TOPICS

Citing pressing workforce recruitment issues, the Agriculture Department on Wednesday said it will launch a five-year pay-for-performance demonstration project covering 2,900 nonbargaining unit employees in the Food Safety Inspection Service in July.

"Through the demonstration project, FSIS will be able to take a proactive role in finding solutions to ... attract the best qualified candidates and to retain and motivate its current workforce," FSIS wrote in a Federal Register notice finalizing the program, which was announced in May.

FSIS noted shortages of public health veterinarians and scientists, and said the average age of its mission-critical employees ranges from 50 to 53, depending on the occupation. The agency is spending more than $1 million annually on recruitment and retention incentives, but said these efforts have not been adequate.

Employees in the demonstration project will move from the Grade 15 General Schedule system to a series of six broad paybands. Those rated "fully successful" or better during the evaluations process will receive performance-based pay increases.

The service stated repeatedly in the Federal Register notice that all raises should be performance based.

"FSIS believes that in order to fully test a pay-for-performance system and promote a performance culture, all pay increases should be tied to performance," the regulation stated. "Employees [placed in the lowest categories of "unacceptable" or "marginal"] will not lose pay, but rather will not receive a pay increase. That is, the employee's base salary will be reduced to offset any locality pay increase."

If weak performers improve to "fully successful" or higher the year after they receive the poor rating, their raise will be based on what their pay had been without the locality pay offset, rewarding them extra for their gains.

Employees at the top of their paybands who are rated "outstanding" will be eligible for an increase of up to 5 percent from the maximum salary in the payband. Those at the top of the band who are rated "fully successful" or "superior" will receive their performance award as a lump sum rather than as a salary increase.

Ratings will be based on an "employee accomplishment report" written by the worker and a "supervisory rating justification." That rating recommendation will be reviewed by another supervisor and presented to a pay pool panel. Employees who receive low ratings will be given written notification and will be allowed to ask a different supervisor to review the marks.

Supervisors and managers will be required to undergo training for the system and will be evaluated partly based on the performance of their employees. And the service is providing classroom instruction, written and CD guides, and online training to help employees write their accomplishment reports.

Senior executives and bargaining unit employees will not be included in the demonstration project.

Agency officials rejected the idea of including longevity pay in the demonstration project.

"FSIS believes that length of services is not as critical as the employee's performance and their contribution to the mission of the agency," the notice stated. "The demonstration project is designed to recognize and retain these experienced high-performers by providing more meaningful increases."

The service acknowledged that it will be difficult to ensure that the new system is fair and credible.

"Perhaps the biggest challenge the agency faces is earning and keeping the trust of its employees during this time of profound change, while ensuring that the demonstration project is not a disincentive," FSIS wrote.

COMMENTS

  • As an employee who has work both in private sector and the fedrela government. I will state that the NSPS system at my installation does not work as I believe it was intended. I feel the SYSTEM could be good, but it is based on have good professional managers. Here we have not had the luxury of such managerial personnel. Therefore, the facility has lost several quality personnel because their immediate supervisor's rating was ignored by the Pay Pool mamangers. In my opinion it was done so they could spread the wealth among the chosen few. In the private sector this would be referred to as the GOOD OLD BOY system. Those at the TOP due not see the problems in implimentation of the pay system as they are sheilded by personnel thinking they are doing the right thing. My personnal experience has been there are to many manhours being wasted on the paper appraisal form that could be better spent in the performance of the job assignment. While this is just my observation at one facility my discussion with other personnel in several other agencies indicates simular results. I have seen the moral of personnel decline since the NSPS system was implimented at this facility. I hope that the system will improve but I have my doubts since I have witnessed that same process in the private sector fail.
  • The FSIS's belief that, "FSIS believes that length of services is not as critical as the employee's performance and their contribution to the mission of the agency." is very misguided. An agency's best resources are those experienced employees with the knowledge base to accomplish the mission. Despite the complaints regarding how the current system is based on "favors and friendship" a pay for performance system is worse by far. I have worked for agencies that tried this system and it did not solve any problems, benefit employees nor prove to be better than the old system.
  • Pay for performance is only as good as the agency's ability to pay for the increased performance level. Do the agencies have the funds to pay for the increased performance? All economic indicators are showing that 2010 will start the government cutbacks - and hard cutbacks. Do you really think that incentives and bonuses for the lower class (GS 02-14, and paybands 1 & 2) are not going to be hit? Think again! Management clearly benefits, workers are at the mercy of management - not their performance. For the guy stating civilians earn more than military - guess again. All of my sons are enlisted active military, and after 3 years in they all earn more than I do at a GS-11 and it's taken me 12 years to reach that GS-11! Take the pay scales, do a realistic side by side comparison of rank and civilian grade - and consider the time it takes to attain those grades. Don't forget to add in that military gets housing allowances and other things. Active Duty Military comes out ahead after year 3!