Supervisory/ Managerial Responsibilities and Merit System Principles
By Phil Varnak
Friday, September 12, 2008
Over the past six years, I have been presenting a course for federal supervisors and managers that includes a discussion of supervisory responsibilities based upon the nine Merit System Principles. I estimate that I have trained at least 1500 supervisors during this time and the majority had never heard of these principles before the class.
Accordingly, they are not aware of their responsibilities under these principles and in many cases, admitted repeated violations. Many of these supervisors have been in a supervisory position for years but indicate they never had knowledge of their responsibilities for proper application of Merit System principles.
A related topic is the subject of Prohibited Personnel Practices since the majority of these practices were also implemented as part of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. Although many of these participants had heard of Prohibited Personnel Practices, the majority expressed little, if any, knowledge of the 12 Prohibited Personnel Practices that affect their performance of duties.
I firmly believe that management must assure supervisors are aware of these requirements and follow them to the full letter and intent of the law, as set forth by Congress. To do otherwise places the supervisors in jeopardy of committing a violation of law and suffering the consequences of that violation. We have all heard that ignorance is not an excuse for violating the law, but I believe that management has a responsibility to assure that all management representatives are prepared to accomplish their assigned duties, and this includes following the requirements of the Merit System.
One of the biggest surprises to participants was that the Privacy Act of 1974 applied to them.
Merit Systems Principle 2 addresses the requirement to be fair and equitable. This principle also includes the supervisor's respect for the privacy and constitutional rights of their employees. The majority of participants had no idea which records were covered by the Privacy Act, the fact they were responsible for their releases of information covered by the Act, or the limits on the information they were permitted to release.
Another Principle deals with protecting employee rights concerning partisan political actitities. Most participants knew the provisions of the Hatch Act and the rights of employees to participate in limited partisan political activities. What most supervisors did not realize is that they should refrain from participating in discussions of their political views with the employees supervised since such a discussion could be interpreted as attempting to influence how employees vote. This is particularly timely with the upcoming elections. Attempting to influence how employees vote is not only a protected right for employees under Merit Systems Principle 8 but also a Prohibited Personnel Practice for the supervisor.
In my previous life as a Human Resources (HR) Director, we provided regular recurring training classes for new and experienced supervisors to keep them informed of these requirements and other responsibilities assigned to them by virtue of the position they hold, i.e., supervisor/manager in the Federal sector. Many supervisors believe that their responsibilities end with assigning work and evaluating performance. I cannot imagine why organizations are assigning supervisors to these positions without fully acquainting them with their individual responsibilities to follow the Merit System Principles and to avoid committing any Prohibited Personnel Practices.
HR Offices or other offices with training responsibilities should have an established process to assure that supervisors receive training in the Merit System Principles and Prohibited Personnel Practices as part of their new supervisor training. The completion of required training is generally recorded in the supervisor/manager's Official Personnel Folder and this can be utilized to show this required training has been completed. A reminder for all supervisor/managers on discussion of political issues would be appropriate at this time with the advent of the upcoming elections.
The guidance from OPM on this subject was submitted in a letter dated 9/12/06 from the Director, OPM to the Chief Human Capital Officers Council. That guidance was titled "Guidelines for Managerial Development" and contained three criteria, each with several components. The second criteria stated that agencies should as a minimum incorporate the following components in their leadership development approach and then listed eight separate components, one of which is,
"Training for new supervisors and managers to ensure they have completed development of basic supervisory skills, including communicating expectations, and managing, evaluating, improving and rewarding employees' performance. Ideally, training should be completed within six months of appointment to supervisory duties."
I understand that some agencies allocate resources for training supervisors/managers and other agencies do not. However, agencies are responsible to assure that supervisors and managers are properly trained to carry-out the responsibilities assigned them by position description, statute, and regulation. It is just good management practice to assure supervisors know how to do the job properly thereby assisting management is accomplishing the work of the organization. To do otherwise is not only foolish, but, in my opinion, mismanagement of Federal resources.
The opinions expressed in this article are totally mine and mine alone. They do not represent the views any of the agencies or unions with which I am currently working or have worked in the past.
© 2009 Phil Varnak. All rights reserved. This article may not be reproduced without express written consent from Phil Varnak.
|
Readers' Comments
Posted: October 3, 2008 9:48 AM
Posted: September 25, 2008 12:57 PM
Posted: September 16, 2008 10:32 AM
View All Comments »