Readers' Comments
Total Comments: 54
Page 2 of 5
Page 2 of 5
Unmasking the Marginal Federal Employee
Total Comments: 54
Page 2 of 5
Page 2 of 5
Free Email Newsletter
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| G | $12.7470 | +0.0007 | +0.05% |
| F | $12.6172 | +0.0216 | +0.29% |
| C | $10.5209 | +0.0356 | +0.83% |
| S | $12.5059 | +0.1427 | +2.45% |
| I | $14.5176 | +0.1584 | +1.84% |
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| L 2040 | $12.6448 | +0.0773 | +1.24% |
| L 2030 | $12.7606 | +0.0676 | +1.09% |
| L 2020 | $12.9752 | +0.0566 | +0.91% |
| L 2010 | $13.8966 | +0.0292 | +0.46% |
| L Income | $12.8270 | +0.0186 | +0.33% |
January 9, 2009
Search:
Custom Search
Home | About Us | FAQ's |
Site Map | Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
RSS 
|
Twitter 
© 2009 FedSmith Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Who's Truly "Marginal?"
AFRC
Wed Aug 3, 2005 8:58 AM
Post Reply
After 20+ years of federal service, I've concluded that a "marginal" performance has to come from equally inept supervision.
Anyone who still thinks "silly" service is a guaranteed job for life, doesn't live in the real world. I've known many feds who were removed, mostly w/out truly justifiable cause that warranted such drastic action. It was merely a boss who decided to remove this worker, enlisted CPO's help, and ended that worker's federal career.
But if a subordinate is truly failing to perform the job, it's up to the supervisor to stay on top of that worker to bring him/her up to speed. That has to mean daily meetings w/specific goals that must be met until that worker is brought up to speed and in consonance w/their PD/CoreDoc (or whatever they're called these days).
That's where I've observed the real failure: someone tells me to "shape up," but doesn't tell me what to do or how to do it--after I've been doing it for years and received outstanding appraisals and cash awards for doing what I've been doing all along. As a worker, I expect that boss to tell me exactly how I've failed to perform, and then tell me how to do it correctly--after he/she tells me why I've suddenly been doing something wrong all these years.
What kills me is when these alleged "best and brightest" come in off the street and then tell workers who've been in place 10, 20 years that they're "doing it all wrong." Then they proceed to do it "the right way" (their untried and untested method), and the whole process either fails, or falls into chaos--and the "old guard" is left to clean up their mess.
I say this from the worker's standpoint--which is why I personally would never be a supervisor. The pay isn't worth the heartache. But since I AM good at what I do and happy w/my job, I would hope that my bosses would appreciate that in kind by letting me do my job...
D ratings
Orr Consulting
Wed Aug 3, 2005 9:11 AM
Post Reply
Robbie - you hit it on the head - this is another example of management "doing it " to themselves - why on earth do we have 4 and 5 level rating systems with a level BELOW Fully Acceptable??? If agencies use that level, they should label for what it is - "Lousy."
Thank you
Too Small to Mention
Wed Aug 3, 2005 9:26 AM
Post Reply
I agree. It's like they say. If something you're involved with isn't going right, look in the mirror and fix the problem. Too many managers are mismanaging.
However, whatever the cause, I am very, very, very, very, tired of public servants (including politians) who recieve a paycheck for being "marginal" and let's face it, most marginal employees are rated that way because of marginal managers who fail to do there job by issuing failing ratings.
When will my taxes stop paying for marginal work?
As a federal employee myself, it is very disheartening for those of us who goa above and beyond.
Marginal Employee
DON
Wed Aug 3, 2005 9:26 AM
Post Reply
Guys -- this isn't that hard. Forget the performance part of this. If their performance is sad, most likely their conduct is as well...it is so much easier to remove someone for CONDUCT vice performance. Are they loitering/wasting time, using gov't phones/fax/time/computers to do personal business, are they following proper leave requesting procedures, etc. We have removed many "poor performers" who were also conduct problems...try that route. Doing a PIP and working that avenue will make you old, if not kill you. The worse thing you can do is allow it to continue and then pass the person off to another. I've had MANY dealings with that as well...wait for RIF, identify their position as one to go, then outwait them. That is wrong and passes a problem off to another. As managers and supervisors, we're paid handsomely to do the HARD work...manage them, before they manage you.
Re: Marginal Employee
forest service
Wed Aug 3, 2005 1:54 PM
Re: Marginal Employee
AFRC
Wed Aug 3, 2005 2:26 PM
That's where discriminatory ?s come into play: Why is the alleged infraction illegal for ME but not for him/her?
Which means the solution STILL--is for supervisors to do THEIR jobs correctly so that workers can do THEIRS likewise.
Dead Wood
Aircraft Maint DOD
Wed Aug 3, 2005 9:45 AM
Post Reply
I read with interest all the comments about how to fixs the system and I have lived through the point system and seen how top level manager will pad the piont to protect some off the worst worker because they are some how personely involved with the individual. and I have seen how exception to standard, are administered to protect individual to maintain the political balance. So until there is one standard for all employee, to insure a clear direction as to the duties and reponsibilites there will continue to be unsatifactory results under any system that is dreamed up. by the new messiah, to the federal work force. What do you exspect God has ten basic rules with no amendments and people have a hard time following those directions, now factor in the politically correct answer of the day.
marginal employee
DOD
Wed Aug 3, 2005 10:08 AM
Post Reply
Being a member of the federal government after years of working in the private sector and prior military, the one thing I learned when I started in civil service is the only way to get fired was to kill someone. If you were in the private sector you would have been gone the day you did something wrong no questions asked even with a union behind you. Employees are given way too much leeway. From what I have seen, the more you "screw up" the higher you are promoted. Guess I haven't screwed up enough yet.
Marginal Employees
DOI
Wed Aug 3, 2005 10:12 AM
Post Reply
Get rid of the marginal rating and marginal performers; sounds great, but the problem is that until we get rid of marginal managers, of which there are far to many, we are going to have what we have now, too many marginal performers. Good managers can't save or turn marginal performers into high performers, but they can go a long way in bringing their workforce to a higher level of performance; acceptable or higher. Too many managers are not willing to take the time and effort to be "leaders", which is a major factor in being a successful manager/leader of people. The irony is, ask any of these marginal or unsatisfactory managers how they perform as managers and they will tell you that they are an outstanding manager. The sad part, is that they probably could be, but lack the training and tenacity to ever be, at best, "effective". I don't often agree with the union, as they helped perpetuate this situation, but this is a management responsibility, and until managers are willing to step forward and do their jobs, it is not going to change. Except for the few, leaders are made, not born.
Re: Marginal Employees
Government Personnel Services
Wed Aug 3, 2005 5:09 PM
We can all acknowledge the "Peter Principle is at work here. "In a hierachical organization, people eventually rise to their level of incompetence" or something to that effect. I tried to address what you and others are noting in the second of three articles on this site titled, "Making Pay-For-Performance Pay Off".
Dr. Peter must be acknowedged... and who's to say our subordinates wouldn't think we were lousy bosses? My heart goes out to Federal supervisors. I want them to be better trained and supported.