GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Defense personnel overhaul headed to President Bush

• 2587
  

  As a DOD employee 54 years old and 34 years of federal service, I must say that over the past 10 years or so I have seen the erosion of the team effort in defending our country. Mr. Rumsfeld has obviously had some problems in the past with some civilian workers (possibly when he was a military member) and wished he could just fire these people and get some YES people. Well it looks as if he will get his revenge. This is the only logical reason I can think of for a person to treat others in this fashion, pure and total revenge. His attitude has to be civil service workers are the slaves and he wants to be lord and master. Mr. Bush wake up and make some decisions for yourself and fire Rumsfeld before he brings you completely down. I have a regret of my own, I voted for you. Won't happen again.

  Loyal Worker and Dedicated American

  Roger Hunt Posted December 19, 2003 2:39 PM
• 2168
  

  Pay-for-performance is just a clever name for another O&M manpower cost-saving initiative, which builds upon the previous locality pay cost-saving initiative. A select few chosen people get paid a fraction more due to their political backing or selected geographic location while the majority will have their pay cut back to finance the perks for the few. When the analysts do the math the overall result will be a reduction in across-the-board payroll costs and those who will suffer the pay cut will be told that it is their own fault. A brilliant concept in which the stage was set by Department of the Navy's introduction of the pass/fail mediocre performance rating system five years ago in preparation for the new performance management system. Clearly since all DoN personnel are now rated mediocre by policy, no Navy employees by definition are eligible for "pay for performance". Even more savings!

  GovExec.com reader Posted November 14, 2003 9:34 PM
• 2167
  

  Hey Rummy, why don't you have pay-for-performance for the military? Where I work, 99 percent of them are useless. This is just another military versus civilian fight. And it's another cheap way to pay for their unnecessary war in Iraq. When a base closes, he will fire everyone and we will lose our retirement so DoD won't have to pay for it. And it will all be political, especially for those of us who aren't Washington bureaucrats (who have gotten protection in the bill). No one, but, no one will want to work for the feds anymore. Good luck Rummy and thanks for the reward for my dedicated service!

  GovExec.com reader Posted November 14, 2003 6:27 PM
• 2162
  

  This is totally ridiculous. They know the pay system they are talking about will never work because the supervisors have their pets. If you don't party with the supervisors you don't get anywhere. I wish someone could get it through the politicians' heads that rewarding the people that do their job won't mean a thing. The only people that will get a raise will be the ones that hang with the supervisors. We need help. We need to let the President know that he doesn't need to sign that bill.

  Bonnie S. Willis Posted November 14, 2003 10:39 AM
• 2160
  

  This is the final nail in the coffin for career civil servants. Bush has already eliminated career progression for many civil servants since he declared the nation under a state of emergency and waived the requirement for military retirees to wait six months after retirement before they could be hired as civil servants. In my area of the country a GS-15, GS-14 and a SES position have all been filled by military officers who were still on active duty when they were selected for the vacancy. Several other GS-9 and GS-11 positions were filled by retiring enlisted personnel. Who were the selecting officials for these positions? In all but one case, the SES position, the selections were made by military buddies of the people selected. The SES position was made at a facility were the admiral selected for the position had been serving for several years. Deserving capable career civil servants, with many years of corporate knowledge, are having their progression paths elinimated by selecting officials who are in place for only a year or two. To add insult to the matter the career civil servants are then expected to train the individual selected over them on how to do their jobs. Fairness under the new policy, I don't see it happening.

  GovExec.com reader Posted November 14, 2003 8:43 AM
• 2144
  

  DoD hasn't been able to win wars against third world countries since the '50s, so I guess they feel the need to batter their own in retaliation ... classic profile of an enterprise that's out-of-control.

  GovExec.com reader Posted November 13, 2003 4:57 PM
• 2143
  

  This legislation will allow the Defense Department to offer early retirement incentives to up to 25,000 employees a year and to rehire Defense retirees without reducing their annuities. Mr. Rumsfeld, PLEASE make this offer to me and I'll show my appreciation come election day.

  GovExec.com reader Posted November 13, 2003 2:02 PM
• 2136
  

  Note to Mr. Rumsfeld. It's good to be king. Isn't it? Good thing you got lots of experience there. Got nothing but love for ya. Note to White House. Speaking of pay-for-performance, when are we gonna see some?

  Art Doss Posted November 13, 2003 11:07 AM
• 2121
  

  Overhaul? What a misnomer for genocide. Civil servants, for the most part, play vital roles that will be difficult to duplicate with private sector personnel who have no ownership for a program...just a paycheck. A little introspection here could save jobs and dollars. How about enforcing the rules and regulations that have taken decades to build. You have 55+ year olds at nearly every facility that are just marking time until a severence package is offered. If these folks are no longer performing...send em home, just as a private industry employer would do. There are groups of professionals and semi-professionals that are reaching an adequate number of yrs. service to retire and would do so without dragging their feet until a package is offered, a simple VERA would be all the incentive I need. Evaluate these two groups, force out the non-performers, let those that want to leave...leave, and you will have a re-shaped workforce without the genocidal overhaul approach.

  Dave Bryant Posted November 13, 2003 9:02 AM
• 2109
  

  The Republicans have now gone against everything Republican! They have violated free trade with the steel tariffs and soft wood tariffs, they have destroyed the right to chose, they have fostered the growth of our worst potential enemy in China, and they have destroyed civil service protection for DoD civilians while wanting to restrict their pay relative to the military that they work with in DoD. Why destroy the civil service in DoD and not throughout the government? Does DoD have particular problems - I think they do and it is the total lack of management! They have no plans (as witnessed in Iraq), they lie on many issues particularly money issues, they treat civilians as military for hours, work load, job content, and promotions. DoD currently is out of control and now will be totally out of control!

  I now have to say yes sir boss on everything, not only to get promoted (which was required in the past) but now even to keep the job! You no longer will find any internal resistence to what the top brass wants because now you have allowed them to treaten everyone with job loss and no pay increases regardless of the situation. The foxes are now in charge of the hen house - even more than they were in the past. I think you need to get rid of 50% of the political appointees at DoD with this new policy - they don't care about anyone but themselves!

  GovExec.com reader Posted November 13, 2003 6:30 AM
• 2107
  

  Basically what congress has done is made the illegal acts that this agency and the civilian personnel office at this base have been doing the last 12 to 15 years legal. I can see major problems that Congress has not envisioned, with a backlash of votes that will replace many of those who voted for these atrocities.

  william pitts Posted November 12, 2003 9:56 PM