The Peter Principle, as I’ve come to understand it, is the idea that people who’ve been successful in lower levels of business will often get promotions. This cycle continues until that person reaches the pinnacle of their capabilities, and at which point they cease to be effective. Essentially, they “Peter” out. Many of us have had the unfortunate experience of being a subordinate to someone like this.
In education, my former profession, it quickly becomes apparent that many teachers have been placed in classrooms because of their vast knowledge of a subject, but under the false assumption that knowledge equals the ability to teach. Unfortunately, the two don’t always go hand-in-hand. I was never very good at math until I had a professor that was gifted at explaining things in simple terms and made the process easy to understand.
Time has proven that there is a limit to people’s abilities. I’ll spare you the blatant example of this in the world of politics. While much of these lessons and principles are easy to see and a person’s ability, or lack thereof, is easily determined by those with some level of common sense, the BOP (Bureau of Prisons) seems determined to rewrite the playbook, as it were, and has thrown time-tested business practices to the wind. All too often race, or gender, play a much more important role in promotions, and unkindness and ambiguity toward inmates seem to be a necessary character quality in the staff they hire and promote within. Those that are kind to inmates often find themselves ostracized by their colleagues until they conform to the accepted standard or quit. It’s the nastiest of the bunch that seem to get promoted most often.
I’ve spent the last nine years of my de facto life sentence at the U.S. Penitentiary in Tucson, and I’ve witnessed a lot of promotions. Let me share three of them with you.
A current associate warden (A.W.) who climbed the ranks started out as one of the best counselors on the compound. She was, by comparison, doing her job very well, and developed the reputation as someone who could be counted on for help when needed. She eventually reached the level of a unit manager, and her attitude rapidly changed. Her hatred of inmates became apparent almost overnight. Everyone, for the most part, was treated with disdain. One conversation I had with her involved a disciplinary report in which I was punished for a minor rule infraction. It was a misunderstanding, and I hadn’t broken any rules at all. I thought she of all people would be helpful to me in clearing the matter up and I approached her with my concerns. The conversation went something like this:
Unit Manager (U/M): “What’s up?”
Inmate (I/M): “I received an incident report, but there’s been a misunderstanding. The accusation is false, and I have paperwork that will help clear this up if I’m given the chance to do so. So far nobody has been willing to help me.”
U/M: “So what do you want me to do about it?”
I/M: “Well, policy states that when individuals are blocked or removed from my contact list that the I/M is to be provided with a copy of this form, (showed her the form number on the printed copy of the policy in my hand), with reasons for the removal. I’d like to have a copy of that form. I never received it.”
U/M: “I’ll look it up. Get back with me tomorrow.”
(The next day I approached her again.)
I/M: “Good morning. Were you able to find the form I requested?”
U/M: “No. That’s not the form that was used.”
I/M: “I don’t understand.”
U/M: “Well, there was a memo issued and that’s all.”
I/M: “Okay. May I have a copy of the memo then?”
U/M: “No. It contains sensitive information.”
I/M: “It’s about me. How is that sensitive? And policy clearly states that I’m entitled to a copy of the reasons for removing my contacts.”
U/M: “Well, too bad. You want a copy of it then you can request it through FOIA. (The Freedom of Information Act – a long process if requesting and waiting for documents by mail, and which all too often is ignored for inmate requests.)
I/M: “Ms._____, with all due respect, you’d never accept this kind of treatment from someone if the shoe was on the other foot.”
U/M: “But it’s not, and that’s how it’s going to be. I’m a free person and you’re a ward. You want it FOIA it!”
I requested to “memo” by FOIA in April of 2023, and sent an inquiry as to the delay in April of 2024. I’m still waiting for the form, and my contacts are still blocked from communication. The unit manager is now an associate warden (AW).
Another incident occurred years ago. I received a form from the mail room stating that pictures sent to me had been rejected because the person in the photo did not appear to realize the photo was being taken. This staff member referred the photos to an in-house investigator because the situation “appeared to be stalking.”
I knew that the pictures were coming and knew it was a photo of a family member of mine. The person sending them told me they were coming. So, I did the only thing I could do, I filed an Administration Remedy (grievance process) and after nearly eight months I won the right to receive the photos, a rare occurrence. Fast forward to the present (about 8 years later) and the same staff member who blocked my pictures is now in charge of the mailroom. Letters, photos, books, calendars, magazines, legal mail, and other items frequently disappear without explanation. I only know they’re missing when mentioned in phone calls by the individuals sending them. They simply cease to exist or are returned to the sender without explanation. The mailroom can’t seem to explain why.
A third staff member entered the BOP as a secretary. She was recently promoted to be the case manager in my unit. Her responsibilities are now numerous and can have a lasting impact on the lives of those on her caseload. I was her first “team” review, (6-month review). A unit team consists of four people. The highest position is the unit manager. Under that is the case manager. Then comes the counselor and finally the secretary. A case manager has a lot of power, and I quickly learned that mine was in over her head. She’d raised my custody level points by two just because “I don’t really know you that well yet.” The points affect an inmate’s ability to transfer to a lower security and safer institution in the BOP. I’ve been at this institution eight years longer than she has, and she’s already making decisions that impact my safety and quality of life, and indiscriminately so. This is now the second time a new case manager has done this to me. After a few minutes in our meeting a more seasoned case manager entered her office, (her trainer I assumed), and I finished my time with him answering my questions. To my chagrin, her decisions were final.
I’m one inmate and I have a multitude of stories just like these that I could tell. All of us have them. Competence and efficiency don’t seem to be required prerequisites for staff promotions in the BOP. Accountability for staff actions and frequent failures are nil. At worst, a serious problem with staff might result in mine or their transfer to another area or a new facility where they go on to repeat the same abuses elsewhere. It’s rare to hear of a staff member losing their job.
I thank God that I’m fairly healthy and haven’t had to deal too extensively with medical staff. The horror stories involving that department are numerous and inhumane.
The interview process for BOP staff promotions is a mystery. I can only imagine what it entails, or the numerous red flags that must be ignored. One thing is certain, Peter is not determining the outcome of them.
So, the next time you have a problem, and go about seeking a resolution, or the next time you visit your doctor just remember it’s often much worse for others, especially inmates. Remember the prisoner as if in chains with them. (Hebrews 13:3)
No Comments