Cory Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Press release from the National Weather Service Employees Organization: President Obama’s 2013 Budget Plan Cuts Crucial Positions at Weather Forecast Offices, Jeopardizing the Lifesaving Mission of the National Weather Service (February 13, 2012) Less than nine months after commenting that Republican-led budget cuts “might compromise the National Weather Service,” the President’s 2013 budget proposal calls for damaging cuts to the NWS, including cuts to positions critical to emergency responses at weather forecast offices (WFO). The cuts would decrease the number of information technology officers at weather forecast offices across the nation. Currently, each WFO is staffed with one local programmer/IT specialist (ITO) who is critical to NWS operations. During an emergency response, ITOs are crucial to the WFO’s local ability to innovate immediate lifesaving products and services. Because ITOs are meteorologists with information technology skills, they are frequently used to cover shifts and assist WFOs during severe weather, in addition to their regular duties. Most WFOs are only fair weather staffed, meaning there are not enough meteorologists to cover shifts during severe weather outbreaks. The NWS service assessments on the historic 2011 tornados and the 2010 Nashville flood event commended offices for having ITOs on station during the event to help with weather and IT issues. “The ITO position is crucial to the lifesaving work of weather forecast offices,” said NWSEO President Dan Sobien. “These are the guys who ensure our technology is working and our forecasts are accurate. Without an ITO on site, responses will be slower and lives will be lost during extreme weather events. This is an alarming move backwards when it comes to protecting the public.” Additional 2013 budget cuts propose eliminating research on improving hurricane intensity forecasts and the air quality forecasts. “Seriously, with all of the money government wastes, are we going to cut the people who are integral to the tornado warning process?” asked Sobien. “I think if the federal government can afford $39 million for the Blue Angels and $325 million for marching bands, it can afford $15 million to provide its citizens warnings of severe weather. It may not be this year or next, but if these cuts go through, the nation will see another Katrina-like event, and it could have been entirely preventable.” The President’s FY 2013 budget calls for reduction of $39 million in funding for NWS operations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hckyplayer8 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Garbage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cory Posted February 13, 2012 Author Share Posted February 13, 2012 The ITOs at the WFOs are pretty much like Star Trek's Scotty. Most employees probably know an ITO who runs around fixing one problem after another to keep things running smoothly to make sure everyone else can do their jobs properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitchel Volk Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Let.s hope it is nothing like Reagon's cuts in 1981. They devastated our industry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
binovc Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Mabe we could fund a few less solar panels and keep some people on the job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtticaFanatica Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Maybe they can just put a "climate change" in front of their job description, that should keep them around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 This is not good news at all, ITOs are very important for a weather service office and for the entire County Warning Area. Poorly thought out cut that will not save a whole lot of money while compromising safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 If you guys are going to politicize this-- which I sense you are by bringing up highly-politicized topics like climate change and solar panels-- you have the GOP to blame. Obama has to play this stupid game in order to show that he's "fiscally responsible"-- so that rabid right-wingers who want to slash the government to nothing will be satiated. Anyhoo... We can all agree that the proposed cuts are ridiculous and really show how messed up this country's spending priorities are. This is a classic example of "pennywise, pound-foolish". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radarman Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Anyhoo... We can all agree that the proposed cuts are ridiculous and really show how messed up this country's spending priorities are. The deficit is out of control. The politicians can choose to be ostriches with their heads in the sand until we become insolvent or make cuts that are going to be painful... really, really painful. But that said, I totally agree with you that the spending priorities are messed up. Some things lend themselves to the realm of the federal govt. much more than others and there's no doubt that the NWS is one of them. Cutting these IT/met hybrid positions all the while emphasizing data assimilation, sensor fusion, and modeling is going to bite them at the worst possible times. It's when all hell is breaking loose that bandwidth and CPU loads get maxed out as it is; precisely when you need that staff. Add new govt. regs WRT security... Without venturing too far into PR, I hope our 'leaders' strongly reflect on the criteria of picking federal projects based on their inability to be done at the local level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 The deficit is out of control. The politicians can choose to be ostriches with their heads in the sand until we become insolvent or make cuts that are going to be painful... really, really painful. But that said, I totally agree with you that the spending priorities are messed up. Some things lend themselves to the realm of the federal govt. much more than others and there's no doubt that the NWS is one of them. Cutting these IT/met hybrid positions all the while emphasizing data assimilation, sensor fusion, and modeling is going to bite them at the worst possible times. It's when all hell is breaking loose that bandwidth and CPU loads get maxed out as it is; precisely when you need that staff. Add new govt. regs WRT security... Without venturing too far into PR, I hope our 'leaders' strongly reflect on the criteria of picking federal projects based on their inability to be done at the local level. Dude, I agree 100% that the deficit is out of control. I think we all agree about that. The disagreements arise over how to resolve it. Anyhoo, we also all agree that these cuts would be dumb. So there's lots we can all agree on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtlehurricane Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 If you guys are going to politicize this-- which I sense you are by bringing up highly-politicized topics like climate change and solar panels-- you have the GOP to blame. Obama has to play this stupid game in order to show that he's "fiscally responsible"-- so that rabid right-wingers who want to slash the government to nothing will be satiated. Anyhoo... We can all agree that the proposed cuts are ridiculous and really show how messed up this country's spending priorities are. This is a classic example of "pennywise, pound-foolish". Call me crazy, but if Obama put something in his budget he is responsible for it. Of course, he doesn't make his own budget anyways, just the mindless, useless drones at the OMB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Call me crazy, but if Obama put something in his budget he is responsible for it. Of course, he doesn't make his own budget anyways, just the mindless, useless drones at the OMB. Don't get me wrong, I'll be furious with him if he pushes this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radarman Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Dude, I agree 100% that the deficit is out of control. I think we all agree about that. The disagreements arise over how to resolve it. Anyhoo, we also all agree that these cuts would be dumb. So there's lots we can all agree on here. Yup, I wasn't trying to be argumentative. I think we're on the same side here. With regards to this specifically: >>you have the GOP to blame. Obama has to play this stupid game in order to show that he's "fiscally responsible"-- so that rabid right-wingers who want to slash the government to nothing will be satiated. He's got to know that the people who you speak of will never be satiated, and there's really no point trying to appease them, especially in his second term. But fiscal responsibility is something he should strive for on his own... not saying burn the house down, just spend on what needs to be spent on and cut what's cuttable. The NWS to me seems like an essential function of govt... a good thing to keep if/when the paring down happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneJosh Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Yup, I wasn't trying to be argumentative. I think we're on the same side here. With regards to this specifically: >>you have the GOP to blame. Obama has to play this stupid game in order to show that he's "fiscally responsible"-- so that rabid right-wingers who want to slash the government to nothing will be satiated. He's got to know that the people who you speak of will never be satiated, and there's really no point trying to appease them, especially in his second term. But fiscal responsibility is something he should strive for on his own... not saying burn the house down, just spend on what needs to be spent on and cut what's cuttable. The NWS to me seems like an essential function of govt... a good thing to keep if/when the paring down happens. Agreed on all points. And I didn't think you were being argumentative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isohume Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 I'll believe this when I see it. Anyway, cutting 98 WFO ITOs and creating 24 regional ITOs? The regions need to be bigger? lol. How'd you like to be a regional ITO, when on any given day a typical WFO ITO has a crapload of varying tasks on their desks? Nice to see Jack Hayes (NWS head) has our back and little thought was given in this proposed cut. Another case of the NWS saying yes before they really know what they are saying yes to. So, the DOC gets a 5% increase in their 2013 budget, while the NWS needs to take ~4% cut? And in the IT department? If you don't go after the fat regions, I'd say look hard at the SOOs. We calculated last night that the elimination of the outdated SOO position would free up about $12-$15 million annually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainshadow Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 I'll believe this when I see it. Anyway, cutting 98 WFO ITOs and creating 24 regional ITOs? The regions need to be bigger? lol. How'd you like to be a regional ITO, when on any given day a typical WFO ITO has a crapload of varying tasks on their desks? Nice to see Jack Hayes (NWS head) has our back and little thought was given in this proposed cut. Another case of the NWS saying yes before they really know what they are saying yes to. So, the DOC gets a 5% increase in their 2013 budget, while the NWS needs to take ~4% cut? And in the IT department? If you don't go after the fat regions, I'd say look hard at the SOOs. We calculated last night that the elimination of the outdated SOO position would free up about $12-$15 million annually. That's the part that got me. I thought he wanted to eliminate the DOC and put us in the DOI? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isohume Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 That's the part that got me. I thought he wanted to eliminate the DOC and put us in the DOI? Yeah the whole thing is weird. I say combine all the science agencies like geology, space, ocean. weather, etc into a new department. The Department of Science. A department which would make sense and would look after their specific needs. Then combine the DOC and DOT with the DOI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 I'll believe this when I see it. Anyway, cutting 98 WFO ITOs and creating 24 regional ITOs? The regions need to be bigger? lol. How'd you like to be a regional ITO, when on any given day a typical WFO ITO has a crapload of varying tasks on their desks? Nice to see Jack Hayes (NWS head) has our back and little thought was given in this proposed cut. Another case of the NWS saying yes before they really know what they are saying yes to. So, the DOC gets a 5% increase in their 2013 budget, while the NWS needs to take ~4% cut? And in the IT department? If you don't go after the fat regions, I'd say look hard at the SOOs. We calculated last night that the elimination of the outdated SOO position would free up about $12-$15 million annually. That's the part that got me. I thought he wanted to eliminate the DOC and put us in the DOI? The word on the street is ITO's and OPL's will be slowly phased out, and they make the cause for ITO's because the NWS plans on having all data "on the cloud", so in theory, there won't be a need for ITO's in every office. As for OPLs, who knows, with what they have been doing with the COOP program, perhaps it may be true. That position was already downgraded from the DAPM position. As for our office, the ITO is irreplaceable. I don't know...some of the word on the street by the doomsday scenarios was 40% cuts...so being that this is a proposed 4-5% cut, I don't see the need for all the worrying by some people. That said, it is obvious the NWS is given the least priority here since every other department saw budget increases in NOAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MN Transplant Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Call me crazy, but if Obama put something in his budget he is responsible for it. Of course, he doesn't make his own budget anyways, just the mindless, useless drones at the OMB. Actually, it probably came from Commerce and NOAA itself. OMB gave Commerce a target to ask for, they put together a budget, and then OMB can "suggest" changes. Unless you are in the budget negotiations, you don't know the details about who asked for what, but I'm guessing it wasn't the "mindless, useless drones" at OMB who made this call. Remember, the note in the OP comes from the union, not NOAA/Commerce itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 The biggest shocker in all of this was the loss of lightning data. That is something that is crucial for operations. Hopefully that comes back in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MN Transplant Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 The word on the street is ITO's and OPL's will be slowly phased out, and they make the cause for ITO's because the NWS plans on having all data "on the cloud", so in theory, there won't be a need for ITO's in every office. As for OPLs, who knows, with what they have been doing with the COOP program, perhaps it may be true. That position was already downgraded from the DAPM position. As for our office, the ITO is irreplaceable. I don't know...some of the word on the street by the doomsday scenarios was 40% cuts...so being that this is a proposed 4-5% cut, I don't see the need for all the worrying by some people. That said, it is obvious the NWS is given the least priority here since every other department saw budget increases in NOAA. Which is also very likely a response to FY12 when the NWS got a decent increase while others (like OAR) got hit hard. Here's FY11 to FY13 National Ocean Service: $467M to $458M National Marine Fisheries: $856M to $801M Oceanic and Atmospheric Research: $418M to $403M NWS: $871M to $872M National Environmental Satellite Service: $184M to $191M Program Support: $453M to $433M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isohume Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 The word on the street is ITO's and OPL's will be slowly phased out, and they make the cause for ITO's because the NWS plans on having all data "on the cloud", so in theory, there won't be a need for ITO's in every office. As for OPLs, who knows, with what they have been doing with the COOP program, perhaps it may be true. That position was already downgraded from the DAPM position. That's a shallow theory. On any given day our ITO is helping to troubleshoot a myriad of issues specific to the office systems or creating software solns on the fly. Not every office has a tech enlightened ESA or focal point. I just don't see the needed support coming from a regional ITO. As for our office, the ITO is irreplaceable. I don't know...some of the word on the street by the doomsday scenarios was 40% cuts...so being that this is a proposed 4-5% cut, I don't see the need for all the worrying by some people. That said, it is obvious the NWS is given the least priority here since every other department saw budget increases in NOAA. Huh? I never heard that. A 40% cut would make us close our doors. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 That's a shallow theory. On any given day our ITO is helping to troubleshoot a myriad of issues specific to the office systems or creating software solns on the fly. Not every office has an tech enlightened ESA or focal point. I just don't see the needed support coming from a regional ITO. Huh? I never heard that. A 40% cut would make us close our doors. lol Yes I know, but it is all dependent on having the data "on the cloud". Supposedly this will be tested by next year at the Super Bowl of all places. In that scenario we wouldn't even be running our own computers/workstations, but we would just be accessing it with slimline systems that are easily and cheaply replaceable. Like I said, our ITO is amazing, and the office wouldn't run without him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Which is also very likely a response to FY12 when the NWS got a decent increase while others (like OAR) got hit hard. Here's FY11 to FY13 National Ocean Service: $467M to $458M National Marine Fisheries: $856M to $801M Oceanic and Atmospheric Research: $418M to $403M NWS: $871M to $872M National Environmental Satellite Service: $184M to $191M Program Support: $453M to $433M Quite honestly, the NWS can come close to these goals by going paperless on a lot of things. As an organization we waste a ton of paper for legacy things that can be electronically stored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isohume Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Yes I know, but it is all dependent on having the data "on the cloud". In that scenario we wouldn't even be running our own computers/workstations, but we would just be accessing it with slimline systems that are easily and cheaply replaceable. Like I said, our ITO is amazing, and the office wouldn't run without him. Not everything can be put on a "cloud". There are things our ITO does outside of systems maintenance or networking. Like designing office specific scripts, supporting research projects, aiding/teaching others in scripting/networking for their projects or professional development, and helping out the ESA when they get in a manpower jam. I'm with you, I couldn't see ops run without our ITO on station. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayBreeze Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 get rid of some MICs and SOOs. i dunno. if you are going to cut, start wiith the big meat first. for dinky offices in the south and midwest to be staffed at the same level as some of the northeast mega centers has never made sense to me. if we cant increase staff at place like sterling, mt holly and taunton, lower the levels at some of the tiny offices. the ITO would not be a good place to start. lots of bang for the buck there. can fill in on shifts. takes care of the equipment software...a tough job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 I don't think it belongs in PR either. These proposed cuts are only the beginning and we have many people on here in the NWS and many that want to get into it, and it may affect them as well (especially if an internal-only hiring/attrition thing starts). We talk about volcanoes, the sun, and tsunamis on the weather side, so I don't see why an NWS discussion shouldn't also be there. Sadly money is money...if NOAA decides to allocate less to us this year...not much we can do. Hopefully they don't keep cutting out every budget year. As MNTransplant said OAR saw cuts the previous go around, one can only hope this is not a new yearly thing. It certainly forces one to wonder why, after a budget increase to NOAA overall, that they chose to actually cut the NWS budget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 get rid of some MICs and SOOs. i dunno. if you are going to cut, start wiith the big meat first. for dinky offices in the south and midwest to be staffed at the same level as some of the northeast mega centers has never made sense to me. if we cant increase staff at place like sterling, mt holly and taunton, lower the levels at some of the tiny offices. the ITO would not be a good place to start. lots of bang for the buck there. can fill in on shifts. takes care of the equipment software...a tough job. As much as I think we need the amount of offices we have, you are right on. In difficult budget times, it is hard to argue that a tiny office in the middle of the plains is as important as Boulder, NYC, Boston, etc. I am not necessarily looking to set up shop in a small office in the future for this various reason as this is a legit worry. Should the NWS choose to relocate offices, it will be the tiny ones that will go, obviously. I don't think we are close to that happening, however. Any talk of significant layoffs and/or office closures, at this juncture, doesn't seem to have any factual support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wxmx Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Yes I know, but it is all dependent on having the data "on the cloud". Supposedly this will be tested by next year at the Super Bowl of all places. In that scenario we wouldn't even be running our own computers/workstations, but we would just be accessing it with slimline systems that are easily and cheaply replaceable. Like I said, our ITO is amazing, and the office wouldn't run without him. I was wondering when would that be implemented...huge cut on expenses, though being government, I'm not sure how easy would it be to sort all kinds of security and bureaucratic issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeauDodson Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Exactly what tiny offices should be eliminated? The Paducah forecast office covers a large area and is short staffed as it is. They do good to keep up with everything during severe weather events. We live in one of the most disaster prone states in the nation. St Louis, MO is another busy office - Springfield, MO is another busy office. These small offices cover large areas where severe weather is a fact of life - regularly. Although there may be large population centers in the northeast - these areas don't have nearly as much severe weather and active weather as other areas. Granted they have big snow events and some flooding episodes. Hope some of you don't think the areas with the most severe weather should see cuts. These are the areas where the most lives are lost because of damaging weather events. The need for these offices is great. Just wait until computers start issuing the warnings. That day is coming. Super regional offices will also be a fact - just a matter of when. Extreme and severe budget cuts in the years ahead. You can't be 15-16-17-18 and eventually 20 trillion dollars in debt and not have severe and painful cuts. Hopefully we can get all the radars upgraded - not to mentioned phased array - and new satellites. Our local office is already experiencing cuts - some of the things they are going to have to stop doing are Cut down on travel May lose their newspaper clipping services - that is used to collect informationn on storm damage Spotter classes are being cut down in number Moving to webinars for classes Among others Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.