GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Pay-for-performance prospects dim, OMB official says

• 23484
  

  When I entered the GS system, I had no idea what it was or how it worked. Entered as a GS-5 even though I have a BA degree and have worked since I was 18 years old and am now 51 years old. After a year and 1/2, I have not been able to move because of the rules about being in the next grade down. Well, I thought that NSPS would take care of that, but no. Now, I am being told that you can only advance 5% a year which is not much more than a step. The supervisors do not know the rules of how to help someone to advance, so those who have supervisors with a little more sauvey than others benefit while those of us who work for supervisors who feel that it is more effort to learn how to help their employees than it is worth to them feel stuck. Finding another job doesn't help much since you are told that you can only advance 5%. So, if you started out too low in the GS system, you are still doomed to stay there with the NSPS.

  Sharon Rokanas Posted May 17, 2007 8:28 AM
• 20081
  

  Mr. Johnson's election-like swipe at Democrats illustrates the partisan nature of this effort. All government employees support a rating system that links their performance to pay. The catch is to do so without creating a bureaucracy to make it happen. While the old systems were far from perfect, enforcement of already existing rules along with some enhancement of the process would have made much better use of the millions of dollars spent on a system that will occupy an estimated 80 percent of upper management's time to accomplish. The use of a 13-page form, the three extra layers of review, a couple of months from the time from the date of evaluation until the employee receives their rating, along with the ability of these additional levels of review to lower the rating official's evaluation, all out of sight of the employee, make the NSPS system a large waste of time and resources. Hiring practices have been slowed to a crawl while the salary for every position is negotiated vice the GS system where salaries were preset and fairly implemented across the government.

  Mr. Johnson also implied that lone disgruntled staffers were the only ones having a problem and that these individuals were operating without guidance from superiors. This shows the disregard he has toward opposing points of view. The implied threat is real and employees don't speak out for fear of being branded as not being "team players." Seems to me if he only reports to his boss once a year and has to explain what the system actually accomplishes, he might need a little closer coordination with his own chain of command. It's time to admit these resources are better spent supporting our troops than creating a system that reduces the ability of the current workforce to provide that support. Stop the madness now!

  GovExec.com reader Posted December 11, 2006 9:12 AM
• 20076
  

  Federal agencies remind me of the diabetic person who lives in self denial. The person tells himself that fifty extra pounds isn't really that dangerous to his health. He continues to eat Big Macs instead of salads and sneaks snacks and cookies. He ignores blood sugar readings because the machine "just can't be right." He even ignores the warnings from his body. He rationalizes everything as "not that serious."

  Then it happens. He finds himself going blind or developing gangrene. He ignored the warnings and now will never be the same again. All he had to do was get rid of the fat and get his act together. Now, it's too late.

  Isn't that what federal agencies are doing? Aren't they in denial? Haven't they been ignoring the signs? Either, they must act to get rid of their fat and get into shape or Congress may finally be forced to cut them off at the knees.

  Robert M. Posted December 11, 2006 7:38 AM
• 20044
  

  Good!!! The GS schedule will work as it has and all we need is the supervisors and managers to stand up to the slackers as they should have been doing all these years. But, most of our management does not want to make waves, so they may protect their status and promotional opportunities. Quit being spineless and document and get the job done!!

  Bill Posted December 8, 2006 2:16 PM
• 20039
  

  At our VA medical center in Dublin, Ga., all employees who received a fully satisfactory or better received a monetary award. That's right -- even if you just did your job you got additional cash. One person who they had just demoted due to unsatisfactory performance received a fully satisfactory rating and -- you guessed it -- received additional reward money. At this place you don't even need to worry about having an advanced education to get ahead. Service chiefs are sometimes just high school graduates. And they wonder why the system is so screwed up!

  GovExec.com reader Posted December 8, 2006 8:23 AM
• 20010
  

  May I say it? "Woohoo!!"

  Now the question is: Will sanity reign supreme, or is this just another lull in the storm?

  Oops, now you got my hopes up again.

  Tip off.

  GovExec.com reader Posted December 7, 2006 12:30 PM
• 20001
  

  I first thought NSPS would make it easier to motivate and reward folks. But now I see it is a dangerous instrument in the wrong hands and bad ideas like bad fruit don't get better with time. This idea was rotten to the core from the start. No matter how you peel it, layer for layer, it's meant to stifle the individual and create blind obedience instead of individual initiative. This is not how we should define success. Even the SES's have complained about how the pay pool was managed. The system requires all raises to be placed it in a pot. But guess what, the pot was always gone by the time it got to those just a few rungs down the ladder. Those at the top received excellent bonuses though. NSPS was created to satisfy someone's ego and has nothing to do with security of out nation.

  GovExec.com reader Posted December 7, 2006 10:29 AM
• 19983
  

  This is the best news that you published in a long time.

  GovExec.com reader Posted December 6, 2006 3:05 PM