GovernmentExecutive.com

The Homeland Security Department's plans to switch from the General Schedule to a performance-based pay system have generated unexpected backlash from rank-and-file employees and unions, the department's outgoing personnel chief acknowledged earlier this week. But he touted the ongoing implementation of a new structure.

"The surprise is how much turbulence tends to be generated," said K. Gregg Prillaman, DHS' chief human capital officer. "Unions will probably not be happy, initially."

Prillaman, who tendered his resignation May 15 after less than a year on the job, made his comments in a speech before the National Academy of Public Administration Tuesday. He and David M. Walker, head of the Government Accountability Office, offered their perspectives on how to best coordinate the arrival of a new personnel system with a staff that is averse to the idea.

GAO switched to a market-based pay system at the beginning of 2006. Walker said that quarterly closed-circuit television addresses, combined with his willingness to personally take calls from the rank and file to answer questions, have helped his staff adjust to the end of the General Schedule system. That system, he added, shouldn't have been too revered by anyone.

"It was designed for the workforce of the 1950s," he said, adding that the jobs typically filled out at the base of any government department were "more clerical than knowledge-based."

Whereas GAO workers have no central union, DHS employees are unionized, and Prillaman said he sought to include unions in discussions as parts of the new performance assessment system were implemented. The department is scheduled to award the first wave of performance-based pay raises in January 2008.

Interviews with DHS employees revealed that many felt managers were not well-trained and that rank and file wanted clarification pertaining to their career paths, Prillaman told attendees of the NAPA conference. Younger workers generally like report cards, or management's recognition of where they have made strides, he said.

Prillaman added that he believes the court cases regarding labor relations aspects of the personnel system will be resolved within a few months.

Both Prillaman and Walker said delays should be expected in implementing new personnel systems and that re-evaluations of the system are necessary as it progresses. While current employee evaluations are based on a 50-50 results and competence measurement scale, Prillaman said, that could continue to change under the new system with results taking priority over competence in judging a worker.

As DHS' chief human capital officer, Prillaman also oversees recruitment at the department. In May 18 testimony before the House Homeland Security Committee, he acknowledged that hiring and retention are fast becoming problems.

Larry Orluskie, a department spokesman, confirmed that Prillaman himself will leave for "personal reasons" on June 9.

COMMENTS

• Mr. Prillaman is quoted in the article as stating that DHS employees are unionized, among other things. The fact of the matter is that some DHS employees, like CBP officers, are unionized, while many others are not. If the now former DHS human capital officer makes a statement like that, when ICE agents (at least those from legacy Customs) and other DHS employees have always been, and still are, non-bargaining unit employees, it speaks volumes about how disorganized and mismanaged this department is! And he wonders why "hiring and retention are fast becoming problems"! GovExec.com reader Posted July 28, 2006 11:11 AM
• Under the proposed MAXHR pay banding system at DHS, senior employees at the top of their respective pay bands would see no increase in their salaries for "high three" retirement purposes. All they would be eligible for would be Performance Pay Increases (PPIs) if their job performance is deemed satisfactory, which would be paid as a lump sum and would not increase their salaries. In addition, while DHS says that most employees would receive a within-grade-increase (WIGI) buyout upon conversion, those who are already at the top of their grades (e.g., GS-13, step 10) would not be eligible for any increase. In other words, if you are an experienced employee and already at the top of your grade, the salary you are earning when you enter pay banding will be the same salary your "high three" retirement computations will be based on, no matter how many additional years you work! So much for encouraging senior employees to stay, rather than retire. DHS is practically showing us the door, instead! This is no way to treat loyal employees whose experience is sorely needed by this agency. Maybe Government Executive should do an article on this topic, which smacks of age discrimination, and see how DHS management responds to some hard questions! GovExec.com reader Posted June 30, 2006 11:57 AM
• It is my belief and the belief of almost everyone I work with who has voiced an opinion that NSPS is just a way to remove all security connected to civil service employment. All you have to do is read it to see it. Unless you wish not to see it. SCTR GovExec.com reader Posted June 7, 2006 5:41 AM