GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Unwieldy hiring process can be fixed, top personnel official says

• 5060
  

  I am both female and minority and I have not received any preference whatsoever. I have been a GS 12 since 1987. The bosses are all white males, and in DoD and the VA, it seems like everybody has had military service.

  GovExec.com reader Posted June 15, 2004 2:43 PM
• 5052
  

  A pox on both OPM and the respective agency HR organizations!

  I've been hiring professional workers for over 20 years. Oh that we could get someone on board in 45 days!

  From personal experience applying for federal jobs, it seems to take 30 days for the HR processing unit (be it OPM or a contractor organization) to acknowledge receipt of even an electronic resume. Don't even expect a response if you must fax in the information. (Yes, that's still done when the system is being "tilted" for a favored candidate.)

  Then it can take another 4-6 weeks until the hiring organization gets around to scheduling interviews, which invariably take 2-3 more weeks. If you're still breathing, you might find out the results a month after all the interviews are done.

  Total elapsed time: 3-4 months seems to be the norm.

  Want the system to improve? A few steps might make a real difference.

  1) Negotiate a reasonable agencywide standard timeframe for HR to accomplish the hiring process.

  2) These vacant jobs are funded. The organization with the vacancy had to fight for the FTE and $$. There is a daily cost for every position. Higher grades have a higher daily cost.

  3) Make the HR Department pay the "owner" of the vacancy for every day past the standard timeframe that the vacancy is not filled. Think of it as a penalty clause for services not rendered.

  Who knows - it just might work.
  GovExec.com reader Posted June 15, 2004 9:00 AM
• 5051
  

  The removal of covert anti-veteran hiring and promotion practices at many Army Materiel Command facilities will go a long way toward fixing the personnel system. Personnel practices since the mid-eighties have given lip service to veterans preferences, while in fact providing a hostile environment for hiring quality veterans. Quality veterans are servicemembers that have succesfully completed difficult military assignments such as command or 1SG positions at TO&E units, as well as completion of military schools with honors. The current personnel system does not have any meaningful methodology for translating military experience or schools into Army civilian accomplishments. Additionally, most Army civilian supervisors act threatened by quality veterans. There is no doubt in my mind that there are thousands, if not millions, of quality veterans that would rather continue their public service by working for the federal government. The sad truth is that the intern, minority and female priority placement system currently in place will fill those positions with individuals who don't understand the needs and challenges of the soldiers in harms way, and unforunately many who also don't care. The bottom line is that quality veterans are forced to working for contractor companies that have no stability nor security, and ulimately doing the federal civilian emloyees' work.

  GovExec.com reader Posted June 15, 2004 8:29 AM
• 4996
  

  Time in grade is just one of the many, many issues facing job applicants as a hurtle. Our federal competitive service/"merit selection" rules were set up decades ago so that clerks could advance based on seniority. It is absolutely the worst system to hire anybody under.

  I really do appreciate your problem. Try transferring over from the Exempt into the Competitive Service and being told that you are ineligible to apply for Competitive Service Only positions even though you currently perform the job being advertised.

  My point though was not that it is hard to apply and get a federal job- even for us who are in the system. This is a given. My point was that private sector folks are simply not interested unless forced by economics to apply for these jobs and making the system easier to get the job does not make the jobs more enticing. I have many friends in private sector HR who tell me that I'm crazy for staying with Uncle Sam and there are a few days I think they have a good point. Luckily there are many more days I don't.

  But I also didn't think that President Reagan could be topped for an anti-federal service administration. I was wrong.

  HR Specialist

  GovExec.com reader Posted June 10, 2004 8:15 AM
• 4985
  

  HR Specialist -

  If you don't have very many applicants, take a look at what's being offered. The location or conditions may be a problem. I'm interested in HR but can never apply due to time in grade.

  GovExec.com reader Posted June 9, 2004 4:53 PM
• 4979
  

  I respectfully disagree with Director James.

  We recently opened two federal postings for junior level HR Specialists and it was nationwide, anybody and everybody could apply regardless of civil service status- the postings were open for more than three weeks and one could apply online. We received less than half a dozen applications for each announcement. I expected many, many more.

  I train HR Specialists in my area of expertise and I rarely ever see someone under 30 years of age- usually it is a mid-career shift from one speciality to another.

  In my years of federal government HR service I have not seen the groundswell of private sector applications to join the federal service. While I agree with Director James that the government seriously needs to streamline the hiring process- I think there is a serious crisis because even if we could hire on the spot, I don't think there would be the applicants to take these jobs absent a private sector job freeze.

  If this administration is really interested in filling the billets it needs to make federal sector jobs enticing to young people fresh out of school. The across the board workplace take-backs and hammer on federal employees pay and promotion potential is not the best means for improving recruitment. It certainly won't help in retention.

  HR Specialist

  GovExec.com reader Posted June 9, 2004 7:37 AM
• 4973
  

  This woman has missed everything. The problem is the government wants good people to accept being treated like children with pay that won't quite pay the bills and discrimination between the ranks. Divide and conquer - that is what she and the current administration wants. Rummy is in a big hurry to screw up everthing he can before King George gets booted to the curb. These people will never get it they have too many cobwebs in their heads to get past.

  You can't pay the bills at $5.15 an hour, when was the last time the minimum wage was increased? There is your problem, poor people getting poorer and the rich getting richer.

  GovExec.com reader Posted June 9, 2004 6:50 AM