GovernmentExecutive.com

Personnel reform at the Defense Department hit another bump last week when officials halted training on the new pay-for-performance system to allow more time to evaluate it and make changes.

In a Dec. 23 letter, a National Security Personnel System official told program managers to stop all content-specific NSPS training for January at least.

"We need more time to focus on simplifying the performance management design, getting performance objectives right, and ensuring the system is simple, clear and understandable," wrote Mary Lacey, program executive officer for NSPS.

The regulations governing the system restrict union bargaining rights, eliminate the decades-old General Schedule in favor of broad paybands and require pay raises to be based on rigorous performance evaluations.

A group of 10 unions filed a lawsuit soon after the regulations were published. That lawsuit focuses on union rights, rather than human resources. The two sides had agreed that the department could continue training its employees on NSPS in the run-up to court proceedings.

Lacey did not provide a specific reason for this latest delay. In preparing for the transition to the new system, the department "received much feedback ... that [led] us to conclude" more time was necessary, she wrote. A spokeswoman for the NSPS said she could not give any further details.

Information about any NSPS design changes will come in early January, Lacey said.

"We want to ensure that our employees, supervisors and leaders fully understand this system and have the tools to succeed in a results-focused, performance-based environment," she wrote.

Lacey encouraged program managers to continue training on soft skills such as communicating with employees about the changes. Earlier this month, the Air Force announced that it had awarded a $24.8 million contract to Centre Consulting of Vienna, Va., to help managers improve those skills.

COMMENTS

• The training I had to take (no choice was given) was the worst training I have ever attended in my entire life - and I thought no one would ever be worst than a high school math teacher I had. The contractor teaching the course did not know the principles he was teaching and his presentation was totally boring. The room had a temperature set for storing meat and the materials were ridiculous. Also, the training had very little to do with the new pay system. This entire process will not impact me -- particularly if it keeps getting delayed because I will retire. However, this proposed system is a total subversion of government checks and balances. Everyone in the new system will do whatever the boss says (even when illegal) because their pay will depend upon the bosses rating. That means the political appointees who ultimately approve the pay increases will reward only those that foster the political outlook of the day and not what is right. Congress may as well pack it up and leave because it is allowing the executive branch total power over government actions and spending. This no longer is a great political system because we have elected representative doing what is best for the country. We have a political system where elected representatives are doing what gets them re-elected and the country is run by the president regardless of what Congress may want. Taxpayer Posted January 6, 2006 6:45 AM
• Why not just cancel NSPS? It is pure waste, fraud and abuse. The money being spent to support the development and training would be better spent on replacement equipment for the troops. GovExec.com reader Posted January 6, 2006 5:37 AM
• If it takes contractors to advise supervisors how to work within the new personnel system, that must tell somebody they have a long way to go before it becomes reality. They have a hard time working in the old system and now we are giving them a new playground. What they should have done with all the money they spent was setup mandatory leaderships schools the potential supervisors have to attend prior to becoming one, then make the supervisor and managers a separate career field. George Posted January 5, 2006 8:13 AM