Background check, mate
Agents of all sorts interview me a lot for security clearances. One of my students, co-workers, former employees, neighbors or acquaintances seems always to be trying to get one. This is one of several uncompensated tasks (letters of recommendation, job referrals, career advice, informational interviews, academic counseling) that take up far more time than I every imagined.
But I have never turned away one of the agents. What they are doing is necessary: how will these folks ever get a government job, or the government determine that they are suitable, without my responding to the usual litany of questions?
They might go something like this in the case of a fictitious Alexis Aaron, a stand-in for you know who:
Q: When and where did you meet Alexis Aaron?
A: Sometime early in my years at US Institute of Peace.
Q: When did she work there?
A: I don’t really remember. You have to check with their personnel office. I find it hard to remember my own career, much less someone else’s.
Q: When was the last time you were in touch with her?
A: I had an email a few months ago. She asked for a letter of recommendation.
Q: Did you provide it?
A: No.
Q: Would you hire her again?
A: Absolutely not. She had eight disciplinary notices in just a few years.
Q: What was the problem?
A: I don’t really know. But she was unreliable and had several run-ins with the police because of misuse of firearms.
Q: Would you entrust her with national security information?
A: Are you joking?
Q: Why not?
A: She hears voices and and can’t seem to hold down a job.
Q: Does she abuse drugs or alcohol?
A: I don’t know, but hearing voices is not normal.
Q: Does she have any financial vulnerabilities?
A: I don’t know but it would not surprise me.
The point is this: even though they are not asked to uncover potential mass murderers, the normal questions to supervisors in doing a background check for a security clearance would easily turn up things that would prevent Alexis Aaron from getting or keeping a clearance. I’ve never actually had occasion to answer questions this way, or do more than hesitate slightly in responding, but I would certainly speak up if the occasion arose. Most of the people I know would too. It would be irresponsible to do anything else.
The agents who do these interviews are in my experience assiduous. They don’t like to do it over the phone, though I suspect that may be due to the greater time required to come do it in person. A lot of the interviewers are contract help to the agencies and presumably benefit from billing an hour rather than 10 minutes for an interview. They often read the questions from a notebook and take what appear to be copious notes. I am never the only one interviewed. I have the impression they often do half a dozen or more for a single person.
So if Aaron Alexis got a clearance, or had one renewed, since his all too apparent problems started someone wasn’t doing things right. His supervisors and coworkers should also have noticed problems. His financial complaints in particular merited attention. Secretary Hagel is right to order a review. I’d suggest particular focus on contractors, since they have powerful incentives to cut corners.
But please, please don’t make this mean longer or more frequent interviews with me!
RSS - Posts
