Readers' Comments
Total Comments: 30
Page 2 of 4
Page 2 of 4
New Pay-For-Performance Twist Coming to Your Agency
Total Comments: 30
Page 2 of 4
Page 2 of 4
Free Email Newsletter
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| G | $13.2114 | +0.0012 | +0.70% |
| F | $13.6201 | -0.0062 | +2.14% |
| C | $13.8116 | -0.0706 | +4.49% |
| S | $17.9282 | -0.1903 | +8.91% |
| I | $18.5079 | -0.0782 | -0.16% |
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| L 2040 | $16.1968 | -0.0789 | +3.59% |
| L 2030 | $15.9593 | -0.0673 | +3.23% |
| L 2020 | $15.7365 | -0.0532 | +2.72% |
| L 2010 | $15.4595 | -0.0197 | +1.57% |
| L Income | $14.0856 | -0.0155 | +1.48% |
March 20, 2010
Search:
Custom Search
Home | About Us | FAQ's |
Site Map | Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
RSS 
|
Twitter 
| Mobile
© 2010 FedSmith Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Time in grade
Dept of State
Fri Feb 8, 2008 12:02 PM
Post Reply
I agree with all that favoritism could play a factor in some people's promotions. I cannot speak for all agencies, but mine would never use a favoritism practice. My AD only puts the best individual in the next grade for the position. If you do not qualify, then you do not get it. However, I like the idea of dissolving the 52-week time in grade. We have all met those individuals where we felt that they were not presently in the position that would be to the greatest benefit of the agency and people, and, sometimes, we lose those people. We have also seen where someone else should have obtained the position, but because they did not meet time in grade, the position was given to a less qualified person. The 52-week TIG has done a disservice to us and the people because we have lost too many "creme of the crop" candidates. I understand some people's hesitation, but I feel that in the long run this will be a great practice.
Shut-up or Vote
Defen$e Agency
Fri Feb 8, 2008 12:24 PM
Post Reply
Why is gas $3.00 per gallon? The answer is very simple, because you will pay it and shut up because you have no alternatives.
The reason NSPS was implemented is similar. Our elected officials in parties authorized it and you have no alternatives. If you don't like either, buy a fuel efficient car and get out and vote.
Time-In-Grade Requirements
DCMA
Fri Feb 8, 2008 12:58 PM
Post Reply
Mr. Smith, covered this subject correctly, removing the time in grade requirements. Will only foster a reward to those favorite (Good Ol Boys) boys and girls up the corporate ladder, it would not necessarily promote those that are deserving. I can also see where removing this requirement could promote those who have the gift of gab, or shine up to supervision. Where those who work hard day in and day out don't receive any reconition for the what they do. Some of this you have even with the requirement, but it is somewhat controlled now. If removed any controls would be removed and at some future date there wouldn't be any room to promote those who are deserving.
Another way to stack the court...
DoD
Fri Feb 8, 2008 1:40 PM
Post Reply
What about the perspective that removing time-in-grade just allows managers in-sync with the current adminstration (regardless of which flavor it is) to promote those who "agree" with your particular biases like any President gets to nominate someone who believes in his/her particular political view to the Supreme Court. In the case of Civil Servants, it's like stacking the upper grades of the bureacracy with people who think like you do. When you are gone, those like you will carry on your legacy. If they remove time-in-grade, then promotions will become even more "old-boy-network" influenced. Hell, it already happens here in the South and OPM just doesn't look close enough. I served on a personnel selection panel and had to report another member for bragging that his promotion was who he knew instead of what his qualifications were/are; HE SAID IT TO A CANDIDATE WAITING FOR THE INTERVIEW TO START. As far as I know, nothing was done to the guy who admitted that. God Help Us all.
time in grade
usda
Fri Feb 8, 2008 2:55 PM
Post Reply
What are these people who come up with these ideas smoking ?????
Let federal employees develop and design a pay plan and I guarantee it will be the best thing to happen to federal employment in 50 years and the worst thing to happen to those non-performers who work for Uncle Sam.
Re: time in grade
DOD
Tue Feb 12, 2008 10:18 AM
qualifications for promotion
USDA
Fri Feb 8, 2008 4:48 PM
Post Reply
I find the time in grade somewhat arbitrary but would be wary of getting rid of it for all the reasons you state. I have been chomping at the bits to comment on a related subject--Hillary Clinton's claim to qualifications for high office because she was 1st lady and hung around people in high office. How many people in federal government have been by the side of their spouses in a higher grade helping prepare presentations late at night, administering cousel when things were going bad, attending the acceptance ceremoies when things were going good? I, now a GS 12, as a career employee in a professional series have spent 29 years as a "1st lady" at the side of a spouse who has always been 1-3 GS levels ahead of me. Now that he's retiring, does that qualify me for his job as a GS 14 because I've been there (probably with far more engagement than Ms Clinton) at his side?
Re: qualifications for promotion
VHA
Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:29 AM
Pay for Performance within the federal government
air force
Sat Feb 9, 2008 5:01 PM
Post Reply
"Pay for Performance within the federal government" should be a controversy merely from that fact that there is no accountability in management. Performance is simply 'go along and get along', which may be where the "Good Old Boy Network" applies. Bush fired the lawyers because they were not in the "Good Old Boy Network" and the guy under fire said in his defense that performance and loyalty is an imaginary line. 'NSPS' is just another word for the beginning of another cycle of the spoils system, which President Chester Arthur was forced by the American people to abolish. Of course, some may be better paper pushers than others and paper pushers need rewarded.