GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: The Short List: Key Federal Management Jobs

• 84075
  

  Homeland Security Sec. Napolitano apparently has little concern that there remains no appointee to head the Transportation Security Administration - although industry chatter suggests at least four people have turned the job down cold. Meanwhile, several programs and rule makings have stagnated, waiting for leadership.

  Art Kosatka Posted August 3, 2009 11:33 AM
• 83968
  

  I, too, have to agree with Dr. Don. The first priority of who ever i appointed to the posts to oversee management will need to address the issues of the problem managers. This will be a huge problem after seeing how EEO, DODIG, and OSC protect these problem managers and make sure that these problem managers are continually rewarded by Sr leadership. DCMA is a model agency for which there is no hope of cleanup.

  DCMA CURMUDGEON Posted July 31, 2009 9:01 PM
• 83304
  

  "Earp's term ends in 2010, so this appointment is not imminent." You wrote this about the new nominee for EEOC chair. Your information is wrong. Naomi Earp resigned from the EEOC in June to take a position with the Library of Congress as Director of the Office of Opportunity, Inclusiveness and Compliance.

  Mary Stevens Posted July 23, 2009 9:27 AM
• 83069
  

  An important postion not listed here is the Assistant Sec of Defense for Health Affairs. This position determines health care policy for 9.5 million beneficiaries of the DoD's health plan. This position requires strong business expertise in the health care industry, plus knowledge about the unique health care program delivered by the military services. While finding someone with this unique blend of knowledge, expertise and experience is rare--it is still critical that whomever is selected be able to lead this unique program. The previous ASD admitted he was not interested in the policy component of the position and instead tried to focus on the operational side of health care delivery for the uniformed services. This was frankly a disaster. This ASD was a clinician--he had no business knowledge or expertise, and less knowledge about the military health system. He spent millions on his website and other programs that duplicated existing efforts within the MHS. I sincerely hope that the next appointee is much more qualified for this position as he or she will need to manage the program of highest cost to the DoD--and perhaps the highest value as well as it is a key component of military readiness and retainment.

  Sheila Smith Posted July 21, 2009 8:19 AM
• 82948
  

  The NRC is short two commissioners. 3 out of 5 is not productive. When will the slow moving Obama administration appoint two additional commissioners.

  Jim Smith Posted July 20, 2009 8:02 AM
• 82857
  

  This article and 26 of the comments are from previous months - namely December 2008 through April 2009. Only two new comments were dated July 17th (today). Is the author of this piece having a hard time writing a new article? Some of the nominees on the list have already been confirmed and in their new positions.

  jfb Posted July 17, 2009 3:15 PM
• 82780
  

  Interesting list of vacancies since all of these are very important to the process of governance not politics. Both parties are having a more and more difficult time recruiting qualified candidates for key federal jobs that all recognize are not sinecures but tough demanding positions. This may sound ridiculous but about Congress or Max Stier's org or Paul Light going over a list of all the 3500 politically appointed or screened ( and this may be far more than 3500(In FEMA during my tenure from 1979-1999 both parties Directors screened all GS/GM15 positions for political loyalty.)Anyhow a listing of positions that by consencus should operate largely on a bi-partisan or non-partisan could be developed. Interested candidates of both parties could submit their names and then both parties could screen for whatever they wanted but the end result would be a roster from which positions could be filled with de minimus approval procedures other than ethics update and Senate Advise and Consent if necessary. The Senate would benefit because except for rare cases the Senate would confirm a goat if nominated. If this process broke down at least the public and press could point fingers at the culprits. Of course I would eliminate all Schedul C positions and NON-CAREER SES because unfortunately both are endemic homes to burrowers in the Civil Service. Hey at the moment jobs are so scarce perhaps the GS-1-2-3 messenger ranks need to be reopened. After all if the grid fails someone has to ride those bikes with important message traffic.

  William R. Cumming Posted July 17, 2009 8:41 AM
• 82764
  

  Any word on possible candidates re: Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services? Seems more than odd with all the talk of health care reform that this key position remains unfilled.

  Patience Posted July 17, 2009 7:23 AM
• 75258
  

  How nice that former Clinton appointees are getting a second shot at a cabinet position! Guess if you don't get it right the first time......

  Kathy Posted April 21, 2009 7:56 AM
• 69948
  

  Any update on candidates for NASA Administrator?

  Curious Posted February 25, 2009 12:24 PM
• 69919
  

  What are Obama's plans for the FAA? The agency is planning to spend billions of dollars to upgrade its 1950's air traffic control system. The change is needed, but requires strong, knowledgeable, innovative, cost conscious leadership.

  Continuous reorganizations, changes in management, and not listening to it workforce, has lead to limited improvements at a time when major changes are required.

  Josh Posted February 25, 2009 9:04 AM
• 66477
  

  What happened to the Obama campaign theme of CHANGE? His administration is turning into the Clinton administration only with Obama as one of the few who did not serve in the Clinton era. It was not that good an era! Bring in some outsiders please!

  anonymous Posted January 14, 2009 2:07 PM
• 66473
  

  Any wisdom on head of NASA and FAA?

  Jim Crowell Posted January 14, 2009 1:30 PM
• 66436
  

  I have to concur that it would be wonderful to see Steven Kelman at GSA. While not every change he made at OFPP worked as hoped, his tenure was a most innovative and interesting time to work in federal procurement. It would be very disappointing to see any of the people from the Professional Services Council appointed to positions that would influence federal procurement policy. We need analytical thoughtful changes and their approach has represented the worst of the "private industry is always right" mentality. Professors Yukins and Schooner have each published interesting papers on federal procurement.

  Tova Stein Posted January 14, 2009 9:54 AM
• 66199
  

  Good summary of the EEOC by Wise Owl. Change is needed in "how" EEOC carries out it's business. We apprised Halden by e-mail at the EEOC on how they could easily become more efficient and effective despite a limited workforce nationwide but received no response. Is there anyone at the EEOC I can write to that listens to simple, needed ways to assist the EEOC become more efficient and effective? So, we must know work to assist EEOC be more efficiently and effective from the "outside." Meaning federal agencies will have to take the lead and not rely on the EEOC to demonstrate the need to change... This will be easy and simple thanks to available technology and having the right person (don't need hundreds or thousands...just the right person to start the change)in the right place...Change is on the way.

  Anonymous Posted January 9, 2009 1:42 PM
• 66193
  

  And these accomplishments helped get us to where we are today(... both Stan Soloway and Colleen Preston, now at Professional Services Council, served in executive DoD positions in the Clinton Administration and were largely responsible for implementing many of the successful Acquisition Reform efforts in DoD.)

  Fed Vetter Posted January 9, 2009 12:50 PM
• 66093
  

  As it is identified in FISMA, will the position of Administrator for the Office of Information and Technology be identified for a replacement or will Karen Evans remain. The Administrator in essence is the Cyber Security CZAR for the US Government not to be found anywhere eles, be it CNSS or DHS.

  Robert Edwards Posted January 9, 2009 7:02 AM
• 66030
  

  It was not mentioned that both Stan Soloway and Colleen Preston, now at Professional Services Council, served in executive DoD positions in the Clinton Administration and were largely responsible for implementing many of the successful Acquisition Reform efforts in DoD.

  Bruce E. Sullivan Posted January 8, 2009 8:59 AM
• 65972
  

  The EEOC is toothless. It issues "guidance" instead of legislation or regulations. EEOC these days is all about PR and the private sector. They are a complaint oriented organization that focuses on rushing complaints through the process so they can report an increase in complaints processing. EEOC does not "walk the walk" when it comes to preventing complaints in the Federal sector.

  The need a Commissioner who can give them a new focus.

  Wise Old Owl Posted January 7, 2009 12:45 PM
• 65958
  

  Have never heard of Don Gala, but he makes a lot of sense.

  I would also argue that as long as we allow discrimination in the Federal government, pay for performance will continue to be suspect. We need to weed out discrimination first. Then we need to train supervisors in giving appropriate performance appraisals.

  WIsh they would consider the 360 degree appraisals (employees appraising their supervisors) which are done in some private sector entities.

  Charleen Posted January 7, 2009 10:31 AM
• 65947
  

  The next OPM Director has to be Max Stier! He is engaging, smart and has been the only steadying influence over proposing and researching new and innovative human capital strategies for the Federal workforce. OPM and OMB have simply imploded over the last 8 years of this Administration...of which Ron Sanders helped to create (during his stint at OPM). Mr. Sanders has left every institution he has touched, from IRS to OPM, in utter destruction and then simply moves on to his next conquest. Max Stier is what the hard working Federal employee needs advocating on his or her behalf and making "it cool again" to work for the Federal government!

  Pete Balfate Posted January 7, 2009 9:54 AM
• 65942
  

  Re-appointing Elaine Kaplan to be the Special Counsel would be a huge mistake. As the Clinton era Special Counsel she purposefully ignored her agency's duty to agressively represent federal employees who were discriminated against by their federal managers for Reserve Component military duty under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemeployment Rights Act (USERRA) and to uphold USERRA rights for federal employees/Reservists and Guard members.

  Under her watch, OSC did not represent one federal employee before a federal court against a federal agency for USERRA violations despite Congress directing OSC to represent federal employees in such cases, despite numerous viable cases presented to OSC, and she purposefully limited her OSC staff involvement in USERRA matters.

  I hope the Reserve Officers Association, NGAUS, and other military and veterans support groups raise a ruckus about her refusal to provide representation to federal employee Reserve Component members against their agencies to uphold their rights to serve as Reserve and Guard members and return to their federal jobs without loss of pay, position, and benefits. Any nominee for Special Counsel should pledge to enforce federal employee UESRRA rights at their confirmation hearing!

  I hope Congress questions her closely on her terrible record of USERRA enforcement as Special Counsel, if the Obama administration makes the mistake of re-appointing her.

  Paul Conrad Posted January 7, 2009 8:59 AM
• 65939
  

  I just want to say that Don Drennon Gala, Ph.D is correct in his comments. I have been appalled by the lack of competent managers who can not make a decision. They worry about political consequences instead of standing up in the job. It makes me want to go back to the private sector. It is difficult to work for managers for whom I have no respect.

  Fed Employee Posted January 7, 2009 8:41 AM
• 65938
  

  In your discussion of the EEOC Chair, you stated that the term of the current Chair, Naomi Earp, did not expire until 2010. That is true, but refers to Ms. Earp's tenure as Commissioner, not as Chair. Under the law as I understand it, the President has the right to designate a Chair and Vice Chair from among the serving Commissioners, and to change that designation at any time. So, if he wished, President Obama could designate one of the other three serving Commissioners as Chair at any time after he took office. Alternately, since one of the EEOC Commissioner slots is currently vacant, he could nominate a person for that slot, and designate him or her as Chair upon confirmation.

  Steven J. Berke Posted January 7, 2009 8:30 AM
• 65931
  

  Ron Sanders? You've got to be kidding. He was one of the worst managers that Kay Coles James hired when she was trying to destroy OPM. He only got his job at OPM because of his wife's activities with the MD GOP. He's not qualified to return to OPM or even be in the position he currently holds.

  Meyer J Persow Posted January 7, 2009 5:24 AM
• 65404
  

  Max Stier at OPM?!*?@%!? You have got to be kidding. That would be like appointing a wolf to assist the shepherd in tending, guiding, and guarding the federal civil servant "sheep" who administer our nation's government.

  David Solomon Posted December 21, 2008 4:45 PM
• 65212
  

  This merely continues an earlier message. The cases that the departments or agencies lose are merely an example of employees being empowered with the knowledge to protect themselves. The cost to the taxpayers is usually high, although the law caps recovery of non-pecuniary damages at $300,000. This is why jury trial awards over a million dollars had to be decreased to $300,000. The subsequent retaliation by these unprofessional and incompetent managers causes additional damages through loss of work hours of otherwise competent and highly competent subordinates, additional cases, and loss of these high caliber employees through early retirement, retirement, or resignation. However, we still have the same incompetent and grossly incompetent managers.

  This is a vicious cycle, and it needs to come to a halt. A transition team of new managers, and administrators, at the top need to focus on identifying these poorly prepared managers and make the appropriate changes to the management complement.

  Unfortunately, all departments and agencies have these problems, but some have a greater problem than others.

  After these changes have been made, we will see a more cost-effective federal government. Hopefully, this can begin quickly and at least make a statistically significant impact on the government in the early stages of the transition period.

  I know of an agency where I could save $100 million or more within one month, and cause the exodus of incompetent managers within the first 6-months. If I failed at doing this, I would resign immediately at the end of the 6-month period. I am one who would not worry about my resignation. Those people who know me are aware of the quality of people that I would immediately surround myself with, and how quickly I would work at meeting my goals and objectives.

  Don Drennon Gala, Ph.D. Posted December 17, 2008 11:36 PM
• 65211
  

  One of the greatest problems in the federal government is the large proportion of poor managers. With the "performance-for-pay" standard being advocated, we first need to cure the problem of the presence of poor managers in our departments and agencies.

  To date, we have had many promotions based on personal relationships between the sexes, friends, and other non-competitive reasons. Many of these individuals have been carried by the system, because once they become a manager, they are the department's or agency's manager. As such, these individuals are supported regardless of any unlawful, civil or minor criminal, behavior that they may engage in while at work.

  There is a serious problem here, and it needs a huge broom and clean-out these incompetent and grossly incompetent managers need to be sent out the door.

  What has the adverse effect been? These managers have caused competent and well learned individuals to leave federal service. Most Title VII cases are the result of incompetent managers mishandling matters dealing with subordinates. The MSPB has been nothing short of a "management protection board." Once an incompetent or abusive, or both, type of manager causes a cause-of-action, department and agency attorneys get involved and try to justify otherwise unjustifiable management actions. If the wronged employee has little or no knowledge to protect him/herself, then the department or agency may prevail. Does this mean that the manager was correct? Not at all, is this correct. This would be nothing but a system failing to protect the system.

  Don Drennon Gala, Ph.D. Posted December 17, 2008 11:34 PM
• 64767
  

  I also hope that the selection of the next EEOC Chair would be someone who has a background in Civil Rights, however I believe the vision should be for protecting employees from retaliation by the agency when the employee files an EEO complaint. My vision is also for the EEOC to stop allowing the agencys to run over disabled employees. A few months ago I received a decision from an AJ that had so many violations and errors in it that if left to stand will continue the devastating adverse impact on every disabled employee within the federal workforce. During Hitler's "cleansing program", thousands of people with various disabilities were deemed useless and simply put to death like dogs and cats because it was decided that it was a waste of time and money to support the disabled. The number of employees with targeted disabilities in the federal work force has been steadily declining in the past ten years. In FY 2007, individuals with Targeted Disabilities represented less than one percent (0.92%) of the total work force.

  R.Murry Posted December 10, 2008 6:51 PM
• 64766
  

  I hope our new President will shake up the Merit Systems Protection Board especially when it comes to their unethical relationship with the General Services Administration. For example: The MSPB allowed GSA to illegally terminate me even after agreeing that GSA had not proven the charge.

  Similar occurences have been happening to federal employees of several agencys all around the country over the past 8 years. Federal Employees have no protection from illegal actions of the agency they work for. Shame Shame Shame

  R.Murry Posted December 10, 2008 6:37 PM
• 64685
  

  As a soon to be retired GSA employee, I would suggest to the Obama Team to replace the current Administrator of GSA, Jim Williams, with someone who does not have any ties to the former Administration. Steven Kelman, professor of public management at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government. Kelman served as head of OMB's Office of Federal Procurement Policy during the Clinton administration from 1993 to 1997, would be an idea candidate to fill the Administrator's position. Mr. Kelman has a background in procurement, especially procurement policy. Right now, GSA has concentrated its efforts in collecting sales and not servicing its customers.

  Calvin Stevens Posted December 9, 2008 6:34 PM
• 64681
  

  I agree the agency needs to be seen as there for all races and issues. They can start with returning Veterans not getting their jobs back. Their #2 priority is the end of quotas in all government and private employment. Once they loose the bias they will gain the respect that has been lacking for the past 2 years

  dan m ketter Posted December 9, 2008 6:09 PM
• 64677
  

  President-Elect Obama: I am hopeful you will select leaders for any of the foregoing positions who have demonstrated, without question,the utmost integrity in all aspects of their careers. Additionally, I believe a fundamental character trait to be a leader at the highest levels (or any level for that matter), is to understand the 'grass-roots' and daily pressures of those they lead. They must truly present themselves as the ultimate mentor!

  L. Beard Posted December 9, 2008 5:25 PM
• 64645
  

  I would hope that the selection of the next EEOC Chair would be someone who has a background in Civil Rights and a vision for the the agency. It took the commission a long time to position its investigators and agency so that it could be viewed as a respected enforcement agency. We moved to 18th and L, EEO specialist were renamed to federal investigators, investigators received federal investigator badges. These moves went a long way to establish our legitimacy in the community. With one stroke, Ms. Earp changed that significantly by moving the agency from downtown to the outskirts of town. Given the budget constraints this agency has operated under over the past secveral years, we need someone who is motivated to make this agency the primere civil rights agency in the county. I work in Jackson, Mississip and dispite all of the changes, including President-elect O'bama's win, there is still MUCH to be done. We should be seen as the agency that protects the employment rights of EVERYONE. Race took a back seat for many years and in a place like MIssissippi, it is still a MAJOR issue. WE should, however, seek to be all inclusive and show citizens how his agency helps everyone, regardless of race, sex, national origin, religion, age or disability.

  Wilma J. scott Posted December 9, 2008 11:35 AM