Return to Article: Senator crafts bill focusing on performance now, pay later
-
16778
Read the next article. Now money is not going to be appropriated for the "pay" for performance part. This is exactly what I have been saying all along. This is about the money, and the civilians are not going to get any. The salary is going down, the benefits are going down. You think federal service is going to get recommended to the next generation? Civil "Servants" is exactly right, maybe more like Civil "Slaves"!
-
16586
Great idea! Let's do the same for Congress!
-
16582
In the end, it will all be decided on who is sleeping with whom. If the manager wants a lap dancer promoted, he will just inflate the evaluation and performance rating, and bingo, he or she will be given a pay raise and promoted. No different now really.
-
16575
Personal feelings for the senator notwithstanding, I do believe his idea is just crazy enough to work ...
-
16574
This is one of the hardest issues to try and get managers to focus on -- especially when managers don't have the resources to deal with their programs, let alone more and more HR programs. Most managers want to simply check a box, give no narrative and I've been asked too many times to count whether it was OK to just throw the appraisal on the employee's chair without a meeting.
I sometimes meet a rare manager who does this right but it isn't frequent and it certainly isn't the norm.
This is the real environment for performance management in the federal sector. Now all these brainy types thinking up grand schemes wish to link pay to performance. In almost 20 years I have yet to see good PM system that can support such a scheme.
I have serious questions for the senator from Ohio. Do you do it right? Do you sit down with your staffers and give them a performance appraisal that would support pay for performance? Do you give your staffers meetings to relay your expectations and feedback when they do things right and wrong? Could your office support the scheme you are trying to implement? Does anyone in Congress do this performance management right or are you all simply too busy as I've heard 10,000 times from managers?
HR Specialist
-
16571
Members of Congress ought to start concentrating on their own performance. The approval rating they get from their "bosses" -- the ubiquitous taxpayer -- is at an all time low. Instead of always shifting the blame from their lousy records by putting the federal employee under a microscope, let's see some effort to pass legislation that fixes our dependence on overseas oil/fossil fuel. Show us some progress over the big picture issues and stop picking on the already embattled civil servant who shoulders the load for all the services and promises made by the political elite.
-
16569
I agree this is election year and last ditch effort to resolve something if nothing else. However I think it is a halfway effort to come to an agreement with the unions. I am for performance evaluations based on performance, but problem is many jobs are not structured properly for growth, and evaluations end up being who you are friends with. Also I am an advocate as a woman for equal pay, equal work -- something that will vanish with pay for performance.
-
16568
I am totally confused by this article. Prior to my retirement nearly 14 years ago, the VA issued position descriptions to every employee, as well as detailed performance requirements. Detailed records were maintained throughout the rating period and were used to evaluate the performance of each employee. Those rated "fully satisfactory" received their within grade salary increase. Those rated at one of the higher levels were eligible for monetary performance awards subject to the availability of funds.
It appears this was not a requirement for all federal agencies. Is this correct?
-
16567
The only time he does anything is during an election year. Even though he is not up for election, the other Republican senator is. He grandstands and never does another thing for years. For a senior senator, he has not helped Ohio.
-
16562
Dare I hope? Finally, someone who can see the forest and the trees. Sen. George Voinovich has shown the first bit of foresight and true understanding that I've seen to date.
Once more, we already have a carrot - stick performance system in place. If the only reason for the NSPS is to increase performance, then this plan by the good senator should suffice; focusing the harsh spot light of truth on the managerial problems of accurate performance determination, reporting, and response.
If the NSPS is supposed to save money, then we will be losing. As another respondent has pointed out; if the government is saving, those savings have to come from somewhere. And where are the savings coming from? Us, the workforce.
If the NSPS is to enhance security; once more, we already have methods of deploying civilian response teams, mobile training and support teams, etc.
If the NSPS is to neuter the unions beyond President Reagan's encounter with the Air Controllers, it seems the courts have said "Enough."
What particularly encouraged me was the buy-in by Ms. Springer. Perhaps I'm a cock-eyed optimist but "Hope springs eternal."
Thank you, Sen. Voinovich. I will spread your word and wait to hear and see more. FYI, I'm from "The Show-Me state."
Tip off.
-
16560
Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio is extremely naive. Mangers do not have the final say on job performance ratings. Personnel ratings go to my boss' boss and that person's boss and the top person decides what the ratings will be changed to so that certain people in the bigger organization are rated where the top dog wants them rated! The degree of a scale 1 to 5 or 1 to 10 and the categories rated make little or no difference. You are going to fall in the bigger organization where the top dog wants you to fall regardless of your output either in terms of quality or quantity -- most of the managers and their bosses cannot measure the quality so quantity becomes more important even if you are wrong!
All George's proposal does is drive up costs and lead to nothing new or better.
-
16558
Senator Voinovich's proposal seems like a good idea. It would help take some of the shock factor out of implementing the pay for performance system. But, care must be taken to have an evaluation system that workers can understand. The guidelines for must be specific enough to minimize favoritism.
Federal employees want to be treated fairly. They don't want to have to constantly defend their rights. They shouldn't have to argue the rules in the workplace. They shouldn't have fight DOL when they are injured. They want respect.
-
16556
Boy is it great to be retired! This article will surely depress the thousands of dedicated, competent government workers, 'cause they know that management will use any tool available to unfairly promote and reward the backside kissers found in any agency. About the only jobs that might lend themselves to this l9th century, assembly-line management mindset are boring, repetitive tasks that easily be assessed. But LEO jobs, counseling jobs, and many other skilled occupations cannot be so easily monitored. But then, we all know that President Shrub is trying mightily to gut the civil service system, so this is just another hole in the bottom of the boat.
-
16555
They can call it whatever they like, chances are it is just another attempt to "slip it to" employees. Could be that Sen. Voinovich (R-Ohio) is running interference for the administration, then again he may have his own political ambitions at heart. Regardless of motivation, if the government, (especially a Republican) wants to change the rules of employment, you know it isn't for the employee's benefit.
PROMO RIGHT: EVENTS
UPCOMING WEBINARS
NOVEMBER 18
Speed bumps for Teleworking: What are they and how to avoid them?
DECEMBER 3
Achieve Program Success: Unlock the Management Information in Your Data
DECEMBER 10
Practical Transparency: Applying Exchange Networks for Mission Results
PROMO RIGHT: DIRECTORIES
Post a Comment
To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Government Executive does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.