AFGE Local 2113 -- CAC Survey

On 22 January 2002, the survey below was distributed by email to the bargaining unit (BU). Votes were taken on each of three subjects. On average, 22% of the BU responded on each subject. Results are tallied below and followed by the survey.
Don't Track	166 = 87% of those voting on tracking
Track me	 15 =  8% of those voting on tracking
Track-NoOpinion	 10 =  5% of those voting on tracking
Total           191 = 25% of BU

ID Concern	137 = 84% of those voting on ID
ID-NotConcerned	 23 = 14% of those voting on ID
ID-NoOpinion	  4 =  2% of those voting on ID
Total           164 = 21% of BU

Med Control	152 = 90% of those voting on control of medical information
Med-NoControl	 12 =  7% of those voting on control of medical information
Med-NoOpinion	  5 =  3% of those voting on control of medical information
Total           169 = 22% of BU

(Total in barganing unit (as of 03 Jan 2002) = 777)

Many of you have already obtained a new CAC (Common Access Card) ID badge. This badge has been loosely but incorrectly referred to as a "SmartCard" (SmartCard is a different card and a different program. The new ID badges that Security has been issuing at NAWCTSD in recent months are CACs.).

While the CAC (Common Access Card) ID badges will bring us several new capabilities, Local 2113 has requested Impact and Implementation (I&I) bargaining to address certain issues. Before we conduct these negotiations, though, we need to know any additional concerns or issues which you might have (and whether anybody cares). Therefore, we solicit your responses to this survey.

In this survey, we are soliciting votes on each of three subjects. You can vote as many times as you want to by reopening the message and pressing the different voting tabs, but if you cast the same vote more than once, duplicates votes from the same person on the same tab will be discarded. Contradictory votes from the same person within the same category will be counted but will tend to cancel each other out.

Each time you vote, you will be provided with an opportunity to attach comments. In your comments, please include your suggestions as to what questions we should ask and what other areas, if any, we should investigate before and when negotiating use of this Card. If you would like to help with the negotiation, please also indicate that. (You must be a member of Local 2113 in order to serve on a negotiation team. Training is available for members who wish to get involved with negotiations.)

If you don't have voting tabs at the top, you may vote by replying and inserting the appropriate words (in boldface: below) at the beginning of the subject line. If you vote this way, please clear this original message from the body of your reply and include only your additional comments in the Reply body. This will aid in sorting replies and compiling results.

Now, here are the issues we have identified:

In informal discussion, Steve Owens has indicated that proximity detection of the CAC is not currently implemented but is anticipated in the future. It is our current understanding that proximity detection including recognition of identity will not be possible with the current CAC but that it is an option which is, has, or may be considered for future ID cards.

Proximity detection could provide benefits such as automatically logging you in/out of the building as you enter or leave through a door equipped with such a detector. Technology also exists by which an ID badge (not necessarily the CAC) can be automatically located. This sort of technology is useful for quickly locating personnel, when they are urgently needed, or for locating survivors or bodies (or badges) in the event of a building fire, bombing, or other such calamity in order to identify who is still in the building and exactly where they are.

Such technology could also be put to use to automatically charge leave when a person is not present in the building during core hours, or to track employee movements and build databases tallying how much time is spent at different places. In the case of badges which are locatable by satellite, the technology could also track the badges' movements during off-duty hours. Local 2113 is not currently aware of any plans to implement such tracking, but with detectors and badges which support such technology, it would be possible. We feel that such tracking would be an inappropriate invasion of personal privacy and could create a hostile "Big Brother is Watching" work atmosphere which in turn would lead to a reduction of morale and productivity as employees would begin spending more time documenting their movements and reasons for them. If such a system was used for timekeeping or to support disciplinary measures, considerable confusion could ensue from employees being out of the building for building evacuations or official offsite meetings, offsite meetings with contractors, or other official offsite business. We therefore feel that tracking of employee movements is not in the best interests of the employees or employer, and we wish to ensure, by negotiation and contract, that employee tracking will not be implemented.

How do you feel on this matter? Please vote by pressing one of the voting tabs above according to the following tab definitions:

TRACK ME: I think employee tracking is a good idea.

DON'T TRACK: I prefer not to be tracked, or I don't care whether I am tracked, but I don't think tracking is a good idea.

TRACK-NO OPINION: I have no opinion on this issue, but I would like to file the following comments and/or suggest the following inquiries. (If you have no comments, you can also cast a don't-care vote by voting this tab and including no comments.)


If someone else has possession of your Card, will it be possible for them to masquerade as you? Will they be able to login to your LAN account, send email broadcasts as if they were you, and digitally sign items with your digital signature? We don't know the answers to these questions yet. We expect that confirmation of your identify will also include a password, PIN, or fingerprint such that mere possession of the Card will not be sufficient for a masquerade. However, if the additional required information is only a 6-digit PIN, then we still have concern for persons who have picked easily-guessed PINs, such as their birth dates, or last 6 digits of their SSN's. How easy will it be for an employee to change his PIN? If the employee logs on to his LAN account and then walks away from his desk, then could someone else take over the station and masquerade as that person (as is possible now before a password-protected screensaver has kicked in)?

If a masquerade is successful, then what is the liability of the person to whom the card was issued? Can a masquerador commit the issuee to responsibility for unauthorized obligations? Could an employee be disciplined for unauthorized or inappropriate use of the Card by a masquerador as if he had actually done the unauthorized acts himself? Will digital signatures and all actions taken from within a given LAN account be construed as prima facia evidence that they were signed or done by the issuee without consideration of the possibility of a masquerade?

If an employee loses his card or leaves it at home, will he be able to do any work which requires access to a LAN computer?

All these questions remain to be answered, and we ask that you submit any further questions or concerns which you may have which are not already included here but you feel should be addressed. Please indicate whether or not your share our concern and add any additional questions or comments by voting as follows:

ID-CONCERN: I share the concern over the possibility of identity theft, OR though I am not concerned for myself, I agree that this is a reasonable concern and that it should be negotiated.

ID-NOT CONCERNED: I am not concerned about the risk of identify theft, AND I do not feel that such concern is reasonable or warrants further investigation or negotiation.

ID-NO OPINION: I have no opinion as to whether the risk of ID theft is real or should be a concern, but I would like to make the following comments and/or suggest the following inquiries on this matter.


We have not yet discussed or been briefed on what, if any personal medical information might be stored on the Card. Timely availability of certain medical information could be critical in the event of a medical emergency. However, it is understandable that some persons may prefer not to have some medical information included on their CAC available to anyone with the capability of reading it. For example, persons with certain medical conditions may prefer to keep their status confidential out of concern for possible discrimination without regard to whether or not such discrimination would be lawful. Who will be able to read the medical information? Will anyone who can read any of the information which is stored on the Card be able to read all information which is stored on it? How do you feel on this issue? Please vote as follows:

MED-CONTROL: I would like to have control over what medical information is included on my Card, OR, regardless of what information is on my card, I think each person should be allowed to control what medical information is included on his/her card.

MED-NO CONTROL: I don't care what medical information is included on my card or who has access to it, and I don't think anyone should have any control over what medical information is included on his/her Card. I don't think this concern is important enough to warrant further investigation or negotiation.

MED-NO OPINION: I have no opinion on this issue, but I would like to make the following comments and/or suggest the following inquiries concerning this matter.


Thank you for your thoughts and opinions. De-identified results will be provided to the CAC negotiating team and will be posted to within 2 to 4 weeks.

AFGE Local 2113 We need your input in order to serve you better.
HOME - Benefits - Accomplishments - Surveys - Issues - LMA - News - Stewards - How to Join - Links - HOME -
This page was last updated on February 12, 2002