkpoint. In recent years, there have been several incidents of TSOs assaulting passengers, stealing passenger items, and allowing drugs past the checkpoint. Now, we all know the majority of TSOs are good people doing good jobs. But there are some bad actors. On February 6, 2020, the State of California announced the arrest and prosecution of a former TSA screener resulting from a joint investigation effort by Federal, State, and local enforcement agencies and the TSA. According to the criminal complaint, the TSA screener used fraud or deceit to falsely imprison a woman going through security while stationed as a travel document checker at Los Angeles International Airport in June of 2019. The screener allegedly insisted that the woman passenger needed extra screening in an elevator, where he told the passenger to reveal her full breasts and to lift her pants and underwear. The victim in the case stated that she complied with the TSO's instructions out of fear that he would inappropriately touch her. This sort of horrible incident is why it is imperative that TSA retain its one-step removal process for employees who sully the integrity and honor of the TSA mission and put American travelers at risk. Under title 5 protections, this TSA screener that I just talked about could remain on the Federal Government's payroll for years before removal. That is wrong. Under this bill, TSA leadership would lose the flexibility to respond effectively to incidents such as the one I just described. The second reason I have concerns about this bill is just recently in 2019, the bipartisan Blue Ribbon Panel for the Transportation Security Administration on Human Capital Service Delivery specifically recommended that TSA not--I repeat not--switch to the general schedule, GS, system, calling it overly rigid and outdated. This panel is comprised of former officials from both Republican and Democratic administrations, and it is led by a Department of Homeland Security official from the Obama administration. They all pointed out that, under the current system and law, TSA can pay its employees more than they can make under title 5. It called on TSA to use the statutory flexibility Congress provided it to provide targeted pay increases, which I support. The Blue Ribbon Panel specifically recommended against the policies contained in H.R. 1140. Madam Speaker, I include in the Record the Blue Ribbon Panel report, titled ``Final Findings and Recommendations, Blue Ribbon Panel for the Transportation Security Administration.'' Final Findings and Recommendations Blue Ribbon Panel for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has faced numerous challenges with human capital policy, operations, and services to support mission requirements. The Agency determined it needed a third-party review to identify the underlying problems and recommend solutions. ICF was contracted to perform the work and convened a Blue-Ribbon Panel (the Panel) to review, analyze, and make recommendations for improvements. This Report documents the ``As Is'' state and recommendations for improvement. It is based on extensive interviews with Office of Human Capital (OHC) and other headquarters (HQ) stakeholders, interviews with airport leaders, and focus groups with the National Advisory Council (NAC) and Transportation Security Officers (TSOs). In addition, the Panel reviewed documents and data provided by TSA. ICF also analyzed TSA data to look for trends, corroboration, or potential root causes of identified issues. Because of the nature of the Panel's work--identifying problems and recommending solutions--this report documents difficult, long-standing challenges. The Panel also found areas of excellence. The TSO workforce, for example, demonstrates a remarkable level of dedication to their work. Even during the seven-week partial government shutdown, the vast majority of TSOs showed up and did their jobs. Some even participated in recruiting events to help TSA recruit new officers. Given the low pay and difficult working conditions that are inherent in TSA's screening work, the dedication these officers show is extraordinary. TSA's low ranking in the Partnership for Public Service's Best Places to Work in the Federal Government may lead some to conclude that there are no great leaders in TSA. That is not true. The Panel found there are airports with outstanding leaders whose work clearly demonstrates excellence. The challenge facing TSA is to take the lessons learned from those airports, feedback from employees and stakeholders, and Panel recommendations to transform human capital operations agency-wide. The Panel's key findings and recommendations are categorized into two major areas: Examining Human Capital Service Delivery and Supporting the Transportation Security Officer (TSO) Workforce. TSA human capital challenges include ineffective use of Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) flexibilities, an ill-defined service delivery model that relies on contractors with insufficient oversight and inadequate Human Capital Information Technology, poorly trained field staff, and a headquarters human capital office that lacks strategic focus and demonstrates insufficient teamwork. The policy and human capital operations challenges appear to result from deficiencies in the Office of Human Capital (OHC) and an inconsistent approach to field delivery of human capital services. The OHC suffers from a lack of teamwork and leadership challenges. Interviews with customers, stakeholders, and OHC staff make clear that human capital programs are not designed in the context of a cohesive strategy. OHC customers gave negative feedback on key programs, particularly human capital information technology systems, classification and position management, and hiring and pay, with a few bright spots in employee relations and training. OHC leaders consistently reported a culture where cooperation across OHC organizations was lacking and peer relationships are poor. TSA's Human Capital Office issues are significant, but the Panel has encountered other human capital organizations with such issues that have been transformed into effective units. With significant leadership support, the Panel believes the improvements in Human Capital Office leadership, work processes and policies required for TSA to have acceptable human capital services are achievable and has included recommendations for implementable and substantive changes that will provide a way forward for TSA. This report includes multiple recommendations. The most pressing among those recommendations are the need for more effective human capital leadership, a well thought out process for human capital service delivery, greater use of ATSA flexibilities, modern human capital technology, and standardizing and realigning the field human capital structure. Adoption of these recommendations, coupled with actions TSA is already taking to make improvements, should result in significantly improved human capital policies and services. The 2018 TSA Exit Survey report indicated employees were concerned about leadership issues, having experienced a ``lack of management skills,'' ``unfair practices (e.g., in performance appraisal, disciplinary actions, career advancement, etc.),'' ``unequal levels of respect,'' a ``hostile work environment,'' and ``inadequate communication with the workforce.'' TSOs perceive favoritism and express an inability to voice complaints about issues. The Panel believes the systemic problems with TSO pay may be a major contributor to some of those perceptions, due to the inability of TSOs (even those with exceptional performance ratings) to advance within their pay bands. Employee perceptions of leadership and organizational fairness may undermine their commitment to stay at TSA. Surveys and Focus Groups reveal that TSO pay is a key issue for the screening workforce, and a complex problem. These officers work long hours, have difficult working conditions, and are the backbone of the TSA mission. By some measures, TSO annual pay in some locations lags well behind industry counterparts. TSO perceptions regarding inequity in their pay are aggravated by the fact that their pay averages about one- third of that of TSA employees in Management, Administration and Professional (MAP) positions. The Panel recognizes that the nature of the TSO's work and that of employees in MAP positions means a disparity in pay is always going to exist. While there is no indication it was deliberate, TSA's use of its flexibilities has boosted MAP pay above government averages, with TSO pay remaining below those averages for comparable jobs. The disparity is driven in part by a pay and performance management process that provides little hope of movement, especially within the E-Band. A TSO at the bottom of the E- band, even with exceptional performance ratings year after year, would take more than 30 years to reach the top of the E-Band. This produces the effect that the E-Band pay range is illusory, with few TSOs in the middle or at the top of the band. TSO turnover is high in the first three years in comparison to other positions in TSA and in the federal workforce. TSO turnover is somewhat consistent with other low wage jobs in the private sector with comparable skill requirements for initial hiring, where annual turnover rates of 20 percent or more are common. That does not mean TSA should accept high turnover as a given. The cost of turnover (in terms of recruiting, hiring and training replacement officers and lower productivity of newer and less skilled officers) is high and the effect on the workforce which carries the screening workload in absence of a full TSO cohort is significant. If TSA can retain Officers beyond the first three years, turnover reduces to a much more manageable level. Turnover among longer term employees may be driven by the stability of employment and benefits TSOs receive. Although TSA operates outside of the general government pay and classification statutes found in Title 5 of the U.S. Code, the agency offers the same or better benefits as other agencies and provides greater job security than many private sector employers. As a result, if TSA can address pay, leadership, and turnover issues, the Panel believes the agency will see reduced costs, better morale, and a more stable workforce. This report includes recommendations to address TSO pay and advancement, and other critical issues for the TSO workforce. Although we often find that pay is a secondary issue for employees and other leadership issues tend to drive turnover, Focus Group findings highlight pay as the greatest issue driving turnover. The Panel acknowledges that TSA recognizes the pay issues and is seeking ways to address them. The scale of TSA operations means that even small across-the-board pay increases can cost tens of millions of dollars. The Panel recommends targeted pay raises, rather than across-the-board increases that might consume precious salary dollars to raise pay in locations where pay is not a problem. Although TSOs identify pay as the key driver of turnover, the Panel believes other problematic issues must be addressed as well. If pay problems are reduced, the other issues will continue to affect morale and turnover. Other key recommendations address the hiring process, which the Panel believes should be significantly modernized, and leader selection and development, which is essential to address many of the morale issues that are contributors to morale problems and turnover. The Panel also recommends changes to the promotion process and support for Information Technology improvements that can simultaneously increase operational efficiency and transparency, likely reducing concerns of favoritism expressed by the TSO workforce. One recommendation the Panel heard repeatedly from employees was moving TSA into the General Schedule (GS). The Panel does not agree. The General Schedule is a 70 year-old classification and compensation system from the last century and is the subject of countless studies and recommendations from good government organizations who consistently find it is too inflexible to meet the needs of the 21st century workforce. A better course of action is to use existing ATSA flexibility to improve the TSA pay system so that it operates at a level superior to the GS system. This Report provides a high-level roadmap for changes to TSA's Human Capital policies and processes, which if adopted, should have a significant positive impact on TSA workforce and mission operations.