The Week in Comments: Hiring women, hiring interns and just plain hiring
The best in reader reaction to recent articles.
A roundup of some of the comments received this week in the GovExec.com Mailbag. All comments are presented in their original, unedited form.
On OPM launches tool to cut red tape in hiring
While we're looking at the recruitment process maybe we should also take a look at GS classifications and how they're applied from one facility to another. You have employees doing the same job with the same title doing exactly the same thing and yet graded anywhere from a 9 to a 13. If you're requiring a certain level of education and experience then this should get you a certain GS grade regardless of facility.
The more I read about Berry I have to wonder what planet he's on. There are 10,000 applicants for EVERY fed opening there isn't nor has there ever been a problem attracting folks to apply for a CS job. If any agency has a problem attracting folks which is disproved by the numbers than they can visit DOD and find out who's retiring or leaving. That alone would be a pool of professional folks who know what accountability is and understand hard work. For years OPM has tried to subvert federal laws by establishing quotas for ethnic and sexual minorities to the point of freezing hiring until the the 'right" quota candidate came along. The expansion of fellows programs and training slots is just an attempt to circumvent the laws. I have never met a 'fellows" graduate that could walk and chew gum at the same time.
What a fraud to use the word "new" in association with registrar lists - oh, sorry, we're dealing with the Obama administration. What a norm to twist the facts. Register lists were around 30+ years ago, there is nothing new about them. They didn't work then, and they won't work now. If I have to explain, you shouldn't be in the federal HR business, and you have no experience. Oh, sorry, that's the administration we put in place, no experience.
On Budget chief: Cutting deficit requires novel ideas
A novel idea...quit spending! Is it true that on page 48 of the Healthcare Plan we're giving the UAW $106 Billion dollars to balance their retirement plan?!
Amen Mark!! Want to cut the deficit? Stop spending money!!!
We need no more "novelty". What is needed is a return to first principles of having government do, what only government can do: Defense, Roads, Courts, Police, and no more.
Quadruple the budget then roll it back 25%. Who is kidding who? It would still be 300% larger than what President Bush had. Numbers lie and liars use numbers. A gradschool kid and figure this out.
On Program to let employees work where and when they want takes shape
I think it is a great idea. I might not retire yet, if i could do this at my workplace.
It's refreshing to know that employee burnout is a recognized problem. Working from home sometimes means you never get away from the work, and your home life and health suffers because of it.
While this may be a good idea, what efforts are also being taken to protect any privacy act information on these computers and in the private resdences? I have concern with this and current Telework policies not enough security protections are being put in place for protection of this information.
This is great. Now I can run a couple of home businesses and do my Fed work during the breaks in business
What a great idea ! Just not in my lifetime in DOD outside DC. Never in a million years would any boss in my work area ever allow this. We can't even get odd shift. We had flex time and took it away from this entire agency portion of DOD. We are FedUp it's all lip service folks
So how long do you think it will take before the bean counters in DC figure out that if you can work from home, then you can work from anywhere. Anywhere like where wages are cheap. Ever call anyone about your computer or your credit card. They work from anywhere. Ever have federal friends have their jobs get relocated.
On Whistleblower protection agency stuck in neutral
Whistleblower protection, in this administration? I doubt this administration has the desire to protect anyone that has the integrity to report fraud, waste and/or abuse. Look at how they go after Fox News, Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, and any other conservative that sounds of on their underhanded games. Concern for whistleblower protection, right!
It's true, none of the agencies can function without a political hack appointed by the regime at the helm. The deputies and minions are hapless dolts without their lead hack.
On Advocacy group says women not moving up the federal ranks
Finally an article without that mytical 78 cents to the dollar. According to the last detailed study done during the Clinton administration, Females have 25% less time in grade than their male counter part more times than not are not required to have a degree when the male counter part does. FEW is a discrimitory organization, they say in their charter that their services are for both genders, but I have never seen that in practice.
One of the reasons that females have not moved up the corporate ladder is obviously the "boys club" and to a certain extent, women not supporting each other in the workplace. Some men think it's ok to treat woemen as second class citizens in the workplace, but I wonder how these same men would like it if someone did that to their wife, daughter or sister? Also, there is a reason that many women say that they would rather work for a male boss. I'd rather work for a man almost any day.......
Giving a person a job based on their race or gender is idiocy.
The unspoken issue here is: how many female SESers (or even 15s) do you see who have children at home? At my agency, very very few, though there are definitely men in that situation. Yes, there are a number of bright, energetic, ambitious women who are easily qualified to move into leadership, but most have young children at home or plan to have children soon. And none of them seem ready to choose the hours and family trade offs that leadership requires, whether by choice or necessity. The current "options," if you're an ambitious female and also want kids, seem to be: choose a life partner who is willing to be the "flexible" parent with respect to work, have your kids early so you have time to move into leadership when they are grown, have only one kid, or suffer from being labeled a "bad mom" because you use a nanny and don't see much of your kids. It gets pretty hard to time everything "just right" for leadership roles if you want kids too - including finding your partner early enough, grad school, getting pregnant exactly when you want to, and the rest of life's twists and turns. Needless to say, fewer men seem to feel constrained by these things. In any case, I think the biggest reason why fewer women are in leadership roles is that women still tend to be the parent that stays home with kids or chooses the less demanding career option while children are young. Why women are more likely to make that choice - and whether more options can be created for women with leadership potential in the midst of those decisions - is the issue that needs more pondering if we are to change this trend.
Perhaps this is being influenced by the number of senior positions being filled by former male military officers. What makes it worse is that most have little to no understanding of the GS system, want to still be treated as if they are officers and don't appreciate or respect those of us, women managers, that have come up through the GS system. I'm completely frustrated.
In two prior positions I had 6 senior level direct reports 3 male and 3 female. 3 were interested in SES. I worked with them on training, details, high visibility assignments and shawdow assignments. If they did something right, they got the credit. If not the blame was poor executive oversight and we did an after action debrief on what could have been done differently. By the way 2 were recent XD graduates both female( 1 retired).
In my last job I had 5 direct reports. 3 were interested in SES. Two recently made it, both male minorities.One female minority is a strong contender for the next class.
I also have coached, participated in mid-level and executive rediness training, and helped candidates refine paperwork and interview skills.
I believe the ability to think strategically, lead, make things happen for the positive (while anticapating the fall out) and engage people to unite behind a mission makes one a sucessful SES candidate. I can help refine skills and the candidate demonstrate what they can do, but as far as FEW's assertion that there are too few female mentors and all grade levels need the training, hog wash. Some people are ready at 26 some at 50 but maturity of skill and vision is crucial for them to be sucessful.
By the way, I am a white male and not a nispanic, black, asian, aluet, male or female I know thinks I am anything but devoted to our mission and developing those who can best accomplish it.
The reason why females are not becoming senior career officials or SES is due to a new trend: why pay a woman a high grade level with high salary if they can get you to do the job for less? Yes, time and time again I've been moving into new jobs but then, they take tasks done by higher level people and dump them on me. You guess: I find out what they have done much later after I've made mistakes and learned the very hard way. Then when I confront managers they say that I was being "trained." I agree with Betty, I've been a GS-13 for over 10 years now doing the team leading tasks of a GS-14 but for less money; it stinks. I agree with Jackie O, I prefer to work for a man too; most women at the top are completely irrational and MOODY, the majority going thru menopause without taking the pills to counteract the negative effects of that transition. The rest of us pay the price of their "transition." Each agency should strike for balance in gender: too many women at the top makes meetings a battle of who's moodier today or who shows they had a fight with their husband/child that morning.
Having been one of the women's lib who FINALLY broke through some 35 years ago, I now find women with the attitude that moving up is an entitlement; they don't have to work for it. Sad to say, they don't. No wonder men have heartburn over this issue!
I think it is more likely the unwritten, anti-family policies of government management that are discouraging women, such as myself, from pursuing management positions. Along with a management position comes longer hours, extensive travel, and less flexibility in using leave, telework, duty station, etc. And how about those dreaded mobility agreements! Take all that and add on the stress of being accountable for the work of so many gov't employees who do not pull their weight and are just biding their time for a great big grievance or retirement.
For women trying to maintain a work life balance while raising a family, flexibility is the key to happiness. The gov't does not compensate its managers well enough to justify the kinds of sacrifices mothers need to make to succeed in management positions. A $5,000 raise to a management position is not worthwhile when you consider that it amounts to $100 a paycheck, net pay after taxes. That won't even begin to cover the extra child care costs. Not to mention the costs your children pay by being raised by strangers and foregoing things such as family dinner time, sports, scouts, play time, etc.. Take all that and consider all the single Moms employed by the feds, and a clear picture will begin to emerge to explain the statistical gap between men and women in management. I think the Advocacy Group should examine the real causes of the statistics gaps instead of chalking it up to a lack of training and mentoring. Start by looking at the job requirements for top positions posted on USA jobs.
On Agencies urged to hire more grad students noncompetitively
I think DCAA could serve as an example of how poorly this approach may turn out. A student gets hired, rises to the agency director and is subsequently removed, due to the actions of congress. Whether a group of schools believes it or not (no surprise there) a broad amount of experience helps round a person out. DCAA is still suffering from the concept that all it takes is education, an education that may not always be quantifiable.
I had to read this twice to make sure it was serious....I work with lots of graduates who had extensive work and military experience BEFORE they got their degree. "the competitive hiring process is not serving them well..." Well, maybe they need to go out and do something before they seek a job.
Welcome to the real world! You are on your own now and are not entitled just because you have a degree. Work your way up, don't expect it to be handed to you. This is what is wrong with society today.
Can you imagine spending tens of thousands of dollars over several years, only to be hired as a GS-9 working for a slow moving dinosaur with a GED from 1965? What a letdown that's going to be for these kids.
I think this is an excellent idea. Many young people are heading back to school for a graduate in hopes of starting new careers. What better should of support by the government and perhaps followed by the private sector that to give those individuals a chance through a non-competitive opportunity. It also would encourage existing Federal employees to seek additional training making for a better skilled workforce for the U.S. in the future.
On Burning Question: What parts of government would you cut?
Greatly reduce DOD travel. A lot of money is spent for high ranks to travel to retirement and change of command ceremonies. I had one of my bosses travel from Mississippi to Kuwait for a one day change of command ceremony while I was being told there was no funds for needed training. This is just an example of how the mind set in the DOD has fenced areas where they spend monies and are considered untouchable because of tradition. Time to ditch the traditions and save the money.
Eliminate the Department of Education, cut half of Health and Human Services, and eliminate the IRS for starters with an easy flat tax.
How about DOE, they have done nothing to reduce oil consumption, roadblock any attempt to increase use of alternative energy not currently toted as "the way" and increased their budget and staffing each time the Dems are in control. Cut off subsidies for labor unions, we are funneling 108 billion dollars in the Health Care Bill to bolster their retirement funds. Pretty sure they make enough money off our backs as consumers. Cut the matching campaign funds crap. If a candidate can't raise enough from their supporters, must be an issue with the planks of the campaign. Reduce the Congressional Operating Budget to pre-'70s levels. These mini-fiefdoms are ridiculous and provide zero benefit for anyone not directly "employed" by members of both houses. If the reps are really too stupid to know what the laws and bills they are voting on are about they need to go home. Having giant staffs to take care of them is just silly and a waste of money. I've got more ideas....
Eliminate the Republican Party so we can move on !!!!!!!!!!!!
The overruns that occur when new items such as the F35 are required not just wanted. Decide what is realistically needed such as: fire power, speed, range, etc. List these requirements on bids and make it very clear that what is listed is what is needed and whatever the bid is will be adhereed to in a timely manner and both sides stick to the original contract. The add ons are a good way for a contractor to up the ante.
Eliminate the part that hires dumb people.
Privatize 90% of the Army Corps of Engineers. What do they do that the private sector can't do better?
Also, just looking at the things my new MAC can do, an effort must be made to streamline all government services using technology. An independent commission should be chartered to compare apples to apples in different federal and state agencies, with input from the public. E.g., I get what Energy does, creating and monitoring appliance standards, researching new alternative energy technologies, maintaining our nuclear weapons stockpile etc., but what does the Dept of Education really do? Why do we need it, at least at the huge size it is now? A great initiative for the Obama Administration.
Close the Departments of Education and Energy, as they contribute nothing to the country. Move the Department of Veteran's Affairs under the Defense Department. Privatize the U.S. Postal Service, Tennessee Valley Authority, Corps of Engineers, and other such agencies that are actually more corporate than government. Merge TSA into CBP and combine security with exit inspection at our airports. We could go on for a long time beyond this, and save billions.
On GAO calls for more outsourcing, part-time employees at Postal Service
How dare GAO recommend outsourcing! Don't they know that insourcing is the current PC management preference! Everybody knows that mail processing and delivery is inherently governmental--Not!!!
What is the matter with Congress?? When a business is bleeding red ink, you stop the bleeding. Cut service to 5 days now. Add another round of buyouts and/or early outs. Start there and see where that gets the USPS.
The USPS is a goverment service, not a private business. If it must pay its own way, then so should all other goverment agencies.
It is very unfortunate that a portion of what was stated is correct. However this article fails to mention the sincere fact that the USPS is seriously top heavy with excessive managers. There is truth to the fact that the USPS has a Level 17 Supervisor overseeing three (3) craft employees. Helo people, is anybody listening? Is the GAO listening? YES the USPS can save money by starting to cut from the top. Also the USPS can save money by reasuring the public that the top PMG will not benefit from bonuses like the bankrupt banks that pay for poor performance of their top officials. CUT FROM THE TOP!
On Merits of internship programs under debate
Seems to me these students are selected for their education through competetive channels or are all schools now open to anyone that shows up with a check. Unless a position is going to be created for everyone that goes through Internship, there will have to be some competition for the few jobs that are avaiable. If everyone that received post graduate degrees were expert enough to handle the top jobs, Doctors and Lawyers wouldn't need malpractice insurance.
No. Internships are not to be used exclusively to fill Federal jobs. I've seen plenty of agencies use internships as a means of hiring only from a select group of colleges (those coming for ivy league universities)while excluding other fine candidates. I've also seen internships filled with selecting officials or h.r. folk's friends and relatives. The Federal internship programs have been abused and are not based upon merit principles. What needs to be done is that the Federal hiring process must be revamped where if you are rated and ranked at the 90 and above...you automatically get hired. I've seen and experienced this myself when applying for federal positions in which hiring managers will ignore the cert lists and those ranking high on them in order to hire a mediocre candidate that they know...such as a friend or a relative. The internship process is even more flawed.
As a current PDC (Professional Development Center) intern I can say the program does have it's short comings however, the program is a sound way to bring on-board individuals with an education but with little if any professional experience. The internship program provides nearly limitless opportunities for training, professional development, and career advancement. The Navy policy is that any intern who performs will be offered a job upon completion of their internship, and from my two years of federal service I have never seen one performing intern dismissed. Military personnel with relevant job experience would be hired in as regular full time employees and skip the intern program all together. The internship program is NOT meant to push out the old and bring in the new, it's meant to bring in new people, create mentors from those who have been promoted through merit and superior job performance, and have the interns learn from these employees. I agree that military time In service is a beneficial asset for employees but, I strongly believe that if an individual had to fulfill a Military service obligation with the Intern program, some of the nations best and brightest students would be turned away...I know I would have. And for the record, since I've been a Navy employee and have experienced the military culture I am seriously considering joining the Navy Reserve as a CEC officer. Go Navy!
On Burning Question: What's a 'one hitter'?
This is why we look like fools to the world one guy tries to light his shoes and a billion people have to take thier shoes off and get them sniffed. Scrambling jets total over reaction, typical reaction from the Feds. So since the world knows how stupid and foolish we are they make fun of our weak paranoid minds. You didnt need jets or anything else just set him next to the biggest dudes on the plane with a belt around his neck with orders to kill him if he so much as farts. Now thats the America I was raised in and long to get that back instead of a bunch of worthless people who want someone else to save them. Now as far as the one hitter to all who read gov. Exec. if you do not know what this do the country a favor and never have children.
Well I hope we taught this 'visitor' what a one hitter means to the taxpayers and that he got a 'one-hitter invoice' for all the jet fuel, personnel cost and lost time for the supposedly funny joke he made. Too often foreigners get immunity but I would think the costs should be incurred by their disregard to us in this type of behaviour.
Burning Question: Is talking on your phone while driving worth getting a ticket?Yes. Unless of course the idiot talking on their phone is having such a deep conversation that is worth more than the life of the child, cyclist, jogger, other driver that they kill. And yes, that goes for other stupid activities people do instead of paying attention to driving their car. Like the moron I say yesterday smoking & talking while making a left turn.
While I hate to see people on the phone while driving, it is a proven fact that changing the radio station, smoking, eating a burger, putting on makeup or sipping a drink while driving distracts the driver just as much as using a cell phone. There are more important real crimes to get the authorities involved in rather than ticketing everyone. Let's get real and go after the elephants in the room and quit chasing the mice.
We should eliminate all cell phones and go back to having an answering machine at home. We are spoiled! People would have more patient if we didn't have all those gadgets. :-)
Job tenure taken out of the equation in NSPS transitionConversion back to GS was easier said then done. Go figure. And now management, all the way up and down the chain, is making up all these waivers in an effort to cover up all the shenanigans they pulled under NSPS. Why don't they concede instead of digging that hole deeper. And to think, in other Gov Exec articles they want to hire more people in from college with advanced degrees non-competitively, with no work experience, to help lead the government. Hum?
Let's see, all the brown tonguers and office cuties will keep their unearned promotions. Crap. This administration is just like the last with a different name.
Where do transitioning military personnel fall in regard to the GS pay scale? How do they know what GS level they qualify for and if they meet that time in grade requirement?
It's unfortunate that there are so many with a true disdain for management and NSPS. I'm being required to move back to GS. I'd prefer to stay in NSPS. There is more accountability for ALL employees. Individuals that excel in their positions get rewarded. Individuals that don't do their jobs, do not get rewarded. Vast majority of employees do their jobs well and get rewarded as such. The GS way of rewarding seniority primarily using step increases (and then only every other year or every third year depending on the step level) is not flexible or fair to ALL workers. DoD needs to keep some elements of performance based rewards regardless of the pay system used. If someone is so untrusting and spiteful about their management, they should look around for other jobs. It's unhealthy and unproductive to be that unhappy day-in and day-out about your work.
On Growing chorus calls for federalizing building security
So, creating a new boondoggle agency will fix the problem? Maybe some of these "experts" should take a look at just how effective the TSA process is and how many "penetrations" take place when they are tested. Last time I looked, they were Feds. One size does not fit all. What is needed is longer recesses for Congress. It seems to be the only time we are even half-way safe.
This is a great idea. People slip past our guards all the time with a little chit chat and a nice figure - and we are in NYC just a few blocked from the WTC.
On Lawmakers propose acquisition overhaul at Defense
Great idea. Why don't we also tie politician pay to the performance of the US government? The salary for the last 30 years would be zero.
Should anything actually come of this proposal, hopefully the upper echelons will also more accurately define who is actually included in the "acquisition workforce". As it stands now, that basically only applies to a select few such as contracting officers or procurement specialists. The rest of us who have to actually nurse the contract through past the the award stage, such as quality assurance personnel and service/construction contract monitors, have been left out in the cold and have no chance of joining the select "DAWIA" crowd for career advancement or educational opportunities even though we have the biggest portion between "cradle to grave" to manage on contracts that amount to multiple billions in DoD.
Only when you get the most corrupt piece of the puzzle, the Congress, out of the process will you get any improvements. As long as there are members of Congress forcing the military to buy services, vehicles, ships, aircraft, and equipment they don't want or need there will be NO improvements to the process. DOD and personnel (civilians and military) should not be evaluated on a process that Congress has corrupted.
On Oversight committee OKs telework and TSP bills
Another good change to TSP that will help some but not all employees. We maxed out our TSP contribution up to the IRS limits for years so it will not do us any good and is not a "much needed boon". As to the "big hit", that happened for two reasons, investors not paying attention and limitations of investment options in TSP. My rolled over TSP account has averaged a 6% annual gain the past 4 years thanks to a much more diverse portfolio and paying close attention to the market, while my spouse's supposedly diversified TSP account with limited choices did take a hit.
Thank you for diligently covering bills and policies like this as they develop. Please keep it up!
Incorporating telework is a subject of keen interest and significant debate for us here--as I see it is with many other agencies, thanks to your stories. Your coverage helps me keep our leadership and our employees in the know.
NEXT STORY: Stating His Objections