Who Is John Berry and What Are His "Bold Ideas" for the Federal Workforce?
By David S. Orr
Sunday, November 8, 2009
There was an interesting piece in the Washington Post recently. Joe Davidson, in his Federal Diary column, reviewed a speech given by Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Director John Berry at Syracuse University. In his address, Berry called for "bold ideas" to reform the civil service.
I know it's all about change, but some perspective is in order, especially when one of the "bold ideas" being floated is to abolish the position classification system and replace it with something like a three-level apprentice to expert scheme.
There has been no mention of how employee pay would work, or how this would mesh with supervisory, managerial and SES levels. According to Davidson's column, an HR staffer who shall remain nameless remarked that "a good classifier could make a Dixie cup a GS-14." I managed some very good classifiers in my years in human resources (HR), but none quite that good, or imaginative. Perhaps someone is forgetting that signing the position description cover sheet, you know, where the supervisor attests to the accuracy of the duties described, is covered by Title 18 of the U.S. Code; i.e., misrepresenting the duties of the position (that's a nice way of saying you're lying) is a criminal offense.
But there's nothing wrong with taking a good hard look at the civil service to see if it meets the needs of its customers—supervisors, managers, senior executives, political appointees, and ultimately, the taxpayers. Change for the sake of change is a waste of time, money and energy, but change is good if:
- it's based on the identification of an actual problem,
- the appropriate stakeholders and experts are consulted, and
- the change results in measurable improvements in productivity, economy, efficiency, etc.
Who Is John Berry?So who is this John Berry and what is he trying to do?
First of all, I've never met him, but I think I like the guy—he is not there just to keep the chair warm. He seems genuinely interested in looking at our 126 year-old civil service and appears to have the energy to take on the challenge of reforming it, or at least refining it, to make it more responsive. And he demonstrates respect for the merit system, which is the backbone of the federal civil service.
The jury is, of course, still out on how he will stack up with former OPM directors—after all, he's only held the job for a few months. There have been eight of them, not counting a few "actings."
We had Alan Campbell, who gets points just for being the first one. And Don Devine from 1981 to 1985. Devine certainly made his mark, one that federal unions would like to forget. From 1993 to 1997 Jim King was the Director. King was known for his fondness for donuts and public spectacles, like unfurling for the cameras a seven-foot long SF-171, then Uncle Sam's job application form, and publicly burning the now-defunct Federal Personnel Manual (FPM) in front of the OPM offices on E Street. When I Googled "past OPM directors," Jim King's name was notably absent from all the lists that came up - not sure what that means. . . Janice LaChance succeeded King and by most accounts, gets good grades for her tenure.
I remember an absolutely wonderful chat I had with her on a Friday afternoon in her office. We talked for quite a while and I remember her command of any topic, her wit and charm and, unfortunately, her good judgment—it was a job interview for a senior position at OPM—I didn't get it.
Where's Connie Newman When We Need Her?
But the one OPM Director whom I would commend to Berry to emulate is Constance Berry Newman. Connie started in government as a clerk-typist, then became a personnel assistant and manager.
After her three years as OPM Director, she went on to an Assistant Secretary position at the State Department. She also served with distinction on what was informally known as the D.C Control Board which brought fiscal and managerial reform to a District government in disarray. Connie was good not only because of her personal qualities, but because she was accessible, she reached out to constituents and she had clout with the Hill and the White House. She knew the President well (George Herbert Walker Bush); both the President and Mrs. Bush came to her farewell party. I wonder if President George W. Bush even knew what OPM was, much less the name of the Director.
"Clout" is important. For the most part, OPM has taken a back seat to the Office of Management & Budget (OMB), which is a shame, since if you spell out the acronym "OPM," you get Office of Personnel Management. Newman didn't take a back seat to anyone. Clout is also important at the agency level. Can Berry rein in the big dogs, like DOD and DHS? After their experiences with the so-called "National Security Personnel System" (NSPS) and "MAX-HR," they may want to be reined in. In any event, the large tail called DOD has had great success wagging the OPM dog. We'll see if that remains the case.
Most of us in the business appreciated Connie's style of reaching out to the HR profession—we perhaps didn't agree with everything she did, but she let us in on her ideas. Even the small agencies, of which there are many, were solicited.
It Will Take an Act of Congress
The other reason we need a "Connie Newman"—type OPM Director is that the kinds of changes that have been floating around cannot, for the most part, be made by a stroke of the presidential pen. The position classification system, competitive examinations and the merit system all go back to the Pendleton Act of 1883. I well remember President Chester A. Arthur at the signing ceremony, noting that the new civil service law was born of the assassination of President Garfield and shepherded through Congress by Representative George Pendleton of Ohio. (Just kidding - I'm not that old.)
The point is that we're talking about major legislative changes. That doesn't mean it can't be done—it just means that it ain't going to be easy. The good news is that we're early in the tenure of what might be a two-term president. The bad news is that he's got a lot of other things taking up his time right now. Things like Iraq, the war in Afghanistan, flu shots, health care legislation, and did I mention the economy? Major civil service reform is not like "Cash for Clunkers." And Barack Obama is by no means a shoo-in for another term.
Misguided Missiles?
Is anyone in the mood for taking on the task of civil service legislation?
I doubt that DOD wants any part of it. The misguided missile that was NSPS may have poisoned the well. As it should. It was both ill-conceived and mean-spirited. I found just the title to be offensive. There was a thinly veiled implication that if it weren't for all these stupid personnel rules and having to deal with unions that 9-11 wouldn't have happened—what an outrageous proposition. The corollary was that our hands were tied in fighting the wars in Irag and Afghanistan by OPM regulations and the restrictions of union contracts. Again, nonsense.
I got a real kick out of the NSPS provision that would have limited the authority of the Merit System Protection Board to rule on DOD employee adverse action appeals. The joke is that DOD already routinely wins most of the cases brought before the MSPB. Always has. It's like the World Series Champion New York Yankees, who beat the Phillies four games to two, asking that next year, all the playoff games be played at Yankee Stadium and the Yanks get an extra at-bat.
And new labor relations ground would have been broken with their hare-brained theory of collective bargaining. Under DOD's scheme, the unions could negotiate contracts, but the Secretary of Defense could void their provisions whenever he felt like it. It reminded me of the old, old days of "advisory arbitration"—an agency fired a guy, the union took it to arbitration, the arbitrator ruled in favor of the employee, the agency said thank you very much, paid the arbitrator and the guy stayed fired. That system worked well for the agencies and arbitrators; for employees and unions, not so much.
There were in fact some worthy provisions in NSPS—interesting ideas that for the most part were doomed to go down with the rest of the ship. But essentially NSPS was an attempt to emasculate employees' due process rights and put the unions out of business. When the lawsuit over the labor relations provisions came before Judge Rosemary Collyer, every labor relations expert in town knew that DOD was going down—unfortunately for them, they drew a judge who really knew labor relations—she was a labor lawyer and former General Counsel at the National Labor Relations Board.
Lessons to be Learned
The lessons to be learned, and there are many, are both strategic and tactical.
The primary point is never assume that time is on your side; changing anything in Washington always takes a lot longer than you think it will. President Obama said he wanted a health care bill passed by August. Washington insiders would respond, "August of what year?" And there are all these higher priorities, previously mentioned. Everyone, including me, thought that the President would sign a new union-drafted labor relations Executive Order giving unions the right to bargain over (b)(1)'s in the presidential limo on the way from the Capitol after being inaugurated.
In reality, there have been at least three drafts thrown around, and the last one doesn't even have the kind of (b)(1) provision the unions want. Things happen.
And then there is that elephant in the room—getting input from all the stake-holders. This is the hardest part. Sometimes you can't even figure out who they are, and they don't appreciate being overlooked. Everyone from the American Legion and VFW to minority organizations, professional groups, academia, Capitol Hill and of course, the unions. Speaking of which, the leadership of the two major federal unions have been lukewarm, at best, towards any bold ideas.
My advice to Director Berry is
- Try to identify the really important issues, not just the low-hanging fruit,
- Make changes that will have measurable results,
- Meaningfully involve all the stakeholders,
- Listen to the experts and practitioners, not just your political staff,
- Allow a LOT more time that you think, and
- Remember George Santayana's maxim that "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." A case in point is the idea of centralized registers, where OPM staff would conduct the evaluation and screening of applicants. Be careful - been there, done that.
And finally, the best of luck.
As always, just my opinion.
© 2010 David S. Orr. All rights reserved. This article may not be reproduced without express written consent from David S. Orr.
|
Readers' Comments
Posted: February 1, 2010 9:47 AM
Posted: November 12, 2009 9:51 PM
Posted: November 12, 2009 8:51 AM
View All Comments »