TOPICS

Virginia lawmaker suggests bottom-up approach to pay reform

By Alex M. Parker aparker@govexec.com June 11, 2009

Early collaboration with employee groups is critical to building successful pay-for-performance systems, said Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Va., during a breakfast in Washington on Thursday.

Close consultation with focus groups and employee representatives helped move Fairfax County in Virginia from a complicated and rigid pay arrangement where employees received cost-of-living increases that some viewed as entitlements to a flexible system where pay was linked more closely to job performance and salaries for comparable jobs in the private sector, Connolly said during the panel discussion, organized by Government Executive. The new system has guidelines for evaluating employees' work and clear procedures for employees to air grievances, he said.

"We didn't impose it from the top down," said Connolly, who was on the county's board of supervisors for 14 years, and was chairman of the board for five years before being elected to Congress in 2008.

RELATED STORIES

But Connolly, who represents a district in Northern Virginia with 56,000 federal employees, noted that due to differences in size and culture, the federal government should not follow Fairfax County's model precisely.

Connolly and fellow panelist Jon Desenberg, consulting director for The Performance Institute, both said an inability to measure performance at the individual and agency levels has held back personnel reforms. Previously, Desenberg ran the General Services Administration's performance management system.

"Sometimes in the government, we fall into the trap of measuring what is easy to measure," Connolly said. Performance measurement has been a roadblock to expanding telework, he said.

"There's a cultural barrier that managers believe, if I can't see you, then you must be watching soap operas or walking the dog," Connolly said.

During a wide-ranging discussion about the federal workforce, Connolly also said the government must create more flexibility for workers to move in and out of public service, focus on internship programs to recruit young workers, and investigate allowing retirees to work temporarily as consultants to help train their replacements.

Human resources departments lost their edge as they hired fewer people during the government cutbacks of the 1990s, according to Desenberg. "If you stop the [hiring] process for a couple of years, you're going to forget how to do it," he said.

He said the process of applying for positions through USAJobs.gov, the government's hiring Web site, can be cumbersome and irks both managers and applicants. "[Managers] don't feel that they're getting the best candidates," Desenberg said.

VIEW ALL 16 COMMENTS POST COMMENT

COMMENTS

  • Connley needs to let the TAXPAYERS have a say in all of the pending reforms they are on the hook to pay for it. Unless pay is frozen until the private sector catches, retirement plan loses its COLA and ACCOUNTABILITY is a significant part of the mix, its an effort in futility. Where else in the world do you go where the inmates run the asylum?? dan m ketter Posted June 15, 2009 2:48 PM
  • What did Rep.Connolly mean by "Early collaboration with employee groups is critical to building successful pay-for-performance systems"? Since ALL training and propaganda told to me pushing this doctorial pay system down my throat was how successful the pay-for-performance system already is. First off, we need to stop putting our political representatives in office just for adding pages to the history books. Secondly, to you kissing butt good old boys (girls), who claim those not wanting the new system are the ones not working. I simple put this way; I have always done my job and received excellent marks. However, I do not believe I should have to sell myself to the boss, whose job it should be to know how good a job I am doing. If I was screwing up or not doing my job then he/she needs to tell me and take appropriate action, which was highly successfully in the good old days. I will get down off my soapbox known, because this is all water under the bridge. Thanks to NSPS as of 3 July 2009 with 39 years of federal service, I am retiring. I am going to toss the blood pressure pills and start enjoying life with my new performance system “spoiling my grandchildren”. Oh! I almost forgot finishing my Honey Do List, whenever I get the chance. Good Luck to the worker bees and God Bless America. Jimmy Mac Posted June 15, 2009 12:48 PM
  • There is too much wrong with the NSPS to be fixed and it is not an improvement over the General Schedule (GS). There has been too much time and Taxpayers' money wasted on this imperfect system. In the GS system the Employee had rights and could be protected; the NSPS is removing that protection under the guise to be able to move Civilians because of Security (false). That is why we have the military branches, the National Guard, and the Reservists! The government has taken control of the Automotive industry. Now the White House and Senate want to control the appointees of all 5 Inspector General positions. Does the United States need more upheaval during an administration change? I do NOT think so, when Congress cannot get a Budget passed on time every year! Will the Inspections be honest or tied to the whims of the Senate and President in order to keep their job? I think so! When everything moves to government control we no longer have a Democracy, but a Socialism government. The last Presidential Campaign was a mockery to the truths for which our great Nation was founded. Hitler promised many things at the expense of many lives and the downfall of Germany. Russia was a powerful nation but met defeat. Are we fast moving in the same direction? B Schell Posted June 15, 2009 10:11 AM
VIEW ALL 16 COMMENTS

TODAY'S MOST POPULAR