GovernmentExecutive.com

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md., told a union rally Wednesday that while pay for performance is a good idea, the Bush administration plan for overhauling the civil service is fundamentally unfair.

Speaking to a National Treasury Employees Union rally in Washington, Hoyer said that federal workers' organizations should not oppose performance pay and outsourcing in principle. Instead, he urged union members to fight for equitable and transparent systems.

"We are not afraid of pay for performance, but what we want is a fair system in which to operate," Hoyer told the cheering crowd. Specifically, he said the White House is trying to weaken the appeals process.

The Bush administration is implementing sweeping reforms at the Defense and Homeland Security departments that will abolish the General Schedule pay system, restrict union bargaining rights and implement stricter disciplinary rules. Bush and other federal officials have suggested that this reform should be spread to other federal agencies.

On Wednesday, Hoyer said that the administration is using improved performance as a guise to install its own management preferences. He said that existing civil service laws allow for performance pay if they are correctly applied.

"They do not philosophically believe in your right to organize," Hoyer said. "They want to do away with collective bargaining."

The White House did not respond to questions about Hoyer's accusation.

Hoyer and NTEU National Vice President Frank Ferris also told the rally that the Defense and Homeland Security departments are being pushed into an untested personnel system.

"That makes absolutely no sense," Hoyer said.

At one point in the rally, he asked employees not to denounce the concept of outsourcing on principle.

"We are not against doing the best job for the taxpayer," Hoyer said. He told NTEU members, however, that they should fight for a fair and transparent system that provides the best service at a reasonable cost.

"Nine times out of 10, we will win the competition," he said.

Hoyer also said that he had introduced a House Resolution - H. Con. Res. 40 - to support pay parity. President Bush has proposed a 3.1 percent raise for military personnel in 2006 and a 2.3 percent raise for civilian workers. In previous years, Congress has granted equal raises to all federal workers.

"Let me tell you what we are going to do," Hoyer said. "We are going to pass pay parity."

The crowd chanted "Steny, Steny, Steny" as he walked away from the podium.

"He's our hero," said one union member.

COMMENTS

• Outsourcing or contracting out will always cost more than federal in-house workers because you are adding a middle company that must make a profit for its stockholders. The contractor must always mark up the costs to make a profit. Pay for performance has never worked because, despite the best of intentions, management has never found a way to measure performance accurately and fairly. Cash awards and bonuses are kept secret in the federal workplace because they create resentment and lower the morale of other employees. Everyone knows the best performers do not get these awards. These awards go to the supervisors’ pet employees or the biggest brownnosers instead of the best performers. The proposed National Security Personnel System (NSPS) reverses the Civil Service Reform Act and opens the door to corruption and discrimination. Ronald W Ballew Posted November 17, 2006 10:57 PM
• VP, I for one don't want the pols on pay-for-performance. The Pres salary is extremely low compared to the private sector and there really haven't been that many raises over our country's history. (I WOULD like to have the perks that go with the job...) But he doesn't have the power to give himself a raise. The reward for performance is re-elction or not. Congress on the other hand can (and DO) vote themselves pay raises. Again, we can vote the bums out, but give me their "salary for life" pension plan rather than Social Security - either plan - any day! Skeptikal Posted March 9, 2005 7:34 AM
• Nice article. I can almost hear the crowd chanting "Steny! Steny! Steny!" BTW, when is OMB going to introduce its proposal to ditch the General Schedule? Or did 'Ole Clay forget about it while at one of his many dinner parties and nights out at the Kennedy Center? Albert Posted March 7, 2005 9:32 PM