01.27.2014
Most people probably have no idea that the military has a "Chief Historian" on the payroll at the Department of Defense. And until Thursday, few knew the details of what an internal report called "unprofessional conduct" in the office by current Pentagon historian Erin Mahan.
The 27 page redacted report, which blacked out even some of the individual conclusions of the internal investigation, found that Mahan misused government resources, engaged in improper conduct in the workplace and even promised the same Deputy Historian job to two subordinates.
The report also detailed how Mahan had subordinates basically care for a child - it wasn't clear from the report whether it was Mahan's kid - by keeping tabs on the child at the office and even picking up the child from a day care facility at the State Department.
One contractor testified that one time Mahan was basically out of her office for "most of the day" at meetings - and that workers simply kept the kid busy with a computer.
"I saw a DVD playing on her computer so I think you just hit play and that kept (redacted) entertained for a period of time," the worker testified.
One worker in the historian's office said he was "horrified" that Mahan would bring a child to the office, saying someone of her senior executive position should have known office babysitting "was not a proper use of contractors."
Mahan acknowledged asking employees to pick up the child from daycare - a trip that took around 15 minutes.
The report also detailed accusations of unprofessional conduct in the workplace, as Mahan was accused of speculating "about a subordinate's sexual orientation" and discussing "personal medical issues with subordinates" that resulted in awkward moments.
The report told of one witness who was asked point blank by Mahan whether a co-worker was homosexual.
"He explained he believed that Dr. Mahan lacks 'a filter in her mind that would block what would come out of her mouth.'"
Why the report on Mahan's office actions was suppressed for over a year - released only after Freedom of Information Act requests - and why it was so heavily redacted in certain sections was not readily apparent.
You can read the report online at the Pentagon Inspector General's website.
Was she fired for what was in the report? The answer seems to be no.
No comments:
Post a Comment