[Processed] Intrepid Talos - Appeal

[sdtwbaj]

Appealing Personnel: Intrepid Talos, Head of Security, NSS Aurora

Specific Incident: ((https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=90&t=10604))

Action taken as a result: Demotion to Warden for one week.

Action contested: Demotion to Warden for one week.

Reasoning for contest: The reasoning behind the action is inadequate. As it is understood, the demotion is in response to a failure to provide adequate paperwork, and to notify other Heads both about stocking the armory and 'allowing' Cargo to hack the autolathe. I will address these both seperately.

Paperwork - I am fully familiar with standard NanoTrasen paperwork and filing procedures, however the Quartermaster is considered to be the expert on supply procedure, and I am not, therefore I deferred to them as to how to proceed. I was given the paperwork that they deemed necessary, and filed it appropriately, on the assumption that they are aware of how to run their department and how to process transactions, of which I have no working experience or training.

Notifying other Heads - As the Head of Security, I am deferred complete responsibility and control over the security operations of the NSS Aurora, with supervision by the Captain as they deem necessary. One of these duties is ensuring my department is supplied and functional, a duty I was carrying out. As it is a standard part of my job, as well as I am a loyalty implanted official and both entrusted and required to maintain the safety and security of the station, I did not see it fitting to notify the Captain while performing a standard task, and they had not requested that I do so. As for granting 'permission' to hack the autolathe, I again defer to the Quartermaster on matters of supply. I intended to acquire ammunition, and noted that an unlocked autolathe may be more efficient, however I dd not tell them to hack the autolathe, nor did I file any papers to that effect, only papers to complete my order. I once again assumed that as the Quartermaster, they would be aware of the procedures and regulations surrounding their department, and the use of the autolathe. I am not responsible for their choice to neglect procedure and their Head of Staff to fulfill my order--I am not an expert at Cargo or Supply procedures, they are, or should be.

---

---

Additional notes: (If there are none simply leave it blank)

[Synnono]

TO: Intrepid Talos, Warden, NSS Aurora

FROM: Xiuying Tan, CCIA Appeals Processing Office, NTCC Odin

SUBJECT: RE: Incident Report

--------------------

BODY:

Your appeal for the following incident is currently being reviewed:

Case ID: 20180313 EShoshanna_ITalos

Date Actioned: 3.30.2460

Handling Agent: Evelynn Chaullard

If necessary, you will be contacted by the office of the CCIA Bureau Supervisor to discuss the resolution applied to this incident.

You remain obligated to comply with previous CCIA decisions while this appeal is being processed.

--------------------

DTG: 02-12:04-TAU CETI STANDARD-04-2060

SIGN: Tan

[Synnono]

TO: Intrepid Talos, Warden, NSS Aurora

FROM: Whitney Foster-Liang, CCIA Bureau Supervisor, Mendell City HQ Bldg.

SUBJECT: 20180313 EShoshanna_ITalos Appeal

--------------------

BODY:

3 April, 2460

Warden Intrepid Talos,

After a review of the facts of the relevant shift, as determined by both the previous investigation and independent review, this office does not find fault with the decision of Agent Chaullard.

As a member of NanoTrasen's command staff, you are held to the highest standards of professionalism, conduct, and compliance. Willful ignorance of a given process - even that not of your own department - does not excuse you from recognizing, understanding, and complying with that process. Managers in security are held accountable to a greater degree in this regard, as they are expected to recognize and enforce regulations across all internal departments as appropriate.

"Expressing an interest" in stockpiling ballistic ammunition when there was no documented need, no communication with your colleagues, and no authorization (either given by you to the crew, or given to you by the Captain), does not constitute carrying out your expected duties as the head of the Security department. Because your facility was stocked with all of the security equipment it requires for normal operations, and because procurement of additional ammunition would require either funds from the station's accounts, or materials from its processing stockpiles, we find your requisition of additional ammunition wasteful, and an unnecessary expense. There is no data to suggest that this extra ammunition would be required for the "safety and security" of your facility under the conditions of the shift, and you did not indicate your plans to carry out nonstandard training with your supervisor.

Additionally, your recommendation to the supply department to override its autolathe's safety protocols illustrates a disappointing lack of concern for the well being of your facility's cargo technicians, the requirements to modify your facility, and the expenditure of its resources. These lapses of good judgement are exacerbated by your synthetic nature, as they may indicate a persistent logical fault rather than a single incident of neglect. You are reminded of the Company's cautious stance on synthetic managers, and are encouraged not to jeopardize your position further in the future.

Finally, due to the short duration of the administrative demotion, we find no compelling reason in this appeal to shorten or lift it. A mandatory examination of your positronic processing unit has been appended to your next scheduled maintenance cycle, to be completed prior to your next shift as Head of Security.

Further appeals concerning this resolution will not be considered.

 

Whitney Foster-Liang, JD-Ph.D

Central Command Internal Affairs Bureau Supervisor, Tau Ceti Operations

NanoTrasen Corporation

--------------------

DTG: 03-16:30:19-TAU CETI STANDARD-04-2060

SIGN: W. F.-L.