GovernmentExecutive.com

Two key senators who oversee federal workforce issues on Tuesday strongly criticized the Office of Personnel Management based on an outside group's recent report that senior federal executives are unhappy with their new compensation system.

Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, called OPM Director Linda Springer in front of a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs subcommittee he chairs to respond to the results of the survey by the Senior Executives Association. Eighty-six percent of respondents said the 2-year-old pay-for-performance system in the Senior Executive Service made no difference in their job performance.

More than half of respondents said their agencies used quotas -- which are banned in the system -- to forcibly limit the number of outstanding ratings awarded last year.

"I've spent an enormous amount of time in this whole area, and a year from now I want this problem taken care of," Voinovich said. "It's really disturbing to me, honestly, that this hasn't been properly" implemented.

Voinovich, who has backed pay-for-performance systems throughout government, said senior managers' experience is essential to success in extending such systems to lower levels. The Defense and Homeland Security departments are unrolling performance-based pay systems for all levels of employees.

Voinovich's Democratic counterpart on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce and the District of Columbia, joined in the criticism.

"Despite the administration's claims that the SES system is successful, the survey tells a different story," said Sen. Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii. "If federal senior executives don't have faith in the fairness and transparency of their pay system, I don't see how rank and file employees would want to work under such a system."

But Springer questioned the validity of the survey, which was voluntary and therefore unscientific, and said it's premature to judge the system.

"It takes several years before a system takes hold," Springer said.

Voinovich replied: "The fact is, it's not where it's supposed to be."

Springer said her staff is still reviewing the survey results to see what changes could be made based on the findings.

COMMENTS

• After months of protests and millions of dollars spent for development, now is when the Congress realizes that the pay for performance system is unpopular. I suggest that our congressional representatives knew what would happen when it was first proposed, but looked the other way until they were sure they could better themselves by criticizing it. What does it take to get through to Congress that they just need to fix the problems undermining the current system? The incompetent managing of the federal workforce will undermine any system. The corruption of federal benefits programs like federal employees' workers compensation will demoralize federal workers and drive away desirable skilled workers. Is it any wonder that surveys are indicating a high level of public dissatisfaction with their Congress? Robert M. Posted October 2, 2006 7:57 AM
• Maybe these two senators haven't stopped to think that perhaps those who received lower performance ratings than before, do not deserve any higher than what they got. It sounds like they want the new pay system to work, even if it means writing top notch ratings for those who don’t deserve them. Charlie Posted September 28, 2006 10:29 PM
• Please. Pay for performance will never work. Our new rating system at GSA is 1-5. Last performance period, I got a 3, when the previous performance period, I got a 4. I heard management was told to limit the 4s because too many were awarded the previous performance period. I guess it makes management look bad when their employees are so competent and diligent in their duties. What a morale booster! GovExec.com reader Posted September 27, 2006 7:54 AM