Letters

I was dismayed to see that Marcela Kogan was unable to find any examples of federal agencies with family-friendly programs in her article "All Worked Up" (November 1996). While I agree that efforts to establish family-friendly programs are slow to develop, there are some shining examples of what can be accomplished when senior leaders dare to break old paradigms. Federal Times ran a story in April 1995 about a family-friendly office created for employees and their infants at the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command Analysis Center at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. The article noted the innovative facility may be the only one of its kind in government.

This family-friendly office provides an opportunity for employees to better balance family and job responsibilities. Parents bring their infants to an office that is networked and integrated with the rest of the agency. In addition to normal office furnishings and computers, the office has a changing table, a crib and a cushioned play area for babies. The office has its own rest-room and refrigerator and provides privacy for parents and their children.

Not only is the agency able to retain highly skilled employees who might otherwise leave federal service, but parents are able to take care of their family responsibilities while pursuing career objectives.

Allen E. Davis
Director, Resource Management Directorate
Department of the Army
Fort Leavenworth, Kan.

AFFIRMATIVE INACTION

The President promised in July 1995 to study all federal affirmative action programs and to eliminate abusive ones. He defined abusive programs as those with quotas, preferences for women and minorities, which cause reverse discrimination, and have either accomplished their purposes or outlived their usefulness.

Neither the President nor the Justice Department (notwithstanding studies done after he issued the executive order to agency heads) have done anything to eliminate or modify abusive programs.

Two recent studies by the Merit Systems Protection Board and the Office of Personnel Management have indicated dramatic increases in preferences for women and minorities at the Social Security Administration. For example, the OPM study indicates that SSA has the highest percentage of minority managers of any federal agency-36 percent.

The program at SSA demands an immediate review by the President. Perhaps it will take an act of Congress to ultimately eliminate abusive affirmative action programs.

Maurice W. Horne
Administrative Law Judge
Office of Hearings and Appeals
Social Security Administration

MANAGING COMPLAINTS

The article "No Way Out" (November 1996) addressed equal employment opportunity (EEO) issues within the federal government. Given a reference to the Federal Managers Association (FMA) in the article, I feel as the national president, I should state FMA's position on equal employment opportunity and the responsibility of managers and supervisors today.

FMA represents more than 200,000 federal managers and supervisors. It is our belief that every manager and supervisor is responsible for providing the training, mentoring and counseling necessary to ensure a healthy, open environment for all employees. This promotes harmonious relations based on mutual respect, empowerment of employees that allows for individual growth, and team spirit.

An objective in the preamble of our association bylaws states that the FMA shall "In every endeavor . . . promote justice, maintain integrity, and assure equality for all." In short, the Federal Managers Association is a champion of the tenets of EEO.

The Federal Aviation Administration Conference of the FMA, for example, plays an important role in providing a forum for discussion between that agency's special interest groups.

FMA, as a parent organization, has brought about positive change in the EEO arena by working closely with agencies and Congress to heighten awareness of problems and to offer practical solutions based on mutual respect. Ours is a proud association, one that will continue to act as a leader in this effort and promote equal opportunity throughout the federal workforce and in every aspect of life in America.

Michael B. Styles
National President
Federal Managers Association
Alexandria, Va.

LEFT OUT OF LOCALITY PAY

I have a concern about locality pay. I think it is a great idea, but I don't think the government should exempt employees in the professional series from locality pay.

Granted we are on a different pay scale, but the government needed to attract engineers. Now that locality pay has eroded our differential pay, it has become difficult to maintain our engineering staff. One engineer on our staff changed to a non-engineering position to receive locality pay.

Is the government going to wait until it's too late to include everybody?

Andy Horrell
U.S. Army
Sacramento, Calif.

MISSED POINT FOR MANAGERS

The management column, "Avoid EEO Flak Over Promotions" (March) by Charles Fernandez quickly caught my eye because the premise was disgusting.

Management of people is leadership. Firmness, fairness, dignity and respect have been quality principles for leaders over the years. As a Marine, I subscribe to many more; however, I object that managers must be perceived as being fair. The best way to do this is simply to be fair.

Fairness-or lack of it-is not exposed only during the interview process, but in a leader's every action. Many of the actions which Mr. Fernandez addressed are valid. Leaders must know their people. This involves more than extensive preparation before a selection board or a promotion process convenes-though those actions are certainly essential. Leadership is a continual process.

Service is learned through example. The leader that spends time getting to know his people and their goals and needs does far more than the manager who takes an extra day or two to review records before a promotion decision. Service and leadership are hard work.

Maj. T.R. Spence
Marine Corps