Return to Article: House sounds death knell for Pentagon pay-for-performance system
-
85457
For government workers in-general; NSPS/DCIPS has been a failure (from my perspective in a DoD Agency). Pay for Performance is a good idea, and it can work [Booz-Allen-Hamilton is a good example]; but, BAH has an entire HR department devoted to handling the large amount of administrative work that makes Pay-for-performance workable. With NSPS/DCIPS, the additional administrative burden was placed squarely onto the backs of already overworked government supervisors. How were they expected to succeed? Every supervisor I saw trying to make NSPS/DCIPS work, had to work every weekend to keep up with the added workload.
-
82799
Dunzwork, " I am all for giving the "bonuses" to those who want to give up their health to look good in their jobs." Kudos....... The government should allow these hyper-competitive, would stab their own mother in the back for a raise, NEO-CON Middle Managers to compete and eliminate one another....mmm sounds like corporate America...and what happened to them? NSPS is just the "Good Ole Boy Network 2009"... and the majority of Federal Workers understand this. We are under a new administration now.
Sincerely,
W Hater
-
82416
NSPS is the most un-realistic rating system that has ever been conceived. To think a supervisor is going to award more money to half his team over the other is ludicrous. Talk about ill feelings and bad attitudes. Nowonder unions are against the program. As a supervisor, under NSPS, I trully hope the GS system prevails. Giving someone a bonus for doing a great job that is rateable is the way to go, and the rest of the team will recognise the award winner as deserving. At least that's how it was in my last supervisory position 7 years ago.
-
82265
The NSPS has been implemented at our agency could not be more "exemplary." The "network" has gotten their way, and the rest of us are on the sidelines expected to be happy with 3's (because most of us should get 3s and be happy with them any way.) I HOPE Obama doesn't shove this to the teachers! I heard yesterday on the radio that he's trying to shove Pay for Performance to teachers. So if it doesn't work for the Federal Work Force, it's not going to work for teachers either. Let's stick to "Bonus for Performance". Make the bonuses the incentive to work "more" and "harder" might be what they're really after. But don't mess with the basic pay and meager annual increase we already get. I am all for giving the "bonuses" to those who want to give up their health to look good in their jobs. Not me. And I'm not lazy. I'm just realistic.
-
82120
Most people I work with like NSPS, and will be very upset if it gets taken away. We all agree that the evaluation process stinks, as we have no clear goals to ensure we can earn a 5, or even a 4.
However, from a money side, it is way better. For new people they lose a bit at the beginning, because the shares don't give as much as jumping from a GS11 to GS 12 and so on. But, if you're in your terminal grade, and only have the GS step increases to look forward to, by the time you get to Step 4, the GS system only gives a raise every other year, and by Step 7, it's every third year.
In the old GS system, when you reach Step 10, all you get is the 2.5 - 3/5% annual bump. With NSPS, you can get a much bigger reward, as you can still earn your shares, plus get 60% of the annual bump. Granted, the shares come as a bonus, but it works out to more money than the GS system.
To say you don't like the compensation part of NSPS is very short sited. The employee evaluation part stinks, but the money is great.
If you pro-union types wreck it for the rest of us, that stinks most of all.
-
81913
The elimination of NSPS is certainly good news. Although in theory pay for performance should work, the reality is that this pay system has allowed some managers (good and poor) to empty the payroll dollars from a much larger (less powerful or influencial) general labor pool in order to redirect/award cash bonuses to themselves and those within the "inner circle". Rubbles to the poor and wealth to the priviledge! What happened to using performance counselings to improve performance, retrain, or weed out (release) non-performers? Counseling, is a management tool and responsibility and when you have poor or non-performers than management is FAILING to perform and management should be rated and paid (docked) as such. The lack of proper management (or professional courage) hurts the individual and other members of the "Team". Management failures support employee failure and management failure contributes to the overall failures within the federal system. Far too often people want the credit, salaries, and "perks" that come with a management title, but they seldom want to acknowledge or fix performance and personnel problems and issues. You can pay a non-performer a basic wage but they aren't going anywhere and pay for performance won't fix that. How about going back to the old GS system and enforcing some basic management principles and responsibilities or docking manager's pay?
-
81818
For Defense Dept. employees, there must be a way to determine which jobs are critical to national security. Then methods used by the intelligence agencies, such as the CIA and FBI, where people are engaged and enjoy their jobs/organizations, can be emulated. Governmentwide, I recommend a hybrid pay system in that the Fed Govt is looking for ways to improve. The # of with-in grade increases per the GS schedule can be decreased, for example. Providing the majority of good employees with COLA raises is very good, though, in that there are too many abuses and too much favoritism when a pay for performance system is used. There is also the tendency to rate everyone a 3 or in the middle. Recently in the Washington Post, negative favoritism/gross unfairness was discussed. The Fed Govt has public service as a value that people are drawn to, and management must continue to strive for fairness and transparency. This differentiates the fed govt from the private sector. However, there are still many employees, unionized and not, who are also unfair to good managers/leaders, therefore there must be some modification of the GS schedule system.
-
81666
One giant leap for civil service kind! Now on to the big fight.......making it happen!
-
81603
"Federal employees are not in favor of replacing their current annual pay adjustment, passed by Congress, for a pay adjustment that is subject to favoritism and discrimination and other unrevealed elements outside of market data and performance."
"If the design principles were to suppress future wages, lower future retirement income, eliminate due process, destroy employees' collective bargaining rights, create years of controversy, undercut morale, mislead the Congress and the employees with half truths, allow total flexibility to undermine merit principles and make the pay process incredibly complex and impossible to understand, eliminate merit promotions, take money from some employees and give it to higher salaried employees in the name of national security and without sunshine or transparency to the employees themselves," said Gage. "Then we can unequivocally confirm that those design principles have been incorporated into NSPS and those program objectives have been fully met!"
AMEN!!!
-
81581
Management left to it's own devices comes up with some sinister stuff.
-
81574
Well, hurdle 1 of passing the house has been successful. Now for the rest of them, passing the Senate then the joint resolution. Crossing fingers they are all successful.
-
81568
Congress should have made equal shares for this year a part of the law. Now all the annointed ones will get max shares their last time around. NSPS is badly managed and a travesty.
-
81560
We are under NSPS, it is unfair, and if you do an audit on the people that got thousands of dollars, you will see it is management. If I was under the GS, I would have got my promotion, but what I got as a (GS-11) YA2 was a $1,000, and that was added to my base pay. I requested a reconsideration, with the Col, and explained to him, why I should had gotten it all in my base pay, and he did correction, but to give me a bonus of $1000.00, after Taxes, it was $700.00 When I check and weighed the Peps and Cons of the GS and NSPS, for little people like me I am between a GS11 Step 3 and 4, had I been a GS, I would have been a GS-11 Step4 It is unfair. How do someone that does not have a college degree, is in a GS-7 position, and has gotten a job as YC which is GS 13. NSPS has no business in the world of the Federal Workers, and for those who want NSP to stay, and I thensuggest that they go work for a private company.
-
81528
I only hope DoD goes through with this.NSPS is a travesty; there always WAS pay for performance and shame on the managers who did not enforce it. In fact, I remember when managers HAD to sign off on a form when employees were eligible for their step increase. It was the PERSONNEL community, in their infinite wisdom, who, when the system for SF 50s was COMPUTERIZED, that insisted everything be automatic. The good old boy network is alive and well in the form of NSPS and it gives managers carte blanche to hire who they want (ie: general officers/retired military officers are hiring retired military officers and former buddies). It is a falacy that those people that do not like NSPS are low performers - the people who believe that have been sold a bill of goods and until they are victimized by NSPS, they will not truly know what can happen to empployees under NSPS. Point: I know of a situation that occured in the Pentagon - where a career civilian employee, who had always received exceptional performance appraisals and monetary bonuses - was replaced with a friend and mentor of the general officer in charge. This person had no clue this was happening until he was booted out and into a lesser job. This general advertised the position as needed filling, selected someone while this person was still IN the position, hired his retired military buddy and former mentor, and gave the career employee a lesser position - and he got away with it under NSPS. The person who was in that job had no idea their job was being advertised until after this other person was hired. If it can happen to him, believe me, it can happen to anyone (he was a GS-15). Needless to say, that person left the Department, and numerous other personnel followed before he could do that to them as well. Check the hiring figures GAO - or aren't you even listening?? PS: the person replaced was a disabled veteran.
-
81514
I never met anyone that liked NSPS! It was one of the worst programs to come along in the last twenty years...
-
81512
P4P will only demoralize DHS, especially at ICE-Investigations (ICE/INV). With no union to back us at ICE/INV, the reoccurring P4P will only worsen things. This will not be forgotten in 2012.
-
81509
Repeal NSPS. Return all employees to the GS system. Use the current system to improve or correct the performance of poor performers.
-
81491
this nothing but pap NSPS is alive and will continue
-
81488
Sorry wannabe Republicans. Another hammer to the policies of Bush. Outstanding job by the House of Representatives. Go Dems.
-
81485
Please...please...kill NSPS once and for all. It is a complete and utter failure in every way. Bring us back to the General Schedule, which was more fair and certainly more transparent. We can tweak and improve the General Schedule which has stood the test of time.
On a side note, I love how the Program Executive Office for NSPS packed the house with "supporters" in that recent public hearing. Of course all the hard-working majority within DoD who HATE the system couldn't do that because they were busy actually WORKING. Of course the PEO for NSPS and his cronies have a vested interest in keeping NSPS alive - but at the expense of the masses who are punished by this corrupt pay system. Love it.
-
81475
T-rex is correct. DOD knew what they were doing in accepting NSPS. The entitlement mentality in DOD upper management is sickening. Why wouldn't present officers agree to a pay system that would line upper management's pockets when they know within a few years it will be THEIR own pockets full of money. NSPS now makes it legal what military officers have been doing illegally since former president Clinton changed the rules: retire Friday and report to work Monday in GS15 positions with full military retirement pay. As long as this practice is allowed, DOD workers will never be safe from any and all schemes to make CIVIL service more like their military environment.
-
81451
"t-rex", THANKS! YES! kill this four letter word, "NSPS" and make it mandatory that no one will be allowed to use a relooked at "GS" system without very exacting and rigorous training to include yearly refresher training and they are able to present a licence saying that holder is skilled. Also, Please bring back the fundmentals of a "Merit" approach to hiring.
-
81447
I won't believe it till I see it. The President wants PFP across the government, so I don't see any real changes coming.
-
81438
Any system, including NSPS, is far better than the outdated GS system. All poor performers under GS just sit back and wait for their step increases. These lazy workers make up 50% of the workers. That's my experience in 18 years working for DoD. Lets spend tens of millions to get rid of a system we just implemented. No sense.
-
81431
DCIPS is WORSE than NSPS. It even strips the few positive factors of NSPS away. It is an embarrasment and an insult to those of us under it. You dont hear much about it because those under DCIPS aren't allowed to join a union and we dont have a voice.
They are spitting in our face and the DCIPS employee community knows it. We just arent allowed a voice.
-
81425
Woo-hoo!!!
-
81403
As someone who is actually IN the NSPS system instead of just beating drums on the sidelines, I am disappointed by how short-sighted lawmakers can be. Trying to dismantle a system of this size piecemeal can only bring another layer of complication. Setting the June 16 date, for example, is just silly. It cripples the mission capabilities of organizations that have settled into the status quo. Any dismantlement must be carefully planned and systematic. If not, it will bring chaos. And adding this amendment while a comprehensive study is in progress is not forward-thinking; it is knee-jerk.
-
81387
It's about time. I mean, paying people based on their contribution to the organization is clearly ridiculous. Why should the guy in the next cubicle get a bigger raise than me simply because he works all day, gets the job done and doesn't whine about everything? I've always been very happy knowing that I'll get my raise every year just by showing up and sitting in my chair each day. It's worked for years...why change a good thing?
-
81367
This sounds like some pretty positive developments. NSPS needs to be scrapped.
One of the big reasons that NSPS was touted as great was that it would allow DoD to pay more cash for supervisory positions relative to non-supervisory positions. Rather than creating the NSPS monstrosity, why didn't the HR folks just tack a bonus percentage, 10%, 15%, 20%, or whatever the HR people thought would attract the talent, onto the existing GS system? That would have been far less disruptive, cheaper and more effective than the NSPS sham.
-
81350
Re: NSPS dismantling, the Administration appears to be pulling rank rather than acknowledging that there is sufficient data gathered over the past four years to indicate the NSPS failure vis a vis employee satisfaction and the cost. Their assertion that OPM is reviewing the system to determine its future, reads like the statement of a baseball coach deciding whether to bench a player who has a batting average of 125. The problems with NSPS are already documented. The OPM review is creating work, wasting time and money. That is one reason good civil service employees get a bad rap; the make work charge. Why the admin's OPM cannot gather all the current data rather than asserting their control is ridiculous, outrageous and costly.
-
81345
FINALLY!!!!! They are finally starting to see through the BS and taking steps to eliminate this ridiculous system that didn't get anyone (except retiring military officers) into the system quickly. The entire system was a scam and it's going to be great to get rid of it.
-
81341
Unbelievable! The house actually passed something practical for a change. It's just a shame that more research wasn't done before so much time and taxpayer dollars were wasted on pay for performance to begin with.
It's time for Department of Defense to face the truth. There was nothing wrong with the old system. The problem is bad management without accountability. Any pay system can be corrupted.
-
81322
I hope that DCIPS is on it's way out also.
-
81310
John Gage, AFGE national president, testified before the Defense Business Board Task Group.
"Wherever we have talked to federal employees, they have been unanimous in their rejection of NSPS. No matter how the question is framed and no matter which version of pay-for-performance is involved, the message is the same," said Gage. "Federal employees are not in favor of replacing their current annual pay adjustment, passed by Congress, for a pay adjustment that is subject to favoritism and discrimination and other unrevealed elements outside of market data and performance."
"If the design principles were to suppress future wages, lower future retirement income, eliminate due process, destroy employees' collective bargaining rights, create years of controversy, undercut morale, mislead the Congress and the employees with half truths, allow total flexibility to undermine merit principles and make the pay process incredibly complex and impossible to understand, eliminate merit promotions, take money from some employees and give it to higher salaried employees in the name of national security and without sunshine or transparency to the employees themselves," said Gage. "Then we can unequivocally confirm that those design principles have been incorporated into NSPS and those program objectives have been fully met!"
Gage also blasted the transfer of money from those making less than $60,000 to those making more than $100,000 as shown in the NSPS Internal Evaluation Review. "One of the most immoral aspects of NSPS is the intended design to take salary money from the pockets of lower paid employees and give it to the higher salaried employees in the top management ranks," said Gage. "In the Evaluation Report of NSPS released June 22, 2009 makes it crystal clear on the chart (figure 2.8) on page 2-15 of the report. It is called a net draw. In other words how much do you get back versus how much of your money went into the pool. Those making below $60,000 had a negative net draw or "lost money", 60-80K group had a positive net draw. Those at $80,000-100,000 gained more. Those making over 100K received the most money back with the largest positive net draw."
AFGE has highlighted the potential for such a transfer of wealth from the beginning. "Clearly, DoD ignored these recommendations because they wanted more money for those at the top," said Gage.
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.