WP:Bush Aims to Expand System of Merit Pay(to all civil service employees)

[DeepModem Mom]

Bush Aims to Expand System of Merit Pay
Unions Criticize Plan Based on DHS Model

By Christopher Lee
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 19, 2005; Page A02


The administration wants to abolish the General Schedule pay system by 2010 and require that at least part of every pay raise for the government's 1.8 million civilian employees hinge on an annual performance evaluation, President Bush's top management guru said yesterday.

Clay Johnson III, a deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget, laid out a proposal to expand government-wide the kind of pay-for-performance systems being implemented at the departments of Defense and Homeland Security as part of the recent restructuring of civil service rules at those agencies....

***

The administration's draft bill, which it is circulating on Capitol Hill, was criticized by federal employee unions. They have complained that the changes at DHS and Defense undermine employee rights and strengthen the hand of political appointees.

The proposal "is meant to erode federal pay and future retirement security for middle-class federal workers over time," said Brian DeWyngaert, chief of staff to John Gage, president of the American Federation of Government Employees. "They have no data whatsoever to indicate that this will improve organizational performance."

Bush officials argue that the civil service system rewards employees for longevity rather than performance. White House officials signaled earlier this year that they would ask Congress to grant all agencies authority to rewrite their civil service rules along the lines of the changes taking place at DHS and Defense. Those changes have included new curbs on the powers of federal unions and worker appeals, and they will be phased in over the next several years....


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/18/AR2005071801476.html

[Deja Q]

1. And then they will redefine performance to kick people out every ~2 years.

[havocmom]

2. They want to be able to award money to those who bend over

and withhold it from people who put their real job requirements first. Sounds nice on the face of it 'merit raises' until you remember who is deciding what 'merit' is. Rank & file fed workers, even those who are registered Republicans, are not happy about this. Most os them realize 'merit raises' at this time will go to bosses who tout the neocon line and not people who actually do their jobs well.

[wallwriter]

3. Let's extend merit pay to Congress and the President.

It should be based on whether they can balance the budget and win wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[RatRacer]

4. I fail to see the problem

Everyone else in the world more or less has their raises based on merit. There's a reason the old cliche "it's good enough for government work" came into being. You don't reward people just for showing up. Or maybe you partially reward that, but people who exceed expectations and go the extra mile should have that effort reflected in their compensation when compared to others.

[pimpbot]

5. We need a system to weed out the lard

And I dont think this is it. Under this system, a manager has to rank his employees from #1 to #100 (if he had 100 employees). The top X get a raise, next Y get a smaller one, etc. Can you imagine the headaches this would cause? The gov't wants managers to take out "managers insurance" just in case they are sued. Believe me, the lard WILL sue if they are #100.

Its already causing problems. We were supposed to transition last year, but they postponed it. Too bad, because my manager based all his promotions on this and promoted all the Level 12s to the next level. This was the cut-off between two "pay bands". What a crock.

The only incentive for younger workers to join up these days are the benefits. We sure as hell could get a lot more in the private sector, so it isn't the money. One of the benefits is a pay increase every year.

This will only help the kiss-asses who tout the managers flag.

[Iowa]

11. What a load of crap!

"Everyone else in the world more or less has their raises based on merit."

Bullshit! Raises and promotions, more often than not, are based on:

1) ass-kissing
2) eagerness to waste time on management drivel (like mission, vision, values, and other useless nonsense)
3) conforming to the company line, whether it's right or wrong, legal or illegal, moral or immoral.

This is exactly the opposite of what we need to build into our government. We need to have government employees who are free to speak the truth.

"There's a reason the old cliche "it's good enough for government work" came into being. You don't reward people just for showing up."

As someone who worked for the government for many years, that's one of the most ignorant and offensive comments I've heard in a long time. Right-wing knuckle-draggers have done a damn good job of demonizing public employees, but I don't expect to hear their drivel spewed here. Government employees where I worked tromped their private sector counterparts in terms of quality and quantity of work performed. In fact, those who couldn't cut it within my organization went to the private sector. The best remained - often for less pay. Why would they do that? Because they weren't willing to become whores for some insurance company or corporation. They believed in what they were doing and wouldn't consider turning their skills against the little guy.

"Or maybe you partially reward that, but people who exceed expectations and go the extra mile should have that effort reflected in their compensation when compared to others."

1) Quality work should be expected, and those who don't deliver should be dealt with. That being said, going the "extra mile" usually means working more hours. The 40 hour work week was a way of life given to us by our unionized Democrat ancestors who had the balls to strike while facing down company goons with guns. And it has been eroded to the point where far too many people are slaves to their jobs and strangers to their families. Suckwads who undermine our way of life by "going the extra mile" shouldn't be rewarded - they should be taken out and thrashed by their peers. If there is too much work to accomplish in the time alloted, the employer should hire more people or put managers to work doing something productive.

2) Government employees often have power to affect peoples' lives for better or worse. For decades they have (more or less) had the freedom to follow their conscience and do the right thing. Employees who work for the government aren't assembling widgets. The issues they deal with are often complex, sometimes political, and frequently very gray. Merit pay introduces a conflict of interest into the system that threatens the public. If these jobs become politicized (and merit pay would do that) the best people will leave and be replaced with compliant zombies who can't cut it elsewhere. If that occurs, our "leaders" will be in a MUCH better position to turn the power of the government against the people. Like most of the sinister crap Bush is pushing, it seems rather benign on the surface but it's a wolf in sheep's clothing. The RW push for merit pay is about the consolidation of power into the hands of a few and a diminished standard of living for workers in general.

All Dems should get behind these federal employees and oppose merit pay.

[rukkyg]

6. They're just really trying to get me to not work for them aren't they?

[gratuitous]

7. Dismantling the civil service system

This is another step in returning to the bad old days of cronyism and machine politics. The reason the civil service system was set up in the first place was to end the corrupt system of political patronage that preceded it. Yes, some deadwood floats through the bureaucracy under civil service, immune to the normal pressures of performance and productivity. And it's still so much better than the Tammany Hall style of rewarding your friends and punishing your adversaries.

When your job or your pay hinges on pleasing your politically-appointed boss, guess what sort of results your agency or bureau is going to produce? It's not enough that the Republicans have been fudging research at EPA or disregarding a 23-4 majority of an FDA advisory committee; now they want to be sure that all the rank-and-file folks down the line are on board or ousted. Then the public won't hear about such inconvenient examples of corruption. That's what this proposal is designed to do, make no mistake about it.

[DeepModem Mom]

8. I think you nailed it, gratuitous. nt

[Frances]

9. Exactly

If you are a registered Democrat, you won't be able to keep your job.

I think there's a case in court in Kentucky right now where the Repubs are being charged with illegally failing to consider qualified candidates for state government jobs simply because they are Dems.

The Repub governor of Maryland fired a bunch of state government people because they were Dems. There's supposed to be an investigation this fall.

[wildflower]

10. Very important point. Thread recommended. n/t

[Daphne08]

13. You're right, and this is the reason that teachers and

college professors have tenure.

[AuntiBush]

12. Bush & His Administration Needs to be Drafted Alright...

Straight over to their beloved oilfields - pronto!

[proiowadem]

14. Shouldn't longevity be the outcome of good service?

Why not work at weeding out those who have poor performances.

[Sgent]

15. I have no problem with performance pay

And if you truley think that performance pay is about kissing a managers butt, then you have not served in many organizations. Most progressive organizations use a variety of metrics to access perfromance -- manager's are only one of them, and usually not any more important than others.

That being said, there are *some* issues in government that need to be insulated due to potential political conficts of interest. I don't honestly think that applies to the majority of people, but I could see that GS15's and the like need to be insulated so they can do their job.