Search:

Custom Search

Readers' Comments

Total Comments: 40
Page 3 of 4

« Previous | Next »

Appraisals, Objectivity, and the Little Black Book

Little Black Book

Mil Pers Tech
DOD
Fri Apr 27, 2007 11:28 AM

Post Reply

Having been in management as a first line supervisor Branch Chief at one time, I had been taught that keeping this kind of record; (a "little Black Book", an "unofficial personnel file" or anything of that nature) was considered to be an illegal act as, the employee has the right to know what is in his/her personnel file, and to have been counseled regarding anything negative.
This kind of record (maintained unbeknownst to the employee can devistate an employees career when and if you have a supervisor that simply doesn't like you or has it in for you for some reason and, provides a false negative picture/representation of an employee. To allow this, you must assume that all supervisors are honest and altruistic in all of their nature and judgements which, is not always true. I've known people who were held back for promotion etc. based on false information provided throughout an organization from a supervisor's notes in an unofficial employee file.

Re: Little Black Book

Duck Master
Navy
Mon Aug 18, 2008 12:09 PM
It's about time I read someone who new what they were talking about. I once filed a grievance and found out it was not purged from my records after 6 months, as required by law. I work for a military person and that black book always gets passed down from person to person. Back then, my pay didn't hinge on their opinion, but under NSPS, it does. This system is a forest to cut our retirement and pay and make it where the supervisor gets a 7% pay increase. How do you think a 3.5% pay from Congress gets someone 7%? By shafting us.

Employee Appraisals

Social Scientist
IRS
Fri Apr 27, 2007 12:46 PM

Post Reply

I was a supervisor for 8 1/2 years and served as a 2nd line manager for a total of 1 1/2 years. As a supervisor I learned that to keep good, decent employees working effectively I had to inflate ratings to keep up with other managers that were overly generous in their appraisals. I realized this after one of my really good workers came to me and asked me why my rating of her was lower than a similar employee in another department. Having supervised both employees, I knew them to be about equal. Through time I realized that the best I was going to be able to do was to categorize my direct reports into (a) Professional (b) Paraprofessional, and (c) Clerical employees. Then I ranked them from highest to lowest within those broad categories, and their appraisal reflected that ranking. I never told them about this system, but I also never had a union grievance or EEO compliant over it. People generally know the pecking order in their own department. Who is best; etc. down the line.

Re: Employee Appraisals

Above Average Joe
Huge Agency
Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:16 PM
I have to agree the employees do know the pecking order. They know the top performers; they know the consistent top performers. So, why have an appraisal system at all?

Opportunities to achieve

Management Analyst
DoD
Mon Apr 30, 2007 12:31 PM

Post Reply

I am in an area made primarily of analysts 11 and above. The favoritism here is that certain people are given the good projects with high visibility, the opportunity to do well and make a difference. Others are relegated to the "also ran" maintenance categories that are the grunt work that every organization needs to have done, but nothing to award a gold star for. These are also the areas that do not backfill when employees leave, so increasing workload, with little chance to get ahead. Increasingly the cool projects are being given to L6S Black Belts, yet another privileged class, even smaller than the manager's lunch club.

Re: Opportunities to achieve

Another nameless, Faceless Nobody
DoD
Tue May 8, 2007 8:00 AM
Absolutely on track!!! If you are "One of the Guys (or Girls) and are a regular Joe (or Jane), you will be given opproutunities. If not, you might as well put an solid steel door on your cubicle and unplug your phone and computer and chain yourself to a big iron ring set into the floor. You'll never be coming out. You will never be given anything but the "Garbage Work" the Boss decides to toss you because his "Shining Stars" are "too Busy on Important Special Projects" to be "Bothered" with that "routine stuff". I've seen the decision to "ground or retire in place" an employee based on their choice of favorite Ball team, their religeous preference, their sexual orientation (if male), their politics, marital status, and other factors "The Team"decides they can't live with. Usually transfer is not an option as The Boss will fill in his counterpart as to How You Really Are in the clandestine phone call. They'd rather you rot in place doing the jobs nobody on the Team has time to do.

JOKE: praisals, Objectivity, and the Little Black Book

Training Coordinator
USMC
Wed May 2, 2007 1:11 PM

Post Reply

Our command is already using the pay for performance system.
I have to be honest that nothing has changed from the old system.
It has to do with who you are smoothing, and who you are friends with.
Your pay is going to depend on how well you are liked by them -- it has nothing to do with how hard you work or how much you do.
nothing has changed except the name.

Major problems with PFP in the Postal Service

Information Technology
USPS
Fri May 11, 2007 3:02 PM

Post Reply

Talk about a subjective complicated system with a ratings recourse process which amounts to a joke. Employees performance is based on a numerical rating derived from adding the weighted composite summary rating to the weighted core requirements rating. Eligible EAS employees are measured under a 15 point performance evaluation system. Exceptional contributors are a 13, 14 or 15;High contributors are a 10, 11 or 12;Contributors are a 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 or 9;noncontributors are a 1, 2 or 3. Different pay increases are established at each 15 point ratings;1,2 or 3=0%;4=2.5%;5=3%;6=3.5%7=5%,8=5.75%;9=6.5%;10=8%;11=8.75%;12=9.5%;13=10.25%;14=11%;15=12%. Each organization head is given a functional average which is broken down by organization and these are not published. Higher managers instruct lower managers to GIVE their direct reports lower point ratings which allows their managers to give them higher point ratings as all of the ratings must average out to the functional average.

NSPS and Chapter 43

HR Specialist
Army
Mon May 21, 2007 6:36 AM

Post Reply

Very interesting article. Just wanted to point out that under NSPS chapter 43 is waived.

In the Solution is the Problem

Vice President & Chief Steward AFSCME LOCAL 3300
Federal Aviation Administration
Wed May 23, 2007 4:13 PM

Post Reply

Thank you for the Article!
I agree with the little black book as a way to include objectivity. Yet if HR policy ask and or require managers to talk with employees quarterly and "note" the discussion why aren't Managers rated on that requirement? You ask the same question differently. "If supervisors are to keep book on their employees, will their bosses rate them by objective criteria as well?"

In my opinion the dual system of eveluation (managers vs non-supervisory employers) is the root of the problem of performance rating. Most employees imatate the boss. So a Manager that is not objectively rated by his manager may repeat the errors of his managers ways and become a subjective evaluator.

Total Comments: 40
Page 3 of 4

« Previous | Next »

Add a Comment about this Article

** All fields are required.
Note: Your comments will not show up right away. FedSmith.com selects the most insightful comments from our readers for posting. If selected, your comments will show up in the comments section after they have been reviewed and approved. See our terms of use for more information.