|
Federal Diary Live
With Stephen Barr
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, April 9, 2003; Noon ET
The Post's Stephen Barr is the author of The Federal Diary, which runs Sunday through Friday in the Metro section. Steve has been a reporter and editor at The Post since 1979, including stints as Federal Page editor, congressional editor and a staff writer covering the federal bureaucracy. He takes the column live to answer your questions Wednesdays at noon ET.
The transcript follows.
Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control
over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests
and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
Stephen Barr: Thanks to all of you for joining this discussion today. At the risk of starting with a hackneyed phrase, this is a time of change--from sending troops to fight in Iraq to renewed calls to revamp the civil service at home. I'll look forward to hearing from many of you today about changes that you see and what you think it means for the public service. Thanks again for joining me. On to the questions.
Washington, D.C.:
Mr. Barr, thank you for taking questions every week. What is the administration's reasoning behind the pay-for-performance system that it is proposing? Is this an effort to attract more 'stars' to work within the government? What's the inside scoop?
Stephen Barr: The Bush team wants to change the conversation on federal pay and focus on employee performance. Focusing on performance implies that something is wrong with federal employees and that changes are needed. To me, that's the political factor. On a more practical level, the Bush team wants to adopt some of the private-sector model, which uses pay as a way to motivate and reward people. The rub, of course, goes directly to the heart of the civil service: how do you judge employees and justify giving them a higher raise than others are getting. That's not as big an issue in the private sector, which does not have a long history of equal pay for equal work and a tradition of maintaining equity inside a workforce. As for the "stars," I'm not sure. Stars have plenty of job offers, and those who choose public service probably do it for reasons other than compensation.
Clifton, Va.:
Pay for performance sounds great. As a DOD civilian employee I don't trust those in charge to apply the program fairly. My friends and sibling in other government agencies don't trust their bosses either. For the record, in the last 5 years I have gotten outstandings and either cash or QSI's so I am not a slacker. Keep the old system. If not the MSPB and EEO will overburdened with complaints
Stephen Barr: A good point. At a hearing Tuesday, lawmakers and several witnesses pointed out that any pay-for-performance system must include safeguards for employees and must be regarded as credible by employees. Otherwise, you're right--we end up with more litigation alleging disparities in treatment.
Washington, D.C.:
Regarding your column today on pay for performance: when will this happen? washingtonpost.com:
Chairmen Want to Know More About Administration's Pay-for-Performance Plan (Post, April 9, 2003)
Stephen Barr: Hard to tell. Sen. Voinovich splashed cold water on the Bush proposal for a $500 million performance fund but stopped short of saying he would oppose it. The lawmakers clearly want to see the details of how the Bush team plans to implement pay for performance. So I bet you won't see it happening this year. Next year, perhaps. Undecided is whether to attempt a government-wide rollout or limit it to a few test sites to see what worked and what did not.
Washington, D.C.:
Steve:
How are we supposed to have confidence in our political leaders -- the pay raise flack, the outsourcing, the hiring for civil service jobs now controlled by politicals? After all, in my shop the assistant secretary's scheduler (a political) got a $5000 bonus last year -- which is as high as any GS15 got in recent memory. And trust me, she is not that good a scheduler.
Thanks for letting me vent.
Stephen Barr: The Bush team has not inspired confidence in the federal workforce with its decision to reinstate bonuses to political appointees. Hard to believe these bonuses took priority over other workplace issues.
Somewhere, USA:
Stephen,
What would you suggest be a good timeframe for my son to apply for federal jobs? He is getting out of the Army later this Summer (he's in Korea now), and he will be getting all the great Veterans Benefits; should he be looking for work now? Or should I be doing it for him?
Stephen Barr: It's not too early to start job hunting. Washington takes off for Memorial Day and the Fourth of July--usually most of a week rather than just the day. Most offices operate with thin staffs during August, when folks take as long a break as they can afford. I'll assume your son knows what field he wants to work in and has selected an agency or two that seems to be the right fit. I'd recommend identifying people to approach, writing them introductory letters to let them know when you're stateside, and studying up on veterans preference and how it is applied. Undoubtedly, you can do some leg work for him, given his duty station. Best of luck!
Vienna, Va.:
I have a little age on me (turning 53 in a couple of weeks). My job focused tightly on a vender software product so my experience (software design) is very limited. Unfortunately I was downsized a few days ago.
I am thinking about attending law school this fall and applying for federal government positions in contracting when I graduate. However, I will be nearing 57 when this happens.
Would if be safe for me to assume that age will not be a factor in the hiring decision?
Stephen Barr: Hey, from my perch, the 50s aren't old anymore! Agencies, of course, are supposed to follow the law and not engage in age discrimination. But plenty of my readers tell me it happens all the time, especially when you hit the 55 mark. Still, the kinds of skills you bring to the job typically carry more weight than your age. I suggest you give a call to the National Contract Management Association, a professional society for procurement experts, and see if they can provide some insights for you. They are in your neighborhood. Best to you!
Little Rock, Ark.:
Even in the private arena, pay for performance seldom works right. I think the federal system encourages poor performance since there are always mechanisms built in to allow below average workers to benefit just as well as the better performers. Why in the world would you allow a system of in-grade pay increases (ramspec's) that are automatic? Do you actually believe a pay for performance would eliminate the "social" pay increase system?
Stephen Barr: One of the problems here is that we don't have a grasp of whether the federal pay system protects the deadwood. Many readers see people who are not pulling their weight in government offices. In theory, within-grade pay raises reward people for staying on the job and becoming more experienced hands. But many feel within-grades are simply an entitlement program now. On your other point, no, I don't think you can ever eliminate social pay raises. No matter how tightly a system is designed, they will still happen.
Washington, D.C.:
I just have to respond to some of those who want
to prevent pay for performance. Many
government employees are hard working,
efficient, etc. I am a government employee and
feel that I am one of those people.
However, there is a WIDE perception throughout
the government (even among the so called good
workers) that they are entitled to outstandings,
awards, etc. This is not true of everyone, but
many.
This sort of entitlement feeling has
already overburdened MSPB and EEOC. There
is the perception that any negative, or even
neutral, treatment is grounds for litigation. I see
this first hand every day.
I am not sure about pay for performance. But, this
post is just simply to say that I don't find the posts
that are skeptical of their supervisors (I am not a
supervisor) conclusive or even relevant in some
cases. There are other dysfunctions at work.
Stephen Barr: Excellent points. If you look at the recent OPM survey of employees, roughly half indicated they have little confidence or respect in their "leaders." That's a problem that complicates almost all other issues, including pay.
Beltsville, Md.:
After 28 years of Federal service, I too lack confidence that a pay-for-performance system would be administered equitably. As one other individual stated above, it's hard to trust in the environment we are in. I'm just waiting for the "outsourcing" shoe to drop. If only the taxpayers of the country would realize that outsourcing federal jobs will cost them more money in the long-run. Taxpayers still have to pay to get the work done and private companies are going to charge more -- maybe not the first day but the costs will keep rising.
Stephen Barr: Good point about the "environment." Outsourcing and bonuses for political appointees open the Bush team up to skeptical questions.
Maryland:
Tell the military guy to start now! It took me six months to find a federal job offer and could have been worse except I got a job with NSA, which doesn't have to mess with those test scores.
Stephen Barr: OPM claims to be urging agencies to streamline the hiring process. Anyone out there who got hired quickly by an agency? Let us know. Most everyone who e-mails me these days have waited at least six months, with no feedback on the status of their application. Sounds like you landed well, though. NSA is a critical agency.
Virginia:
I'm currently seeking employment and thought that perhaps the federal government could use someone with over 10 years of management, program, and financial analysis experience. My two questions: Could the federal government make it any harder to apply for jobs? What does my college GPA from 12 years ago have to do with my abilities now (the EPA has determined me to be ineligible three times because my GPA was not 3.45).
Stephen Barr: The federal hiring process is its own enemy these days. Rather than front-load the application process with every detail of your life, why shouldn't agencies just accept a summary of most recent experience and then determine if they need more data? I hear that many people just give up on applying for federal jobs because they see too much time being committed for no clear purpose.
Re: hiring older entry level lawyers:
I'm responsible for hiring lawyers at the agency where I work. We don't pay any attention to age at all -- unless the applicant makes it an issue. One way to do that is to come in and tell us about a lot of unrelated experience without connecting it up to how it can help us. As long as the person realizes that entry level means entry level, he/she shouldn't have a problem.
Stephen Barr: Great advice. Thanks for sharing it.
Federal resume help:
I am working on my resume to apply for a lateral move to another federal agency. How important is it to limit the resume to the general rule of two pages? According to the Federal resume building sight, it could be as long as five pages.
Stephen Barr: I'm no expert on resumes. Check our archive of Federal Diary Live transcripts to see how some job experts have handled this query. In general, I think you've got to get the most important stuff up high on the resume. The OPM job site has a resume builder, so you might study it for some tips. Since you're in the system, you might call over to the other agency and double check to see what they think is important or what they are looking for in an applicant. Hope you succeed!
Washington, D.C.:
Good Afternoon
Don't know the ins and outs of the new system, but I do know that in my office the old system has been seriously corrupted by budget limitations, favoritism. The same people no matter how good or how bad they do, always get the outstandings since there is only limited money for awards. I've accepted the fact that no matter how hard I try (and I do), I will always be "commendable." My concern is that it is preventing me from getting interviews with other Fed agencies. Mind you, I've gotten performance awards in the past and graduated with honors. Unfortunately, this was my first job out of school and I sooo want to leave now, but I'm afraid HR offices see this and toss my application. Any other points of view from you or other Feds? Thank you!
Stephen Barr: Well, folks, what advice would you give? The lack of budget money for bonuses and pay raises is a problem. Cronyism makes it worse. You seem to be on to something that's wrong in your office, and if that is the case, then moving while you're young is easier than when you're older.
Herndon, Va.:
Mr. Barr: On a new pay system. I'm unconvinced -- I well remember the "PMRS" system. In our agency, nearly all the managers started or kept marking their subordinates "outstanding." If they didn't, it cost the employees money, and most managers didn't have the guts to handle the situation. As far as age in concerned -- I just passed 60, and, in the last few years have applied (within my agency) for several jobs for which I know I was the best qualified. Hardly a coincidence that other, much younger candidates were selected. All were quite qualified of course, but sources close to the offices involved told me my age was the deciding factor. No way to prove it, of course.
Stephen Barr: Well said. Many agencies have failed to properly train managers to deal with today's complex workplace. Or to make pay decisions.
Alexandria, Va.:
Stephen,
I read your article daily. It provides the best information concerning federal employees.
Have you heard any update concerning when we are supposed to be receiving pay checks with the new raise put in. I have not heard anything from OPM or my agency.
Thank you
Stephen Barr: A good question that I have been chasing. OPM says it cannot offer a timeline, since more than 20 payroll processing centers have to reprogramm computers, figure out retirement and other adjustments. Employees at the Health and Human Services Department said their bosses have told them to expect the retroactive raise in early June. At least it'll arrive in time for the vacation season!
Arlington, Va.:
I would also encourage the soon-to-be veteran to start putting in applications now. I submitted six applications to INS In April of 2002 and didn't hear a word from them from them until December of 2002. Thankfully, I also applied to the VA in late July, got a call in August to set up an interview, was interviewed in early September and was made an offer in late September. Nevertheless, I suggest applying early -- I really feel I just lucked out in being in the right place at the right time for the VA position -- everything else that I experienced took much longer.
Stephen Barr: Thanks for sharing your job hunting saga!
Rockville, Md.:
I recently applied for another position in my Agency. As a government worker now, I was told that, under the Merit Promotion System, I MUST be given feedback if I am not chosen for the position. It is my right, I'm told. It was suggested to call the interviewing official and follow-up myself.
The system may require this feedback to be given to me, and I'm told that the Official has up to 30 days to give this feedback after a selection is made. This feedback is essential to my professional growth. So, don't wait for someone to get back to you -- be as proactive as you can be!
Stephen Barr: You're right. It shouldn't hurt to ask.
Arlington, Va.:
How does the Pass Fail rating system work in pay for performance?
Stephen Barr: I don't know. The Bush team has not sent its pay-for-performance legislation to the Hill. Agencies will have to submit plans for approval to OPM before they can spend from the $500 million pot that the administration wants to create. OPM officials say they want to reward superior performance, which sounds like a different grading scheme than pass-fail.
Washington, D.C.:
A colleague is concerned that because of budget constraints the government will reduce in some fashion our retirement benefits. Do you think this is a realistic possibility? And do you know if the government has changed the means of calculating retirement benefits being paid to persons who are already retired?
Stephen Barr: In times of red ink, Congress tends to look for savings in the federal retirement trust fund. But I don't think it is a realistic possibility this year. Also don't think the government can change retirement calculations--they are established in law.
Re: Mother of Son in Army:
As a federal employee in the HR field, I would highly suggest that your son start applying now. This is especailly true if he wants to work in a law enforcement field, where he will have to undergo a long background investigation -- taking at them minimum of four months -- sometimes longer. Although he will not get any VET Preference points until he is officially out and has his DD124 in hand, it still does not hurt to apply. A common misconception is that all military members will get VET preference points. However, the reality is that the individual must have served during specific tours and expeditions. Good luck!
Stephen Barr: Superb advice. Thank you very much.
Silver Spring, Md.:
Stephen, My question is that where is the evidence that the private sector model could make government better? This from someone in an agency that at the end of the last administration had over 30 schedule C's out of 850 total staff. In the private sector losses on four bad ideas offset by profits on one good idea, look at the number of products and companies that appear and disappear each year. In the Government we don't charge constituents based on what the market will command. How do you run an inefficient program effectively? All our outsourcing has raised costs with no noticeable improvement in performance.
Stephen Barr: You make some good points that I don't have time to address, since this forum will soon end. To some extent, we have gone overboard with the assumption that government and big business can march to the same tunes. As you suggest, companies drop products, but agencies offer services mandated by Congress, and Congress almost never wants to take back something it has given the taxpayers. Agencies also operate under checks and balances--such as impartial and fair treatment of the public--that many companies are not forced to worry about. The list goes on. I'm with the Volcker Commission on political appointees. We've got too many now and their ranks should be cut by half.
Cottage City, Md.:
Those Bush folk sure know how to spend money -- and are very consistent about it! Not only do we have tax cuts aimed at the well-to-do, but we have government 'reform' also aimed at the high end. My tiny agency (3,000 FTEs), the GPO, has a new Public Printer who has stated that he wants to lose 300 employees (with buyouts, etc.). But he's adding fat positions at the top -- a new CIO and a new CFO. So in addition to the comptroller that we've always had, we'll have a chief financial officer. What does this add, besides a fat salary? (p.s. -- he clips these chats, too)
Stephen Barr: I'm not familiar with the GPO and its budget these days. But it's important to remember that Congress has passed legislation mandating that agencies set up CFOs, CIOs and, soon, a new one, called CHCO. It's not always the boss's fault when the agency layers up at the top.
North Potomac, Md.:
Do you think that members of Congress have realized that President Bush's proposed pay-for-performance package, with a 2.0 percent base pay increase, will act as the upper limit on their 2004 pay increase (according to the current annual adjustment statute)?
Stephen Barr: No. Most members do not understand the fine points of the government's pay system, but would probably tell you that a 2 percent raise is fine if it reflects general inflation trends. It's been the special burden of the Washington-area delegation to steer federal raises through Congress. In recent years, the delegation has done a superb job, since the raises have run from 3 percent to more than 4 percent.
Alas, we've run out of time again. Thanks to all of you who joined us today. Federal Diary Live will be on "spring break" next Wednesday. When it returns on April 23, we hope to discuss the ins-and-outs of the Thrift Savings Plan. See you then!
| |
© Copyright 2003 The Washington Post Company | 
