TOPICS

OPM delays promotion rule again

By Alyssa Rosenberg arosenberg@govexec.com May 11, 2009

The Office of Personnel Management announced on Monday that it will delay until August a decision on whether to repeal a requirement that federal employees spend at least one year in a pay grade before they can be promoted.

The original rule, crafted during the Bush administration, was scheduled to take effect on March 9, but was delayed to allow for a longer comment period after the Obama administration asked agencies to take 60 extra days to consider regulations that had been published in the Federal Register but not yet implemented. OPM decided to postpone enforcement "to avoid the unnecessary expense of allowing a rule to take effect that may later be amended or revoked as a result of the rule-making proceeding."

The regulation would have eliminated the so-called time-in-grade rule, which requires that federal employees in jobs at the General Schedule 5 level or above, spend one year in that position before they are eligible for promotion to a higher pay grade. Those workers also must meet requirements related to job qualifications.

RELATED STORIES

National Treasury Employees Union President Colleen Kelley said she hoped the announcement meant that OPM would study the impact of time-in-grade more closely, paying particular attention on the importance of basing promotions on experience rather than favoritism.

"A key element in an effective civil service is both the perception and the reality of fairness and objectivity in the treatment of employees," Kelley said in a statement. "The time-in-grade rules help foster such an environment."

But John Palguta, vice president for policy at the nonprofit Partnership for Public Service, said the time-in-grade regulation was an arbitrary distinction that should be eliminated because it has nothing to do with qualifications. For example, he said time-in-grade requirements could prevent the advancement of extremely qualified people from the private sector who chose to start second careers in government.

"It doesn't mean everyone's going to shoot to the full performance level, because they still have to meet the full qualification requirements," providing an appropriate check on favoritism in promotions, Palguta said.

He also noted that because time-in-grade rules apply only to employees who are covered under the General Schedule, those who work under alternative pay systems might be able to receive promotions quicker than their colleagues in other agencies, creating a disparity.

"You might end up having a situation where you have some haves and have-nots," Palguta said.

VIEW ALL 54 COMMENTS POST COMMENT

COMMENTS

  • I work in a enviornment were the young and in experience of two Black female who are the Director and Deputy Director. Both been with the Bureau of Clinician Recruitment and Service (BCRS) for one year and they have target all the white employees for termination. They have target white employees and now and than they would go after one or two blacks? The Assoicate Administrator (OAA) and the Deputy Assoicate Administrator OAA of BCRS should be removed immediately and both Director and Deputy Director of the Division of Applications and Awards should be removed as well. There are good employees but bad supervisors and managers which have brought mental stressful pain to the employees of the Division of Applications and Awards (DAA). Example: The Director and Deputy Director with the approval of the OAA and deputy OAA approved the firing of a senior Public Health Analyst who was employed with the Health Resources and Service Administration for 29 and half years of federal government service. Just because her primary care physician require that the employee be transfer to another bureau or division within HRSA or work shorter hours until she retire in December 2009. We had a another white male resigned this past week after working with HRSA since 1992 with 17 years of good service. The Deputy Director of DAA denied a white female a week of annual leave to see her brother. They question and refuse to at will but let individuals they like take annual leave without question. Two other white left the division because the behavior of the Director and Deputy Dirctor of DAA. The head OAA on the 14th floor knows about the problems in BCRS but refuse to take any action against the supervisors who behavior and conduct questionable. The employee with 29 and half years is suiting the DHHS/HRSA. James Simmons Posted August 25, 2009 8:12 PM
  • I really do hope they throw out the Time-in-grade because I have been a GS-5 for almost 2 years. My goal is to be in the Human Resource Department every time that I applied for a position with the Government with the same agency. I am getting a response that I do not meet time-in-grade or I do not have experience. I am going to school to get my Bachelor Degree in Human Resources Management and I all ready Associate in Business Administrate so I do not understand why I have to be stick at a low grade. I am trying to move up with the Government unlike some people. Shephard Posted August 4, 2009 5:56 PM
  • I'm a legal assistant for Social Security, and have been denied promotions due to TiG. Let's forget for a second that I've been running trainings for the entire office. Let's forget that I've helped make changes nation-wide in the way cases are processed. Let's forget that I'm doing the work of three of my co-workers, while getting paid the same as them. Let's remember that I've been a GS5 for 6 months. Even though I was qualified to start the job at a 5, (finished undergrad before entering the job), they entered me in as a 4 to begin with, and took their sweet time with the administrative bump. My internships working at the State level get thrown out the window. My work in the private sector, thrown out the window. Now how is this fair? Even my bosses are pushing for me to be moved up, (three new judges, and no 'qualified' legal assistants available), but thanks to TiG, there's apparently nothing they can do. We're all hoping that, come August, the TiG is removed. There are plenty of objective criteria to judge someone's application on. Whether you've been there a year more than someone else shouldn't be the deciding factor. Anonymous Poster Posted July 28, 2009 3:06 PM
VIEW ALL 54 COMMENTS

TODAY'S MOST POPULAR