TOPICS
TOPICS
Pay Day
The roster of new federal pay and benefits decision-makers is lining up in the executive and legislative branches.
The current leaders in the administration and Congress who will craft policies affecting the federal workforce are strong defenders of traditional employee benefits, as might be expected from a Democratic-controlled government. They have fought to preserve cost-of-living pay increases, opposed what they deemed to be unfair pay-for-performance systems, and worked to keep federal workers' health care costs low.
Tania Shand, the new director of congressional relations at the Office of Personnel Management, will have a pivotal role as the liaison between the administration and Capitol Hill on federal employees' pay and benefits. Shand is currently the staff director of the House Oversight and Government Reform Federal Workforce Subcommittee. Rep. Stephen Lynch, D-Mass., her boss, credited her with helping to pass legislation last year that ensured employees at the Government Accountability Office earning at least a satisfactory rating under the agency's pay-for-performance system would receive cost-of-living raises comparable to those under the General Schedule.
Jonathan Tumin, a senior GAO analyst, also praised Shand for having "a tremendous positive impact on the lives and morale of hundreds of GAO employees."
In addition, Shand helped lead the congressional response last winter to the decision by Blue Cross Blue Shield to institute a new policy that would have required enrollees to pay a deductible of up to $7,500 for surgeries performed by out-of-network physicians. Blue Cross, the largest provider of health plans to federal employees, eventually renegotiated that provision of its Standard Option plan under pressure from Congress and Shand's subcommittee.
Lynch, the federal workforce subcommittee's new chairman, also has touted his federal pay and benefit credentials since assuming a leadership role. In a March 4 speech to the National Treasury Employees Union, he outlined a broad agenda for federal employees' pay and benefits, including support for a higher pay raise, collective bargaining rights, whistleblower protections, and paid parental leave. On March 25, Lynch moved legislation out of his subcommittee to grant federal employees four weeks of paid leave for the birth or adoption of a child. It was the first bill he addressed and shepherded as chairman. He also has introduced legislation that would change the way federal retirement benefits are calculated and a bill to automatically enroll new federal employees in the Thrift Savings Plan.
Before Lynch took over the subcommittee, he co-sponsored legislation to restore the executive labor-management partnership councils that President Clinton established and President Bush repealed, as well as a bill to increase the diversity of the Senior Executive Service.
He also has long personal experience with federal employee policies -- 17 members of his family work for the government, mostly for the U.S. Postal Service, and "they are not shy about letting me know what's wrong with what they see in the workplace," he said during his NTEU speech.
Even though Lynch is losing his staff director to OPM, Shand couldn't be moving to a better place to work with him on his pay and benefits agenda. Also joining OPM, as general counsel, is Elaine Kaplan, the former special counsel during the Clinton and Bush administrations, and current senior deputy general counsel for the National Treasury Employees Union.
Much of Kaplan's legal experience has been on employee rights issues, including case work on drug testing and speaking fees. At NTEU, Kaplan has been involved in challenges to the controversial National Security Personnel System and the pay-for-performance system at the Securities and Exchange Commission.
On Thursday, Obama's choice for OPM chief heads to Capitol Hill for his first confirmation hearing. John Berry's Senate appearances no doubt will provide an opportunity to see where he stands on a wide range of personnel policies and challenges facing the federal human capital community.
COMMENTS
- All of the government pay systems have their vulnerability to corruption, misuse, and abuse. So what’s new about that? Nothing at all. Why all the whining about NSPS? It is what you make of it. Do a good job on writing your objectives and your self assessment. Learn how the system works and if you don’t get the pay for performance you think you deserve and can prove, file for reconsideration. If your reconsideration does nothing for you, maybe you’re just not as good as you think you are. Or perhaps maybe you need to move on to an organization that thinks as highly of you as you do. GMAB! Fed on NSPS Posted April 23, 2009 7:13 PM
- NSPS Pay for Performance gives your supervisor no additional input in rating your perforance than he/she has now. This supervisor will now have the additional burden of defending his/her ratings to the Pay Pool. The ratings that are "out of sync" will be questioned. Ratings of a favorite will stand out. What can't be stopped and will continue is the preferable assignments being given to certain employees. I had to laugh when on another link, a GS-15 stated that she was insulted that her 15 was thrown away and she had to be put into the same classification as mere GS-14's. Guess 13's should feel similarly insulted. No one likes change but the new system has proven lucrative for the people that were converted earlier. Will it be the same for those of us recently converted? I doubt it as the money is drying up. We should be comforted to know that if we decide our federal career are no longer lucrative, there are thousands of people outside just hoping to take our place for much less salary. Sorry, I am keeping my job! Hope Posted March 31, 2009 4:03 PM
- I hope that the new leadership will take a look at providing some inflation protection to FERS retirees. Currently CSRS, Military, and Social Security receives an annual full cost of living adjustment. Only FERS retirees are singled out for no inflation adjustment between their retirement eligibility date until age 62. From age 62 onward they receive the cost of living that CSRS, Military, and Social Security receives minus one percent. No one has explained why FERS employees deserve to be punished in their retirement years. If it doesn't sound like much, do the math, it is quite a penalty. To penalize a retirement system that is already 50% less than CSRS is quite an trick. But of course, we all know about TSP and its matching contributions, check out the stock market! Casino style retirement . . . . brought to you by the business and government leaders of the nation. What a way to run a country. A lousy system, but not bad for the leadership of AIG and Goldman Sachs. I'm glad that we are all doing our part to fight for freedom and to defend our way of life. Kurt Diebstahl Posted March 31, 2009 7:54 AM
PROMO RIGHT: FIRSTLIGHT
PROMO RIGHT: GBC
Advancing the business of government through analysis, insight and the sharing of best practices.
SPONSORED RESEARCH
Telework in the Federal Government TANDBERG
Healthcare Reform: A Looming Implementation Challenge IBM-Cognos and Symantec
Out of Sight, but Not Out of Touch: Federal Executives' Assessment of Agency Telework Policy KRONOS
The State of Green Government: Response to a Mandate Juniper and HP
Achieving a Greener Federal Government IBM
Federal Cybersecurity: Securing the Nation's Information IBM










