Security/Ethics Question: Uncleared supervisor managing cleared technical work & "Need to Know" communications.
Hi!
I’m looking for some insight from the security and HR experts in this sub. I am a cleared professional (Tier 5) working in a technical/governance capacity within my agency.
I’ve run into a management dynamic that seems like a significant security vulnerability and a major conflict of interest.
My direct supervisor is non-technical and does not hold a security clearance. However, he is the primary rater for my performance reviews and the final gatekeeper for my output.
This manager insists on reviewing and editing sensitive and "need to know" communications and announcements before they are distributed. Since he lacks the clearance and formal vetting to handle this data, I’m concerned that providing him this level of access is a violation of security protocols.
He is essentially "managing" the technical and strategic direction of projects he is legally barred from fully understanding. This has led to friction where he attempts to exert "positional power" to force administrative changes on sensitive processes he hasn't been cleared to see.
From a management standpoint, how can a rater provide a fair and accurate assessment of work they cannot fully access? If 75% of my impact is tied to cleared/sensitive initiatives, his rating is based on a very small, non-representative portion of my actual duties.
My Questions:
• Is there a specific policy that addresses the "Need to Know" breach of an uncleared supervisor editing restricted communications?
• If a supervisor is legally unable to observe the core functions of a position due to clearance issues, is there a formal process to request a cleared rater?
• Has anyone successfully navigated the SSO (Site Security Office) on this without it being viewed as a "hostile" act toward management?
I want to stay compliant with my own security obligations, but I’m being pressured to share sensitive info with an uncleared lead just so he can "manage" the workflow.