A congressional proposal to ban pass/fail performance appraisal systems in federal agencies met opposition Wednesday from Clinton administration and employee union officials.
Under a proposal being considered by the House Government Reform and Oversight Subcommittee on the Civil Service, federal managers would not be permitted to issue pass or fail evaluations to employees. While agencies have traditionally used a five-tiered evaluation system, ranging from unacceptable to outstanding, several agencies, including the Social Security Administration, are experimenting with two-tier, pass/fail appraisals.
"People really care about how they are viewed," said Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md. "If someone said I was 'good,' I'd try to figure out how I could get to 'excellent.' People want to know where they stand."
Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas, agreed with Cummings.
"I believe this two-tier performance system is bad," Sessions said. "It's not the way we should go."
But Office of Personnel Management Director Janice Lachance argued that banning pass/fail systems would deny agencies the flexibility to design their own evaluation programs.
"Each agency has a different culture," Lachance said. "The pass/fail system in some agencies is working rather well. There's room for both approaches."
Lachance noted that under the five-tier system, managers have traditionally rated most of their employees in the top two tiers, suggesting that supervisors do not like to downgrade poor performing employees. The pass/fail system avoids assigning labels to employees, allowing managers to focus on real performance issues, Lachance said.
Robert Tobias, president of the National Treasury Employees Union, said union agreements with agencies that have pass/fail systems require managers to meet with employees frequently to discuss ways to improve performance. In many agencies with five-tier systems, managers don't explain their ratings, Tobias said.
"What we see is a failure of managerial will, not a failure of the system itself," Tobias said.
American Federation of Government Employees President Bobby Harnage said employees and managers who use pass/fail appraisals are satisfied with them.
But Patrick Korten, an OPM official during the Reagan administration who is now with the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, said pass/fail evaluations are bad for morale.
"The growing popularity of so-called pass/fail performance appraisal systems in federal agencies threatens to make appraisals virtually meaningless," said Korten. "It's important for employees to know how their work is being assessed by management. There is nothing more damaging to the morale of a hard-working, high-performing employee than to receive the same performance rating as some unmotivated schlump who's barely getting by."
According to OPM data, in 1995 the average rating on the five-tier system for GS-13 to GS-15 supervisors and managers was 4.43. The average for other GS-13 to GS-15 employees was 4.3, and the average for GS-1 to GS-12 employees was 4.13.
The proposed ban on pass/fail appraisal systems is part of a civil service reform legislative package the Civil Service Subcommittee is considering this session. The panel is also considering a proposal to give more weight to performance appraisals during reductions-in-force.
But union officials and OPM's Lachance also came down against the RIF proposal, arguing that performance is already a factor in deciding who will be laid off. The two sides were also wary of a proposal that would ban people who have drug convictions from working for the federal government.
They argued that a time limit should be placed on the measure, so that drug convictions do not haunt reformed substance abusers for their entire careers.
NEXT STORY: Ex-deputy nominated to head FDA