How to attract tech workers to civil service? Give them credit!

Office of Personnel Management Director Scott Kupor has announced that the federal government will seek to recruit  thousands of private and non-profit sector STEM workers to help agencies solve their technology issues, including more rapid acquisition and implementation...much like the U.S. Digital Service did before it. 

Sounds like the “son of” USDS to me, but I’ll let that pass. This wouldn’t be the first time that an administration renamed and redid something done by its predecessor(s), and both Republican and Democrat presidents are equally guilty in that regard. Regardless, the effort is laudable. However, it is made more difficult when the current president denigrates and disrespects federal service (this just after yet another government shutdown, no less!), and interest in such positions—especially amongst those who could command much higher pay and security where they are—is thus problematic at best. 

As a result, Director Kupor has since extended the application period, in part because OPM is (allegedly) flooded with too many applicants. Yeah right! If you believe that, I have a bridge I’ll sell you! However, as I said, the effort is laudable, and with the right incentives, Mr. Kupor can attract those workers to the federal service, even if it’s only temporary. So, here are some suggestions:

Legislative authority already exists...it just needs to be leveraged

OPM may be worried about the prospects of “new” statutory authority, and understandably so. That would require legislation and would be difficult today—although there may be more congressional receptivity after the midterms—but I think there is already sufficient legal authority to do what Mr. Kupor wants. It’s in legislation Congress passed in 2013 giving the Department of Homeland Security more personnel flexibility to hire, pay, and deploy civil service cybersecurity workers. Alas, it took years to issue implementing regulations (something I know firsthand), but that’s another story. 

Note that this DHS law was followed a year later by legislation giving the Defense Department similar personnel flexibility, so that too is an alternative for OPM to consider. Both require the cooperation of a cabinet secretary, as well as an immediate amendment to existing cybersecurity regulations—either DHS’s Cybersecurity Talent Management System regs or those issued much more quickly to implement DOD’s Cybersecurity Excepted Service—but both are possible. Indeed, much more so than legislation. So too are regulations, including expedited temporary appointing authority, issued several years ago to support the USDS.  

All of these options exist today (or could with some regulatory tweaking) and none require new legislation. All of them would appoint applicants to the “excepted” civil service, so that their initial hire, compensation and removal for cause, among other things, could be expedited. And while they would be appointed by either DHS or DOD, that’s far better than having them appointed to a centralized USDS-like entity in the Executive Office of the President, or by any number of other smaller frontline agencies who cannot offer the career progression that DHS or DOD can offer.  

As part of that authority, OPM could also provide a “passport” that gives STEM civil service recruits an easy (and non-competitive) “re-entry” to a more permanent civil service position if/when their initial tour is over. Now that’s an incentive! 

That flexibility was also discussed as part of the DHS CTMS regulations, so it too is possible. DHS (or DOD) and OPM could also jointly establish this “passport” independently, as an emergency amendment to existing authority. That authority already provides for the non-competitive reinstatement of civil servants, but at the same (generally lower) General Schedule grade held by those individuals upon their departure from civil service. But that authority ignores the grade-enhancing experience that an individual (especially a tech worker!) could acquire in the interim. So, it needs to be modernized!

There is additional pay flexibility already available as well

Every year, OPM, the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Federal Salary Council bless a single number that purports to represent so-called “pay comparability” between federal and all other non-federal employees. In that regard, I served as chair of that Salary Council from 2018 to 2020, and at least during my tenure, we knew that single governmentwide pay adjustment number was a fiction, and that different pay rates existed across the nation, depending on one’s occupation....and we also knew that STEM workers were among those who were most negatively affected by that “lowest common denominator” pay adjustment. 

But OPM already has the authority to fix that situation too. For example, it could impose a “special pay rate” for STEM workers (which has just not worked, ever! But it is an option) OR better yet, it could also establish more than one GS pay schedule under the Federal Employee Pay Comparability Act—and as a result, more than one annual pay adjustment—each year, including one for STEM employees separate from the rest of the federal government. BLS surveys support that (indeed, it is a much more methodologically sound adjustment), and while Congress would need to endorse it in their annual appropriation, I don’t think they’d dare revert back to a single, “one-size-fits-all” number. Besides, they’ve just blessed a higher annual pay raise for law enforcement feds, so there’s even precedent.

Other incentives are also available NOW!

To be sure, much of what I suggest requires a somewhat centralized approach to managing the recruitment of STEM workers, especially when it comes to managing their post-appointment deployment as civil servants. And while I have often railed against just such a “one-size-fits-all” model, anything that requires the complicity of another cabinet department is an exception to that rule, especially those that are occupation-based. This is one of them, and it’s based on authority that Congress has already given DHS and DOD (with OPM coordination). That means OPM needs the agreement of one or both of those agencies, and in my view, that’s exactly as it should be. 

There are other incentives that would appeal to tech workers, and that are also within OPM’s ability to provide right now. For example, OPM, with GSA’s agreement, could mandate that the federal government reimburse new STEM recruits for any/all “first duty station” moving expenses, something that agencies currently have the discretion to approve today. I would even exempt those tech workers who agree to take a civil service appointment from registration and/or recall under the Selective Service System, perhaps even designating the time they spend as civil servants to be “national service” and thus comparable to time spent serving our nation as a military member. 

Then there are things like giving tech workers a more enforceable, multi-year “contract” designating them as Emergency Essential (or whatever the term is today), during a future government funding lapse or even a shutdown—something that’s undoubtedly on their minds today of all days—so that they have at least a modicum of job security if they agree to become civil servants for some temporary period. And while I agree with Mr. Kupor that that is no way to appeal to civil service candidates generally, it does address some of their present uncertainty.

Bottom line: OPM can bring more tech workers to civil service...if it’s serious

Thus, there is a lot that OPM can do to attract tech workers to government. And these are all things that previous administrations could have done as well, although they were trying to do so at a time when public service wasn’t held in such public disdain...that needs to stop NOW. But given that tech solutions (especially of the AI sort) are such a key part of this administration’s approach to public service delivery, it does require more than talk. It requires a concerted campaign!

It also requires that OPM address the concerns of those many employers that it is now implicitly competing with for STEM talent. It does not want to get into a bidding war with them for that talent. That’s a losing proposition, especially these days. So, what can it do that doesn’t involve just throwing more money at them? 

We faced a similar challenge in DOD when we had to recall lots of non-federal employees who had signed up for the National Guard and the military reserves before the 2003 Iraq invasion, and that led directly to hortatory support by their employers, and eventually, statutory guarantees dealing with their pay and post-service employment. OPM and DOD could even arrange for those workers to receive a reserve commission in the military reserves (they do so for doctors and dentists today), though that may not appeal to all of them. All of that is possible, and while it may require legislation, its chances of passing a potentially reluctant (and divided) Congress are substantially increased with some of the other incentives outlined above. 

Of course, such arrangements require a full-bodied campaign. It would also require OPM to “play nice” with those other agencies that may be involved (like SSS, DHS, DOS and/or GSA), but again, I think that’s exactly how it should be. Plus, everything I suggest is consistent with a POTUS who is used to pushing the edge of the legal envelope. So, let’s get to it!  

Ron Sanders is a fellow of the National Academy of Public Administration and a federal civil servant for almost 40 years, including over 20 as a member of the Senior Executive Service. In that capacity, he served as director of civilian personnel for the Defense Department, chief human resources officer for IRS, associate director for HR strategy at OPM and associate director of National Intelligence for human capital, as well as the chairman of the Federal Salary Council.