GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: 'Teach the young' about service, urges Supreme Court justice

• 3831
  

  Teach the young about service, what a novel idea - in today's self-centered world anyway. As public servants, it is about service and we served proudly even with the target on our backs.

  Children should be taught to serve, and the federal workplace is an excellent teaching ground and potential employment opportunity. However, will there be any jobs left? It's hard to teach students and young workers the value of service when you worry if you even have a job tomorrow. How do we explain that it's great to serve, but oops! some other entity -- whose bottom line is the bucks, not the service -- will be taking over.

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 14, 2004 9:01 AM
• 3822
  

  I have taught young people about "service". And when I find that they do want to make a positive difference I espouse the benefits and qualities of the "non-profits". These organizations predominately appreciate their workforce, mission(s), and accomplishments. They understand their role in the marketplace and how they make a difference.

  If you desire being treated like a piece of useless meat by delusional aristocratic beaurocrats, come work for uncle sam. That's the choice they have.

  Teacher Posted March 12, 2004 12:59 PM
• 3807
  

  Recruiting young people will turn out like it has in my organization, they hire students, co-ops, and interns, spend a lot of resources training them and just when they are about up to speed, announce a RIF or contract out the jobs.

  Recruiting young people does not help RETAIN young people and when the "best and brightest" young recruitees start seeing how poorly Civil Servants (you know those who do public service work) are treated by our elected officials and management, it will not be long before they pack up their FERS (social security) retirement packages and go to work for a private company making some real money.

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 11, 2004 12:38 PM
• 3790
  

  Why would anyone encourage a young person to join the 'Federal Workforce' when it's as unstable as private industry? Once upon a time in America we felt that we were safe as a country and the government workforce was here as long as there was a USA. Terrorists struck and our whole country is crumbling and falling apart. When the privatization of government jobs is in full force who will be 'Federal employees'? Will the president still run the country? Will congressman and senators be appointed by the president or will we still get to vote? Just the idea of OUR federal government without a federal workforce is inconceivable. However, once you start where does one stop? Why even lure our young people into a false sense of security?

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 10, 2004 5:58 PM
• 3773
  

  Will the good judge tell these new prospects that it okay to go hunting with the VP while making a ruling on a case involving the same person? Of course not, she and Scalia have been looking the other way for way too long.

  I wouldn't recommend my dog for a civil service job. King George would probably not give him enough dog food to live on, just like he cuts our pay, time and time again.

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 10, 2004 7:23 AM
• 3765
  

  Well I realize things aren't the greatest nowadays for the private sector, but I've come to notice after some 30 years now that even when things are good on the outside the federal employee is still treated as some sort of stepchild rather then a valued employee. The govt is not going to give us anything rather take away, so it's important that we fight for everything....

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 9, 2004 8:32 PM
• 3764
  

  I feel I can give insight. I suggest young people run from federal service. The "good old boy" network keeps the good employees down and the friends moving up. Every year, people are cut and threats of jobs being eliminated for contractors to take abound. Pay raises don't cover the increase in health insurance premiums. Pay raises are a fight to match the military member's raise. Civil servants don't die in battle, so military deserves more. Remember Sept. 11?? How many civilians have died in the CIA, FBI, DoD, etc?? Plus, military get free medical care, housing and food allowances and more. Civil serviants do not get these benefits. If Washington would quit treating civil servants like red-headed step children and treat us with respect, I would recommend civil service. Unfortunately, the way we are treated in the past, now and I am sure in the future will prevent me from encouraging anyone to join civil service. In fact, I suugest you become a goverment contractor. Better pay, better hours and every administration thinks contractors are the greatest. Why would you go to a "B" team (civil service) when you can join an "A" Team (Government contractor)?

  upper 30's and 10+ years service Posted March 9, 2004 3:41 PM
• 3761
  

  Justice O'Conner's opinion that salaries should be increased fits nicely with the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1992. Too bad she never mentioned it before - she hasn't, has she? I suppose her clerks were only recently strapped with heavy debt from school loan programs, how sad for them. By the way, how about pay-for-performance for the Supreme Court? We could let the President decide if the court made the right decision and the relative value of that decision. The again, I suppose Pay for Performance is not "well suited" to use at that level.

  Anyway, here are some ideas for her Honor: Recruiters could use a big poster outlining the wonderful dental benefits Federal employees have. That poster would still have plenty of room left to outline the FERS & mention the new TSP computer system and how swiftly, seamlessly and cost effectively it was put in service! Recuiters should also mention how sick leave can be donated back to the Federal government upon retirement. Finally, they should have all pay raises for Federal employees as far back as the passage of the 1992 Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act displayed so prospective recruits will know how much they will be valued as employees.....

  Although they are all way too old for it now, if any of my loved ones sought employment with the Federal Government, I'd sure try to whip their butt.

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 9, 2004 2:00 PM
• 3757
  

  I've been luckier than most civil servants I know. Twenty-plus years of employment as an Army civilian engineer have brought me some exciting and rewarding professional challenges. I've had the rare privilege to contribute to a large and important enterprise and occasionally was lucky enough to make a small positive difference along the way.

  I've also been disheartened by leadership which increasingly views its employees not as a resource to be gainfully used, developed, and respected, but rather as merely a funds account which ideally should be reduced to as close to zero as possible. Esprit de corps and pride in one's work suffer badly when your leaders consider your existence to be one of their problems.

  The engineering profession has a long tradition of mentorship. As I approach the end of this phase of my career, I am often asked by younger colleagues about the advantages of federal employment. This is far more difficult to do now than it was some years ago. I can no longer in clear conscience recommend the federal civil service to anybody who is serious about pursuing a career as a professional engineer.

  I sincerely wish it hadn't turned out this way.

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 9, 2004 11:57 AM
• 3756
  

  Perhaps they should teach the current administration.

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 9, 2004 11:17 AM
• 3755
  

  I'm a recent college graduate who was very excited to enter into public service. I'm a highly motivated individual and I'm rarely a quitter. Unfortunately, after being with DoD for less than two years, I have already considered other options.

  The pay is not an issue at all. Even the low morale and the unprofessionalism are not the main problems. The parts of the job that really make me want to leave this place are the attitudes of management about the low morale and the unprofessionalism. If executives and management would take some responsibility for the work environment and if they would make efforts to motivate the lower-level employees, I would see hope. Instead, their solution is to ignore the unmotivated and less educated employees. They figure that hiring younger, educated people will be the trick to turning the organization around. They refuse to promote people who don't have degrees, while at the same time they have supervisors sitting in higher positions without college diplomas.

  Here's a tip: While you're hiring those new college grads, put some effort into developing and promoting the people you've already got. No new employees are going to stick around if they see their co-workers being ignored by the top dogs. I don't think the solution is to promote people who aren't qualified, but I think it's critical to get down to a personal level with the people that are already carrying your organization, learn their career goals and their willingness for professional development, and give them your support and assistance in making any small professional advances. That's how you'll make your current employee base happy and that's how you'll retain new workers coming into a more postive work environment.

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 9, 2004 10:24 AM
• 3752
  

  Yeah, I'll teach the young alright, teach them it's best to stay away, at least until these Washington halfwits get their acts together and start treating federal employees correctly...unbelievable, but so typical.

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 9, 2004 9:35 AM
• 3751
  

  As long as government employees are treated with the lack of respect that the current and past administrations have been doing, you will not find people willing to enter government service. To think otherwise is to believe a delusion. It is not going to happen.

  Thank goodness that Congress currently has the votes to override the negative attitudes of these administrations.

  Anonymous Posted March 9, 2004 9:30 AM
• 3750
  

  Oh, good grief! Do you realize how many federal employees are going to read that article this morning and spit their coffee all over their cubicles? This lady doesn't get it at all.

  How does Judge O'Connor expect the federal government to attract young workers to start a career in federal service after all of the really rotten things the government has pulled on its workers in the past?

  OPM recruiters has been recruiting from colleges for years with promises of placements that may not even be available and advancements that never quite happen. The management structure is so unprofessional and politicized that there is no such thing as advancement for performance. It seems to get worse every year.

  If that isn't enough to discourage them, the new workers quickly find out that the producers are constantly carrying the slackers and often have to work around slacker management just so they can get their jobs done, that is, if their employer can keep their low bidder computer network up and running. How rewarding is it to go home every day feeling like you ran five miles and gotten nowhere?

  Would Judge O'Connor want to work in a laboratory or warehouse that doesn't even meet OSHA safety standards? How would she like to be reminded all the time that her job could be downsized by the Congress as their whims dictate? I would like see her spending years fighting for her federal workers compensation as her lawful rights are stomped on by the Labor Department. Would she still be singing the virtues of "public service" then?

  Employment in the federal government is the last, desperate option of best and the brightest and many only stay long enough to find some other rewarding career in the private market. It's not just the pay. It's utter lack of professionalism and the broken promises that keeps the young away and the sooner our revered leaders figure that out, the better it will be for everyone.

  This is the age of communication and the federal government can no longer hide the "rewards" of federal employment under a gauze of rhetoric. It's time to deal with the real problems.

  Robert Merritt

  Anonymous Posted March 9, 2004 9:27 AM
• 3748
  

  Many younger people who attempt to join the civil service are required to jump through the multiple hoops of applying. This is where the problem lies.

  As an "old-timer" in the civil service and in talking to someone (my child) applying for a civil service job, I can sense the frustration. The paperwork gauntlet required to gain entrance is unbelievable.

  Even myself, as a veteran civil service employee, who may want to change positions, the stupidity of the paperwork, (KSAs [especially in applying for the same types of positions in other agencies is ridiculous], standard forms, EEO questionnaires, etc.) makes it a daunting challenge, remember to attach your SF-50, DD-214, Appraisals, etc. Then the 2, 3, 4 or more months delay in hearing anything back. Canceling job fills, delays and more delays, re-announcing, more delays, etc., etc.

  I can tell you why young people aren't jumping in, it's because of the garbage. If government really wants to reform and really wants "new blood", they could easily do it by eliminating 90% of the "stupidity" associated with hiring new employees.

  Stan Posted March 9, 2004 9:00 AM
• 3741
  

  There are a lot of federal workers with 10+ years of service in their mid to late 30's who could be a valuable recruiting source for teaching younger persons about the value of federal service. We can provide the pros and cons of working for the government and offer insight.

  Joe B. Posted March 9, 2004 7:27 AM