Search:

Custom Search

Readers' Comments

Total Comments: 42
Page 1 of 4

« Previous | Next »

The Persistence of Pay-for-Performance in Government

Want to Kill PFP--Include the Military

Don Vito Corleone
Genco Pura Olive Oil Importers
Mon Jun 29, 2009 7:56 AM

Post Reply

The best way to kill a stupid idea is not to fight it, but to insist that it is so good, we should include a more powerfull group that will lobby to kill the baby in the crib. Let's face it, you want to see some action out of an officer, threaten his benifits.

The military would kringe under a PFP system. The military has the same system as GS Civil servants with an other name. Rank is the same as grade and years of service is the same as step. We could have 3 bands for officers and enlisted and we could make them all you mybiz.

Think of it this way, if offcers had 3 bands-Jr. Officers, Field Grade, and General and some was promoted from Major to Lt. Col within band. The could only get a 5% increase and they will not get their full COLA and Step increase. The baby will be dead.

Re: Want to Kill PFP--Include the Military

Hoffa
C.O. Dept of Justice Witness Protection Program
Mon Jun 29, 2009 10:56 PM
I love your proposition!! I could see the body counts going sky high like in Vietnam. Inflated of course and no where close to reality, of killed enemy troops!! The military is authoritarian and very political. They will need a real grievance system to handle the wave of complaints/grievances. The officer corp and senior NCOs are apt to see a lot of grievances. That would be fun to watch, as their culture gets a taste of the best in private sector practices, so we are told.

Re: Want to Kill PFP--Include the Military

Aerospace Engineer
DoD
Mon Jun 29, 2009 11:42 PM
I agree. Since pay-for-performance is so great, mandate that it should be enacted for the military immediately, then watch the brass at the Pentagon pull every string to totally kill it faster than you can say Jack Robinson.

Pay to Perform - the latest fool's gold

Field Director
USDVA
Mon Jun 29, 2009 8:42 AM

Post Reply

Of course it's fool-hardy. but politicians LOVE the fool-hardy, as it makes convincing propaganda for the masses. It's just like saying we can close the deficit "simply" by eliminating all 'waste" in government programs. As if there was a line item for it.

Or the fools who follow the EEO has resulted in anything but unspoken (and often spoken) job and promotion quotas, not giving equal opportunity to all.

Or the fools who follow the various "flavors of the month" to cure all the government's ills - TQM, Zero-based budgeting, The Grace Commission, blah blah blah.

the reality is that if you really want to overhaul the government -- really make it "perform for pay", you would have to start with Congress and its ridiculous, contradictory, self-serving legislation and earmarks. Then move on to the Civil Service Rules which provide vast disincentive for any manager to take action against anyone who is below marginal.

PFP

Computer specialist
FAA
Mon Jun 29, 2009 9:02 AM

Post Reply

If you look at FAA employee survey results from the years prior to enactment of the PFP system the numbers speak louder than words we now as an agency are near the bottom of the list and it’s not the work as federal agency’s go what we do is vital for the health and welfare of the country and I think we do it in spite of the PFP system think about working knowing that you are at the top of your pay scale and no matter how well you do job wise your pay wont go up nor will the bottom line of your retirement pay at least when you retire you will at least get the COLA if there is one

Above article

HR Specialist
OPM
Mon Jun 29, 2009 9:03 AM

Post Reply

As one who served as a charter member of the "GM" merit pay system established by the CSRA of 1978, I can attest to the sturm und drang that accompanied that well-meaning but ultimately frustrating and disappointing attempt to implement a PFP approach for GM-13/15 managers and "management officials" under its coverage. The PFP approach seems to founder primarily on one major factor (though others, including widespread reluctance to deal with clearly demonstrated poor performance, exist as well), which is the intractability of seeking to reduce to a supposedly objective and quantifiable basis performance expectations of work characteristics that are inherently resistant to such Procrustean bed parameters. What may be feasible with regard to lower graded jobs where the work is primarily comprised of performance of repetitive tasks not involving the application of judgment or analyis, is most definitely not the case with most Federal white collar jobs. Thus the frustration with PFP.

Re: Above article

worker
Fed
Tue Jun 30, 2009 9:02 AM
I do lower graded work. I guarantee you that the nuts and bolts of my job are not repetitive without judgement. I must know law and be able to use it competently. It is also lower than a management job. Your facts are very wrong.

Dead Issue?

Labor Employee Relations Manager
VA
Mon Jun 29, 2009 9:04 AM

Post Reply

NSPS specifically, according to the original law is due to expire this year unless Congress approves it again..........

Re: Dead Issue?

LR Manager
DoD Component
Mon Jun 29, 2009 1:30 PM
VA LR Manager...before you comment on something outside your agency...do your homework. You are referring to a sunset date that applied ONLY to the NSPS labor relations rules...which not only were never implemented, but Congress removed the authority in January 2008. The pay for performance system has NEVER had such a sunset date although many people such as yourself have been confused about that point.

Pay For Performace

Contracting Officer
DCMA
Mon Jun 29, 2009 9:06 AM

Post Reply

Enjoyed your article. PFP is a harsh reality being ignored by executive mgmt and the crafty politicians.

A good idea not effectively implemented fails. With PFP you have an idea that sounded good but its implementation was poor and not practical for the Gov't.

I was a GM and saw it collapse on its own weight. Not only was it an HR flop but was finanacially draining and those at the top seemed to benefit the most whether warranted or not.

Under PFP, I see people doing the same old things and going through the motions with little, if any, additional benefits. Oh yes, there are metrics and performance standards but are they the right ones that can truly be measruable that correlate to the job at-hand. It appears to be window dressing to me.

DCMA embraced Deming, TQM guru, but not on a wholesale basis. He advocated doing away with performance evaluations as he contended they did more harm than good.

Gov't is not industry. When will this be recognized?!

Pay for Performance

Accounting Tech
National Finance Center-COD
Mon Jun 29, 2009 9:47 AM

Post Reply

iWho makes the final judgements on this pay for performance thing? I will tell you who....your supervisor or/& Branch Chiefs. And contrary to popular beliefs in the section or branch they are human and will react from a human standpoint such as likes and dislikes, their own prejudices, their feelings from interacting with said employee or just how that employee looks. For example: Suzy is a pretty, outgoing woman that tries to always please (some might say 'brown nose" management). Then let's look at Helen who is not pretty even too heavy some might say. She is a loner and doesn't really interact with others in her branch. She may have initiated a EEO complaint against her supervisor or branch chief. Now what makes you think that a supervisor or branch chief could look at both these women in the same light and judge their work fairly? Just look at the amount of EEO complaints out there if you doubt me.

Re: Pay for Performance

worker
Fed
Tue Jun 30, 2009 9:05 AM
Excellent points and very true. Also, if you just disagree with your manager on an issue, he may take offense. I know this is true with the manager's manager because I have experienced it. Even when they are wrong.
Total Comments: 42
Page 1 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.