GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: More mid-career government jobs going to private sector workers

• 6093
  

  I am a middle manager (GS14) in the Govt. What I'm finding to be at fault is the recruiting process overall. We need to rethink the idea that because a person graduates wtih a GPA of 3.4 or higher, that person is a good candidate to come into the Govt (regardless of the level). Many with high GPAs are good at passing exams, but are not necessarily quality applicants for doing the actual work.

  I know many graduates who struggle to get their degrees, their GPAs are below the 3.4 criteria but are the best workers you would want on your staff. They are more dedicated, want to work, etc. Federal Govt is losing too many GOOD recruits by sticking to the criteria they put in their job announcements (which applies even to being entry level). Why does a GS-5 have to have a high GPA, or a Masters Degree or higher to be a automation clerk?

  I think it's time we start helping people get their foot in the door versus cutting their career off before they can even begin one.

  The second piece preventing good recruits is our security criteria. If there is someone on the outside who has 30 years of experience, holds an active TOP Secret clearance and applies to an agency with the requirement they must have a clearance, then why does that agency start from scratch initiating an interim clearance before bringing the person on board. It takes a long time to request and get an interim; overloads the backload that the Security Agency already has; waste our funds redoing a process that has been done and paid for; and makes the applicant accept a job they may not necessarily be interested in but takes anyway because that person needs a job!!!!! PERIOD!!!! Both parties lose in this case.

  GovExec.com reader Posted September 7, 2004 10:50 AM
• 6062
  

  Why don't they look instead at the talent they have trapped in low-graded, dead-end positions?

  Incidentally, tax payer, you who accuse the unions of "whining" - are you now "whining" too? Or do you begin to see what the unions are talking about?

  GovExec.com reader Posted September 2, 2004 11:07 AM
• 6057
  

  I think the government sometimes limits itself in hiring. Check the Job Announcemnt Boards: many job announcements for the higher-paying jobs in the DC area (especially those nice and juicy GS-13/14/15 non-competitive advancement ones) also specify that no moving costs will be paid. There are many capable employees in the hinterlands who are all but excluded from the candidate pool.

  GovExec.com reader Posted September 2, 2004 7:59 AM
• 6056
  

  I think your data is skewed. A lot of those jobs were not filled by "outside" hires. They were probably filled by retired military senior NCO's and officer's who probably had the civilian job description writen so that they were the only ones who would qualify for it, and it was probably the same job they were doing while in uniform. Ever since the active duty military was allowed to keep all of their retired pay if they got a government job, it has become a revolving door.

  GovExec.com reader Posted September 2, 2004 7:24 AM
• 6054
  

  Interesting article, but somewhat flawed in at least one broad conclusion. The lack of trust for Gov't Service for outsiders is the exact same one that hard-working, long-serving, career force has proclaimed. With continual down- or right-sizing (depending on your point of view) threatening the most recently hired, what strong incentive is there to changing career at the mid career point? Looking at the career force around me, there are workers with over 20 years' service that are worried for their position IF a RIF were to occur.

  A second point is the ridiculous length of time it takes to get reply. When I left the service, I applied for numerous Civil Service positions but could not afford to wait on the replies. The last one I got (negative) was over 9 months after I submitted it. This is NOT the way to secure quality talent, even if they are employed during the wait and motivated to the change. With the exception of one that truly is interested in taking on the challenge of a slow bureaucracy...

  GovExec.com reader Posted September 2, 2004 7:04 AM
• 6051
  

  This entire process is ridiculous and out of control. In my department of about 30 people we have five contractors sitting here everyday acting just like employees but costing the government far more than a civil servant would cost (including fringe benefits!). Also, they are given the jobs that the civil servants would like to have but we are stuck in the crap jobs because contractors don't want them. They get sent to Europe and around the country on my dollars and do not have to stay in crap hotels or fly on contract carriers because "they are contractors". Therefore, the contractors cost more as employees beyond the payment for their time. Most of them have no clue about how the government works or how the services work and it takes a year for them to "get up to speed" then they get a pay increase because they now know what every civil servant knew to start with! This whole process is nothing but political bull and I am paying for it as a tax payer! Another issue is that government employees (the real ones not the contractors) should be paid with tax free dollars so the cash requirements of the government are reduced and the IRS has less to process! What do you think of that Congress?

  tax payer Posted September 2, 2004 6:13 AM