GovernmentExecutive.com

The National Treasury Employees Union on Thursday said it would fight any effort by the Bush administration to extend pending personnel changes at the Defense and Homeland Security departments to the entire civilian workforce.

The Bush administration has drafted a civil service reform bill that proposes governmentwide system based on reforms that are being rolled out at the Defense and Homeland Security departments. The proposal would scrap the General Schedule pay system by 2010 and replace it with a pay-for-performance system. The new proposal was expected, although many lawmakers and observers believed the administration would wait until the Defense and Homeland Security systems were in place before expanding the effort across the civil service.

"All along NTEU has said that it will steadfastly oppose any effort by the Bush administration to extend throughout the federal government personnel changes similar to those under way at Homeland Security and Defense," said NTEU President Colleen Kelley. "It is NTEU's strong belief that the DoD and DHS systems will fail because those systems are not fair and transparent, and neither managers nor front-line employees understand or support the regulations."

The legislation and its supporting documents have not yet been sent to Congress and officials at the Office of Personnel Management declined to comment.

In a draft letter addressed to House and Senate leaders, but not yet sent, OPM acting Director Dan G. Blair called the General Schedule system a "failure" and said the proposed overhaul is needed to provide essential personnel flexibility and competitive pay rates.

In terms of labor relations, the draft legislation requires bargaining only when "proposed management action had a significant, substantial and continuing adverse impact on employees," according to OPM documents.

Agencies also will be able to "prepare for or prevent any emergency, or prevent any fiscal or budgetary exigency without bargaining with unions first," the draft documents stated.

"There is nothing in the draft governmentwide legislation currently circulating that has diminished our strong opposition to extending these personnel changes," Kelley said. "It is foolhardy to rush further changes into law without first gaining experience and understanding the lessons to be learned from the changes at DoD and DHS."

COMMENTS

• Skeptical - I might profit under the new system, but only at the expense of others who also deserve to profit. Back in the 80s there was a similar plan, where managers were given a pot of money to distribute to the "deserving". Funny thing was, no one "deserved" except managers and their management friends. GovExec.com reader Posted June 27, 2005 4:37 PM
• I find it curious that all you ever get is the naysayer opinion on this. Not a single person thinks that they will benefit? IF you take everyone's stated opinion that the only thing it will take to rake in huge, undeserved raises & bonuses is to play golf and go drinking with the boss, then why isn't everyone just making plans to do so now and then? My guess, is that way down deep, everyone realizes that there really will be at least some justification required for every recommended raise. I am looking forward to a pay for performance plan. I work rings around the average individual and look forward to some others actually picking up the ball for a change. But no, they'll just do the same as they've always done - sit back, surf the net, hang out by the coffee pot and complain about how they aren't getting a fair shot because (fill in the blank) is "the boss's favorite, so why bother?" Skeptical Posted June 15, 2005 8:48 AM
• And they have trouble recruiting now! They will have real recruiting problems in the future under this proposed program. The Navy potential engineer describes a problem I also experienced. My private sector management background is far better than that of anyone I work with and yet the classification for the jobs is engineer! These people do not work as engineers but they are supposed to do project and process management and write policy. They have no meaningful policy! The only policy is to do what the law requires! There are no policies about how the operations people should implement the laws. These guys generally have no idea of how to manage or even what mangement means! Many think that because they are in the management positon everyone should do as they are told regardless of what the manager says! No one below the management level is supposed to think! Therefore, the military gets whatever the managers think and that is not very good! It is no wonder that military thinks so little of the civilians in DoD. The civilian mangers have no idea of how to manage! taxpayer Posted June 13, 2005 7:32 AM