IG: Postal Service managers fudged pay-for-performance rules
Audit finds supervisors at the financially strapped agency arbitrarily lowered performance ratings and were less generous with raises, partly to avoid a public backlash.
Managers at the U.S. Postal Service have skirted the agency's performance evaluation rules, reducing or eliminating employee salary increases in some cases to avoid the negative publicity that bonuses could bring the financially ailing agency, according to a new audit.
In an Aug. 8 report, the USPS inspector general found that supervisors responsible for evaluating and approving Executive Administrative Schedule employee performance lowered ratings against the agency's pay-for-performance system policies. In addition, managers rated postmasters based on numeric targets, such as retail revenue and operating expenses, rather than behavioral criteria.
Forty-six percent of evaluators and 40 percent of second-level reviewers surveyed reported that employee ratings were lowered during the review process. Respondents said they were instructed by a superior to bring ratings into line with average scores or believed that ratings should be lowered to avoid raising suspicion. Others were concerned that employee performance targets were too easy to meet or that the public would react negatively to workers receiving bonuses given the agency's fiscal condition, the IG found.
USPS in 2003 launched the National Performance Assessment, designed to measure an employee's contribution as an individual and to their work unit and the entire organization. Incentives are based on employees' contributions, and those determined to be noncontributors aren't eligible for raises. EAS employees rely on performance ratings for their annual pay raises and awards. They do not receive step increases or cost-of-living adjustments.
"Arbitrarily lowering employees' end-of-year ratings can affect employee morale and their potential wage increases and bonuses, promotions, retirement annuity calculations and Thrift Savings Plan contributions," the audit found. "When managers do not comply with PFP policies and procedures, they can compromise the integrity of the program and undermine the accuracy and validity of employee evaluations."
The IG recommended the Postal Service better define its pay-for-performance policies, establish mandatory training for employees and managers on the process, and evaluate the program's effectiveness. Agency officials said they do not believe the audit findings represent the pay-for-performance system as a whole but acknowledged that in some instances ratings were given against existing policies.
The report was produced in response to a request from the National Association of Postal Supervisors, the National League of Postmasters and the National Association of Postmasters of the United States.