Gee, I guess Julie Meyers would take a nose dive here, so this won't work. We wouldn't want to hold anyone responsible. Having said that, these are good, but I still don't think anyone will ever really be graded on this. Managers will still get level 5 (the write up should be really funny under NSPS) and a nice pay raise/bonus. Since the managers make up the pay pool, you really don't think that their ratings would reflect anything remotely resembling reality. That would be a first.
Who is kidding who?
Engineer Interior Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:46 AM
Given that my upper management is still trying to avoid veterans preference and hire a favorite, I don't think that EEO matters much to them either. Upper management has to lead by example, and most do not.
Discrimination
Engineer HUD Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:58 AM
You state: "Standards that refer to recruiting women and minorities have been applied to supervisors who had no authority to recruit or select. Other standards have pretended to evaluate on the basis of EEO complaints filed – a matter that is either uncontrollable or dealt with by discipline." There are sevearl problems with this statement: 1) Putting in place goals for recruiting women and minorities is discriminatory; 2)Supervisors do have authority to recruit and to promote. They promote by giving minorities and women higher performance ratings than they deserve. 3) Supervisors are rarely disciplined for violating EEO rules. They lose cases in EEOC hearings for their discriminary acts and manaement does not discipline them.
The Center for Individual Rights has filed a class action lawsuit in federal court in the District of Columbia, challenging employment goals and preferences for women and racial minorities at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
Re: Discrimination
HR specialist retired Tue Nov 27, 2007 1:43 PM
I think you've misread portions of the article: (1) No where does it suggest that only women and minorities be recruited. It is perfectly valid to focus at least some recruitment efforts to try to reach under-represented segments of the population. In your particular field, women and minorities are probably under-represented. (2) In many govt agencies, a potential selection is run by EEO, HR and upper management before any job offer is made. Supervisors don't have the final say. And by the way, do you know of any white male employees who've received higher ratings than they deserved? (3) You're correct that management isn't always disciplined when they should be.
Re: Discrimination
Engineer HUD Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:38 AM
Reply to HR Specialist
(1)The suit, Worth v. Jackson, charges HUD and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) — which encouraged, evaluated, and approved HUD's "affirmative employment plan" (AEP) — with intentional race and sex discrimination in violation of the equal protection guarantee of the United States Constitution. The suit asks for a permanent injunction against HUD's use of the plan and the preferential treatment of women and minorities required therein.
(2) Managers do get involved in the hiring process. In my case the Director of my office did not want me to receive a promotion so she hired her best friend's daughter-in law instead, in retaliation for my prior EEO activity. She was hired from outside the agency.
(3) In my office the Director is a Puerto Rican female who hates white people, so no I have never seen a white male receive a higher rating than they deserved.
For more information on Worth v. Jackson visit the website cir-usa.org.
EEO ratings
EEO Manager Fed Tue Nov 27, 2007 10:04 AM
This article is not bad. One of the reasons for the requirement to rate is that the record of various agencies even with compliance is poor. There are many examples in which managers, when confronted with the right thing to do or even ordered to do the right thing, purposely fail to do; "rather than offend the boys, it's better to pay off the complainant". This is really bad when the management official is a political appointee, SES or seniior careerist.
The quality of EEO programs is directly related to senior management's committment. If all managers want is a program that processes complaints and therefore stays in reactive mode, they hire EEO staff to reflect that view. That view is actually the primary cause of programmatic problems; the EEO staff is then forced into the defensive because senior management gives lip service to EEO quality.
The EEOC MD 715 is a great step in the right direction.
EEO Performance Standard
HR Specialist NARA Tue Nov 27, 2007 10:37 AM
I liked the standard. It is clear and specific. A person receiving this standard would know exactly what to do to get the desired rating. I also think the standard could be used at many levels, from first-line supervisor to manager.
Good work!
eeo
social worker vha Tue Nov 27, 2007 10:46 AM
I must say first that for the most part EEO is a sham and I feel it is totally against the emloyee on every level.The 'investigators" have little or no ability in investigating thoroughly any complaint.It turns out that every one repeats themselves over the phone to an invesitigator which always amuses me as to how thorough can such nonsense be.I've been told that when an EEO is filed it costs the agency(station or CO).I've never beeen able to find that out and who is held responsible for the loss of that money?Does anyone care?Holding anyone responsible(spervisers,managers(mid/upper)is total foolery and will never happen.But a nice concept.
Re: eeo
Fed DoD Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:07 AM
Before I became a union steward and officer, I filed complaints for valid reasons. That the agency said that the $$ involved in resolving those complaints was irrelevant. In each instance, the problem could've been avoided had the supvr been honest and upfront w/me and allowed me to do my job as outlined in my PD. Had my bosses done THEIR jobs, I'd have been able to do MY job, and everyone would've been happy.
The complaint procedure law, and anyone who feels victimized by discrimination is entitled to pursue that procedure and is protected by law to do so.
That's why it's so important that all feds know what their rights as feds are--and their labor unions SHOULD be able to tell them that, and more.
EEO
Program Technician Farm Service Agency Tue Nov 27, 2007 12:27 PM
Supervisor should be given training on evaluating different personality traits of his employees. There should be emphasis on equality treatment of employees. If there is a perceived trait that baffles/annoys supervisor, action should be driven toward understanding the person who is the employee and not toward comparisons. Look at the whole person. This is especially relevant when favorites are targeted as "ideal" employees. In this case, it would be unfair to evaluate through comparison.
Protected groups include people with disabilities
EEO Specialist FDA Tue Nov 27, 2007 12:38 PM
Please keep in mind that your article perpetuates the 'out of sight, out of mind mentality' I often see by not including individuals with disabilities as one of the protected groups under EEO that are often excluded and thus ignored/forgotten in discussions such as above.
Re: Protected groups include people with disabilit
Author Government Personnel Services Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:50 PM
You're right! My mistake. Many thanks for noticing.
Frost on the iceberg
Analyst DOD Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:31 PM
Talking about performance standards in relationship to NSPS is like talking about Frost on an Iceberg. I'm disappointed that you'd devote an entire article to discussing NSPS performance standards when the real problem is that civilians are being forced into NSPS, they are losing money, they are losing seniority, the DOD is going behind closed doors to evaluate convoluted performance standards. Talk about the issue: Talk about how we stop NSPS before its too late. Talk about how we get permission to go on strike. Research what Class Action Law Suit we can join to stop NSPS. Talk about unfair hiring practices by DoD to hire their retiring cronie friends leaving work on Friday and coming to work on Monday. Write something worth while! Use your position to bring to light exactly how bad NSPS is for the Federal Servant who is quickly becoming a Federal slave.
Re: Frost on the iceberg
Author Government Personnel Services Tue Nov 27, 2007 7:08 PM
I have also been concerned with NSPS. I began posting articles on the subject to this site more than 2 years ago. One of them even discusses how some non-supervisory employees could be exempted from NSPS. Take a look... and sorry DoD's new pay and evaluation system has you so riled. A colleague of mine who works for the Navy tells me she knows of no one in her command who actually likes the new system.
Draft EEO Standard
Retired manager HHS Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:40 PM
I found the standard interesting and a very good attempt to objectively describe and quantify desired outcomes, while recognizing what is actually within the scope of someone's real responsibilities (what they have control over). I have little doubt this standard would result in both improved awareness of EEO and outcomes. It moves things forward. On a side note, I also found the description of how many measures under the "FS" level would need to be met to attain an "E" or an "O" rating, e.g., in this case, meeting 50% of the measures described at the FS level would result in an "O", etc., very interesting. I can't tell you how many managers or supervisors assume that an employee must meet ALL the measures described at the FS level to be rated "FS", even where there's no indication of this in either the CBA or the standard itself. Good job!
Re: Draft EEO Standard
Author Government Personnel Services Tue Nov 27, 2007 7:01 PM
Thanks for your comments. When teaching a seminar I've titled "Making Appraisal Work", I often note that we could get "A's" in my high school by getting one of every ten questions wrong. I can look at some performance standards and know instantly the standards have never actually been applied. One reason, as you've noted, is that perfection is demanded for just a Fully Successful ("C") rating -- yet the employees are being rated "Exceeds" and "Outstanding". I believe it would take a great deal of effort for someone to take on 6 of the 12 items shown in the example. That would qualify for Outstanding... and leave some work ahead in years to come.
Looks good
Engineer Army Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:53 PM
Looks good. The one thing wrong with performance appraissals is that they are not taken seriously until a "bad apple" comes along. Until then evals are given out, checks written and life goes on. This is so sad given the weight appraissals have in RIFs and NSPS. The technical responsibilities of supervisors needs to be removed so that they can concentrate on the supervisory responsibilities. Maybe then performance management can start to change for the good.
Evaluating EEO As If It Really Mattered
Equal Opportunity Specialist U.S. Department of Education Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:57 PM
I never knew that supervisors were evaluated in this area until my former and "late" bigoted homosexual FDA supervisor joked about it in front of me.
EEO Evaluation is not taken seriously
Salior DON Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:21 PM
In the military if a supervisor really wants to give a poor evaluation to a subordinate the senior gives poor grades (grade 3 or lower) in all areas except for EEO where the reporting senior gives the highest possible grade (grade 5). It is a slam against the subordinate and a slam against EEO but no one seems to care.
EEO?
Immigration Officer US Immigration Service Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:42 PM
If you file an EEO complaint, won't management just retailiate against you? I've heard some supervisors say that they think EEO complaints are bogus. Let's get real.
Re: EEO?
Fed DoD Wed Nov 28, 2007 3:18 PM
Immigration Ofcr, supvrs are likely to think complaints are bogus b/c it usually shows THEIR shortcomings as supvrs.
My own experience, and those of others who I have represented, is that supvrs do not know or know enough of what their workers are supposed to be doing. I always tell people who come to me that they should always keep 2 things handy at all times: their PD, and their negotiated labor contract.
That way, if something happens or doesn't happen that they're uncomfortable, they can look it up right away and call their steward or union about it. This is crucial since appeals have deadlines (21 days for grievances, 45 days for complaints, 6 mos for ULPs, etc). I've seen instances where all it takes is a phone call to the LRO, or even a little "sit-down" w/the supvr in ?.
Ignorance is NOT bliss, and problems that "go away" by themselves, always come back by themselves too. Best to be informed and act accordingly.
Evaluating EEO as if really mattered
RETIRED EEO MANAGER DOD Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:03 AM
What a bunch of double talk and ego centric "Mr. Pure" garbage. I understand why he moved around so much and from one agency to another. What gobblegook. His elements are outdated ,do not conform to federal guidance after the 1995 Supreme Court Adarran decision , The Clinton papers on Affirmative Action, the Push for "Diversity" , which is not statutory but what congress likes to hit agencies up for non-compliance.nor could they implemented in every feder agency. Let me ask this If the Committed EEO people in Federal government are not keepng the faith why are they getting salaries over $150,000. with an average of $85000. why the ones that do the hiring of people and still charged with a primary mission get far below the EEO specialist in the majority of Federal agencies do not have to produce anything, just process complaints, according to a cook book procedure, and put on special events of food and entertainment .
Outstanding Performance Standard
Human Resource Specialist OPM Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:59 AM
I was surprised that outstanding (O) and fully successful (FS) performance were separated by only 3 tasks from the provided list (minimum of 3 for FS and 6 for O). I believe the spread should be greater. I also feel the standard for FS is too low for this very important element. I liked the tasks that described topical interaction with others in the workforce.
Re: Outstanding Performance Standard
Author Government Personnel Services Wed Nov 28, 2007 12:29 PM
Thanks for the comment. As you can see from the format I've designed (I'm referring to it as the "menu approach" to performance standards) you can tweak things in either direction. Regarding how high someone must stretch to achieve "Outstanding", I temper my visions of extraordinary effort with the possibility of turning off a high achieving employee. In the end, I'm looking for standards that establish an exchange of sorts: "If you give me this useful stuff that enhances mission, I'll give you this higher rating." If you worked for grades in school, you should understand the currency.
Abolish EEO - The system does not work
Worker Bee DON Wed Nov 28, 2007 3:36 PM
The way the current EEO system is setup It does not work.
We need a system that can resolve problems (NOT TAKE SIDES).
So far all of the EEO cases go to court (which means the cases are not resolved at the lowest level by EEO). These actions cost the tax payers million of dollars.
So far all of the EEO cases protect supervisors & management. EEO does not resolve the problems.
I had to tesify in an EEO case about six years ago.
It was a joke because the EEO rep sat on the side of management & it was management that was at fault (the supervisor put his hands on an employee).
The employee won the case, & management lost (& EEO lost).
EEO was attempting to cover up.
EEO should have removed the supervisor as a supervisor and had the supervisor re-trained
and not let the supervisor ever be a supervisor in that kind of position again.
All the cases I have see
EEO assumes that management & supervisors are always right and the employee is always wrong.
Re: Abolish EEO - The system does not work
DOLORES WELLS VA Tue May 27, 2008 10:17 AM
dear worker bee,
i would like to read about the case you testified in. i was grabbed and slung by my supervisor and i need help as the agency is trying to get the judge to dismiss my case without a hearing.please email any info to wellsdolores@yahoo.com.thanks.
Discrimination
Engineer HUD Tue Dec 4, 2007 11:07 AM
The purpose of EEO at HUD, and at other agencies, is to hire and promote unqualified blacks and Hispanics; especially females. Even though the groups mentioned are grossly overrepresented compared with the general population, HUD still gives preference to these groups. White males don't count, even though they are grossly underrepresented.
Former President Clinton stated that the federal government would be the model employer of persons with disabilities. EEO specialists have paid no heed to this noble goal. The percentage of disabled employees has dropped over the past several years. This group is also grossly underrepresented.
Mr. Kunreuther,
I applaud you in writing this article. I too have struggled with the manner in which the federal government has casually tossed EEO in as an element within rating criteria. It is typically accomplished w/little thought/knowledge of the EEO system. Few have given thought to how the EEO element could actually make a positive difference in attitudes/behaviors. There is considerable ignorance "out there" about EEO and Affirmative Employment and the more our federal managers learn about what it truly means (or doesn't), the quicker we will get to a respectful and inclusive federal workforce...okay, WAKE UP, PollyAnna! Some will never learn; however, this is certainly a step in the right direction. Thank you for taking on the subject and giving agencies some excellent guidance. A copy of your article should be cut out by every EEO Specialist/Manager/Director and forwarded to their Agency Head (oh yes, and to all supervisors/managers). Well written ~
Carol A. Dawson
RE: The system does not work
Engineer Interior Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:19 AM
The EEO representatives in my office have both openly declared that they are part of management and their job is to discourage complaints. They will also report one's complaint and the name of the complainant directly to the supervisor involved immediately. Its no wonder most people here feel there is no place to go for redress.
Re: RE: The system does not work
EEO Trainer/Consultant EEO GUIDANCE, Inc. Mon May 26, 2008 4:27 PM
This would then be a violation of their job requirements. Take a look at MD-715 and the requirements for federal EEO officials. They are required to conduct an impartial investigation of all EEO complaints. See MD-715, Section II.E.
If, on the other hand, the EEO officials are stating their jobs are to "resolve" EEO complaints, that is a different story.
For more detailed information, you can contact the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)'s Lori Grant on (202) 663-4616 (voice) or (202) 663-4593 (TTY).
It's about time!
Biological Research Technician ARS Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:45 PM
Thank You Robbie, for a quantifiable rating scale! What a fantastic method you've developed for evaluating, be it EEO or any other critical element. Ratings are so often subjective and full of wishy-washy terms that are easily misunderstood or abused by either the rater or the ratee. I appreciate your perspective - always, and your straight forward approach in simple, clear and difinitive language.
Sample EEO Performance Standard
Management Analyst IRS Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:48 AM
I appreciate the logic and the hypocrisy amplified in the article. But a general observation I’d like to share. This article, like most I have read on the subject, implies or strongly suggests that the perpetrators of all that is evil are white males. Part of the good ol boy network. Sexist remarks, Homophobic comments, racial slurs, are almost always positioned in such a way that women, minorities, gays, are the victims of discriminatory behaviors or actions by white males. That must be the reason why a double standard seems to exist and it’s not just OK, but justifiable payback for the real and imagined sins of my forbearers. I can’t even start to count the number of times I have encountered slurs and insults for being a white male from members of the repressed and protected groups. Male bashing, Straight bashing, White bashing, all somehow OK. Id like to see some rules that apply to all. Discrimination is wrong, no mtter who practices it.
Evaluating EEO; as if it really mattered
USMC
Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:21 AM
Gee, I guess Julie Meyers would take a nose dive here, so this won't work. We wouldn't want to hold anyone responsible. Having said that, these are good, but I still don't think anyone will ever really be graded on this. Managers will still get level 5 (the write up should be really funny under NSPS) and a nice pay raise/bonus. Since the managers make up the pay pool, you really don't think that their ratings would reflect anything remotely resembling reality. That would be a first.
Who is kidding who?
Interior
Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:46 AM
Given that my upper management is still trying to avoid veterans preference and hire a favorite, I don't think that EEO matters much to them either. Upper management has to lead by example, and most do not.
Discrimination
HUD
Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:58 AM
You state: "Standards that refer to recruiting women and minorities have been applied to supervisors who had no authority to recruit or select. Other standards have pretended to evaluate on the basis of EEO complaints filed – a matter that is either uncontrollable or dealt with by discipline." There are sevearl problems with this statement: 1) Putting in place goals for recruiting women and minorities is discriminatory; 2)Supervisors do have authority to recruit and to promote. They promote by giving minorities and women higher performance ratings than they deserve. 3) Supervisors are rarely disciplined for violating EEO rules. They lose cases in EEOC hearings for their discriminary acts and manaement does not discipline them.
The Center for Individual Rights has filed a class action lawsuit in federal court in the District of Columbia, challenging employment goals and preferences for women and racial minorities at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
Re: Discrimination
retired
Tue Nov 27, 2007 1:43 PM
Re: Discrimination
HUD
Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:38 AM
(1)The suit, Worth v. Jackson, charges HUD and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) — which encouraged, evaluated, and approved HUD's "affirmative employment plan" (AEP) — with intentional race and sex discrimination in violation of the equal protection guarantee of the United States Constitution. The suit asks for a permanent injunction against HUD's use of the plan and the preferential treatment of women and minorities required therein.
(2) Managers do get involved in the hiring process. In my case the Director of my office did not want me to receive a promotion so she hired her best friend's daughter-in law instead, in retaliation for my prior EEO activity. She was hired from outside the agency.
(3) In my office the Director is a Puerto Rican female who hates white people, so no I have never seen a white male receive a higher rating than they deserved.
For more information on Worth v. Jackson visit the website cir-usa.org.
EEO ratings
Fed
Tue Nov 27, 2007 10:04 AM
This article is not bad. One of the reasons for the requirement to rate is that the record of various agencies even with compliance is poor. There are many examples in which managers, when confronted with the right thing to do or even ordered to do the right thing, purposely fail to do; "rather than offend the boys, it's better to pay off the complainant". This is really bad when the management official is a political appointee, SES or seniior careerist.
The quality of EEO programs is directly related to senior management's committment. If all managers want is a program that processes complaints and therefore stays in reactive mode, they hire EEO staff to reflect that view. That view is actually the primary cause of programmatic problems; the EEO staff is then forced into the defensive because senior management gives lip service to EEO quality.
The EEOC MD 715 is a great step in the right direction.
EEO Performance Standard
NARA
Tue Nov 27, 2007 10:37 AM
I liked the standard. It is clear and specific. A person receiving this standard would know exactly what to do to get the desired rating. I also think the standard could be used at many levels, from first-line supervisor to manager.
Good work!
eeo
vha
Tue Nov 27, 2007 10:46 AM
I must say first that for the most part EEO is a sham and I feel it is totally against the emloyee on every level.The 'investigators" have little or no ability in investigating thoroughly any complaint.It turns out that every one repeats themselves over the phone to an invesitigator which always amuses me as to how thorough can such nonsense be.I've been told that when an EEO is filed it costs the agency(station or CO).I've never beeen able to find that out and who is held responsible for the loss of that money?Does anyone care?Holding anyone responsible(spervisers,managers(mid/upper)is total foolery and will never happen.But a nice concept.
Re: eeo
DoD
Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:07 AM
The complaint procedure law, and anyone who feels victimized by discrimination is entitled to pursue that procedure and is protected by law to do so.
That's why it's so important that all feds know what their rights as feds are--and their labor unions SHOULD be able to tell them that, and more.
EEO
Farm Service Agency
Tue Nov 27, 2007 12:27 PM
Supervisor should be given training on evaluating different personality traits of his employees. There should be emphasis on equality treatment of employees. If there is a perceived trait that baffles/annoys supervisor, action should be driven toward understanding the person who is the employee and not toward comparisons. Look at the whole person. This is especially relevant when favorites are targeted as "ideal" employees. In this case, it would be unfair to evaluate through comparison.
Protected groups include people with disabilities
FDA
Tue Nov 27, 2007 12:38 PM
Please keep in mind that your article perpetuates the 'out of sight, out of mind mentality' I often see by not including individuals with disabilities as one of the protected groups under EEO that are often excluded and thus ignored/forgotten in discussions such as above.
Re: Protected groups include people with disabilit
Government Personnel Services
Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:50 PM
Frost on the iceberg
DOD
Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:31 PM
Talking about performance standards in relationship to NSPS is like talking about Frost on an Iceberg. I'm disappointed that you'd devote an entire article to discussing NSPS performance standards when the real problem is that civilians are being forced into NSPS, they are losing money, they are losing seniority, the DOD is going behind closed doors to evaluate convoluted performance standards. Talk about the issue: Talk about how we stop NSPS before its too late. Talk about how we get permission to go on strike. Research what Class Action Law Suit we can join to stop NSPS. Talk about unfair hiring practices by DoD to hire their retiring cronie friends leaving work on Friday and coming to work on Monday. Write something worth while! Use your position to bring to light exactly how bad NSPS is for the Federal Servant who is quickly becoming a Federal slave.
Re: Frost on the iceberg
Government Personnel Services
Tue Nov 27, 2007 7:08 PM
Draft EEO Standard
HHS
Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:40 PM
I found the standard interesting and a very good attempt to objectively describe and quantify desired outcomes, while recognizing what is actually within the scope of someone's real responsibilities (what they have control over). I have little doubt this standard would result in both improved awareness of EEO and outcomes. It moves things forward. On a side note, I also found the description of how many measures under the "FS" level would need to be met to attain an "E" or an "O" rating, e.g., in this case, meeting 50% of the measures described at the FS level would result in an "O", etc., very interesting. I can't tell you how many managers or supervisors assume that an employee must meet ALL the measures described at the FS level to be rated "FS", even where there's no indication of this in either the CBA or the standard itself. Good job!
Re: Draft EEO Standard
Government Personnel Services
Tue Nov 27, 2007 7:01 PM
Looks good
Army
Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:53 PM
Looks good. The one thing wrong with performance appraissals is that they are not taken seriously until a "bad apple" comes along. Until then evals are given out, checks written and life goes on. This is so sad given the weight appraissals have in RIFs and NSPS. The technical responsibilities of supervisors needs to be removed so that they can concentrate on the supervisory responsibilities. Maybe then performance management can start to change for the good.
Evaluating EEO As If It Really Mattered
U.S. Department of Education
Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:57 PM
I never knew that supervisors were evaluated in this area until my former and "late" bigoted homosexual FDA supervisor joked about it in front of me.
EEO Evaluation is not taken seriously
DON
Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:21 PM
In the military if a supervisor really wants to give a poor evaluation to a subordinate the senior gives poor grades (grade 3 or lower) in all areas except for EEO where the reporting senior gives the highest possible grade (grade 5). It is a slam against the subordinate and a slam against EEO but no one seems to care.
EEO?
US Immigration Service
Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:42 PM
If you file an EEO complaint, won't management just retailiate against you? I've heard some supervisors say that they think EEO complaints are bogus. Let's get real.
Re: EEO?
DoD
Wed Nov 28, 2007 3:18 PM
My own experience, and those of others who I have represented, is that supvrs do not know or know enough of what their workers are supposed to be doing. I always tell people who come to me that they should always keep 2 things handy at all times: their PD, and their negotiated labor contract.
That way, if something happens or doesn't happen that they're uncomfortable, they can look it up right away and call their steward or union about it. This is crucial since appeals have deadlines (21 days for grievances, 45 days for complaints, 6 mos for ULPs, etc). I've seen instances where all it takes is a phone call to the LRO, or even a little "sit-down" w/the supvr in ?.
Ignorance is NOT bliss, and problems that "go away" by themselves, always come back by themselves too. Best to be informed and act accordingly.
Evaluating EEO as if really mattered
DOD
Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:03 AM
What a bunch of double talk and ego centric "Mr. Pure" garbage. I understand why he moved around so much and from one agency to another. What gobblegook. His elements are outdated ,do not conform to federal guidance after the 1995 Supreme Court Adarran decision , The Clinton papers on Affirmative Action, the Push for "Diversity" , which is not statutory but what congress likes to hit agencies up for non-compliance.nor could they implemented in every feder agency. Let me ask this If the Committed EEO people in Federal government are not keepng the faith why are they getting salaries over $150,000. with an average of $85000. why the ones that do the hiring of people and still charged with a primary mission get far below the EEO specialist in the majority of Federal agencies do not have to produce anything, just process complaints, according to a cook book procedure, and put on special events of food and entertainment .
Outstanding Performance Standard
OPM
Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:59 AM
I was surprised that outstanding (O) and fully successful (FS) performance were separated by only 3 tasks from the provided list (minimum of 3 for FS and 6 for O). I believe the spread should be greater. I also feel the standard for FS is too low for this very important element. I liked the tasks that described topical interaction with others in the workforce.
Re: Outstanding Performance Standard
Government Personnel Services
Wed Nov 28, 2007 12:29 PM
Abolish EEO - The system does not work
DON
Wed Nov 28, 2007 3:36 PM
The way the current EEO system is setup It does not work.
We need a system that can resolve problems (NOT TAKE SIDES).
So far all of the EEO cases go to court (which means the cases are not resolved at the lowest level by EEO). These actions cost the tax payers million of dollars.
So far all of the EEO cases protect supervisors & management. EEO does not resolve the problems.
I had to tesify in an EEO case about six years ago.
It was a joke because the EEO rep sat on the side of management & it was management that was at fault (the supervisor put his hands on an employee).
The employee won the case, & management lost (& EEO lost).
EEO was attempting to cover up.
EEO should have removed the supervisor as a supervisor and had the supervisor re-trained
and not let the supervisor ever be a supervisor in that kind of position again.
All the cases I have see
EEO assumes that management & supervisors are always right and the employee is always wrong.
Re: Abolish EEO - The system does not work
VA
Tue May 27, 2008 10:17 AM
i would like to read about the case you testified in. i was grabbed and slung by my supervisor and i need help as the agency is trying to get the judge to dismiss my case without a hearing.please email any info to wellsdolores@yahoo.com.thanks.
Discrimination
HUD
Tue Dec 4, 2007 11:07 AM
The purpose of EEO at HUD, and at other agencies, is to hire and promote unqualified blacks and Hispanics; especially females. Even though the groups mentioned are grossly overrepresented compared with the general population, HUD still gives preference to these groups. White males don't count, even though they are grossly underrepresented.
Former President Clinton stated that the federal government would be the model employer of persons with disabilities. EEO specialists have paid no heed to this noble goal. The percentage of disabled employees has dropped over the past several years. This group is also grossly underrepresented.
EEO: Good Tackle!
EEO GUIDANCE, Inc.
Wed Apr 23, 2008 5:02 PM
Mr. Kunreuther,
I applaud you in writing this article. I too have struggled with the manner in which the federal government has casually tossed EEO in as an element within rating criteria. It is typically accomplished w/little thought/knowledge of the EEO system. Few have given thought to how the EEO element could actually make a positive difference in attitudes/behaviors. There is considerable ignorance "out there" about EEO and Affirmative Employment and the more our federal managers learn about what it truly means (or doesn't), the quicker we will get to a respectful and inclusive federal workforce...okay, WAKE UP, PollyAnna! Some will never learn; however, this is certainly a step in the right direction. Thank you for taking on the subject and giving agencies some excellent guidance. A copy of your article should be cut out by every EEO Specialist/Manager/Director and forwarded to their Agency Head (oh yes, and to all supervisors/managers). Well written ~
Carol A. Dawson
RE: The system does not work
Interior
Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:19 AM
The EEO representatives in my office have both openly declared that they are part of management and their job is to discourage complaints. They will also report one's complaint and the name of the complainant directly to the supervisor involved immediately. Its no wonder most people here feel there is no place to go for redress.
Re: RE: The system does not work
EEO GUIDANCE, Inc.
Mon May 26, 2008 4:27 PM
If, on the other hand, the EEO officials are stating their jobs are to "resolve" EEO complaints, that is a different story.
For more detailed information, you can contact the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)'s Lori Grant on (202) 663-4616 (voice) or (202) 663-4593 (TTY).
It's about time!
ARS
Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:45 PM
Thank You Robbie, for a quantifiable rating scale! What a fantastic method you've developed for evaluating, be it EEO or any other critical element. Ratings are so often subjective and full of wishy-washy terms that are easily misunderstood or abused by either the rater or the ratee. I appreciate your perspective - always, and your straight forward approach in simple, clear and difinitive language.
Sample EEO Performance Standard
IRS
Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:48 AM
I appreciate the logic and the hypocrisy amplified in the article. But a general observation I’d like to share. This article, like most I have read on the subject, implies or strongly suggests that the perpetrators of all that is evil are white males. Part of the good ol boy network. Sexist remarks, Homophobic comments, racial slurs, are almost always positioned in such a way that women, minorities, gays, are the victims of discriminatory behaviors or actions by white males. That must be the reason why a double standard seems to exist and it’s not just OK, but justifiable payback for the real and imagined sins of my forbearers. I can’t even start to count the number of times I have encountered slurs and insults for being a white male from members of the repressed and protected groups. Male bashing, Straight bashing, White bashing, all somehow OK. Id like to see some rules that apply to all. Discrimination is wrong, no mtter who practices it.