Obama states "Our country is in a sense continually at war against the ramparts of liberty, equality and justice on which our Republic is founded. Surging constantly are the evil forces of greed, or materialism, of selfishness, headed by those who cynically deny that there is any prosperity that cannot be expressed in dollars and cents, or happiness except in bank balances."
This is funny coming from a politician. The statement "Surging constantly are the evil forces of greed, or materialism, of selfishness..." is an accurate description of what most, if not all members of Congress and former members over the last 40 years, have succumbed to.
Re: Ironic Words
HR Specialist DOJ Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:12 AM
We are "... continually at war AGAINST the ramparts of liberty, equality and justice ..."? Oh come now; I thought our new President was immune from such flubs. Ah well, even a new Messiah apparently has his rhetorical slips after all, not that his adoring media claque would ever acknowledge it.
Re: Ironic Words
Planner DOD Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:07 AM
HR Specialist,
Maybe you should look up the word "ramparts" before resorting to partisan rhetoric.
The Future of Pay-for-Performance in the Federal G
Budget Chief DoD Wed Jan 28, 2009 8:59 AM
Kunreuther understands the civil servant's motivation, the futility of chasing "objective" appraisal systems, and the counterproductive effects of current attempts to motivate through Pay for Performance. Let's hope the new administration is listening.
Above article
HR Specialist OPM Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:05 AM
Many years ago in the mid-'80s, the late, legendary Dr. Edwards Deming was asked to address OPM senior staff charged with establishing performance management program policy and regulatory guidance to agencies, including the performance appraisal process. In a videotaped session that never was released outside of OPM, he essentially derided the effort as "an impossible job," in the sense of achieving the goal of an objective, metrics-driven process that would actually result in a system of stratifying employees in terms of objective and credible assessments of performance accomplishments by individual employees that would contribute to efficient management of the Federal workforce. He said any such systems invariably act to cause dissension and disrupt teamwork. Congress in requiring OPM to establish such a system had done little more, in his view, than ensuring ongoing frustration in the workplace. Having witnessed the strurm and drang prior to and since then, I can only agree.
Re: Above article
Diversity Manager DOL Wed Jan 28, 2009 6:57 PM
Lets see Deming said what gets measured gets done, so you are contending that when it comes to government nothing gets done?? I have to agree with your assessment as a honest CS
Pay For Performance
ASI FAA Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:12 AM
I am currently under the GS pay structure but was part of a Pay for Performance Syatem for 5 years. I can tell you from my personal experience that PFP is the easiest way to turn a good employee into a bad one.
I watched my counterparts submit their evaluations each year. Since there is not enough money to give all the good performers a raise, only a few received raises. The grubling afterwards and loss in productivity became quite evident. If they did not get a raise, they were mad and would wonder out loud why they should work so hard. This was especially evident when 2 people were basically the same, yet only one received compensation.
I hope they government goes the the GS type system for all employees. I was also in the military for 12 years and these sort of pay systems are the best in my opinion.
We need to drop all pay for performance type systems as soon as possible.
Re: Pay For Performance
Tech Ops FAA Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:07 AM
The current system has done nothing except spreat hate and discontent. It needs to be terminated.
I can say that the SCI and cash award system this year amounted to our leadership team sitting in a room and doling out the money to those who did not receive it last year, regardless of accomplishments.
I am sure there would not be any arguments if there was a way for those wanting to EARN more to get it, but there simply is not, and the disparity in pay grows every year. And since the FAA has moved out from under OPM, there is no way to challenge any of this. And when you try, you are simply told that you chose this job.
Please terminate PFP in the FAA forever. We do not have the "leadership" (not management) to administer it effectively.
Re: Pay For Performance
Diversity Manager DOL Wed Jan 28, 2009 7:00 PM
we have a highly paid high school educated work force at FAA. Yet they don't want to be held accountable, their work ethic matches their education
Re: Pay For Performance
Tech Ops FAA Thu Jan 29, 2009 9:40 AM
Diversity Manager,
I think if you spent some time among the Tech Ops ranks you might see things differently. There are those among ALL of our ranks that are merely getting by until retirement. (including DOL)
Do not forget that these "high school educated" Technicians have spent the equivalent of a bachelors degree in training on highly complex systems to make sure you and your family get from point A to point B safely. The ONLY reason some do not have a college diploma is because they do not have credits in english composition, P.E. or similar courses. Personally, I could care less if the Technician knows the anatomical make up of a badger, but I am proud to be associated with those who know the mathematical equation required to calcualte line lengths, powers, etc required to propagate glidepaths which allow aircraft to land SAFELY in zero visibility. That, Sir is AWESOME!
So, I beg of you: Before you cast a widespread net over Technical Operations, walk a mile in their shoes.
Money and Resourses
Labor Employee Relations Manager VA Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:15 AM
Within DoD, look at all the money and recourses that have been spent on a system that was originally conceived to put the thumbs on the unions!
Yep, that's right, it would appear that the main focus of NSPS was to put down the unions. It is time to throw out NSPS return back to the good ol GS system and get on with conducting this nation's business.
After all it is "Joe the Plumber" that pays our wages!
Isn't Obama
Quality Assurance Specialist DCMA Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:16 AM
the one that said the Constitution was flawed and needed changing? After 200+ years maybe we need to return to the constitiution and the founding fathers dreams for this great experiment and quit letting politicians(empty suits) and bird brains like the author fail to understand that liberty cannot survive in a nanny state. To remove from those that which is rightfully theirs to give to someone else is stealing no matter how you dress this pig. Greed, selfishness, materialism, sounds like the great one is talking about taking care of his family.....oooooooops.
Pay for Performance (P4P)
HR Specialist DOL Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:17 AM
Personally, I don't think that most Federal employees are opposed to P4P. They just want their union representatives to have input into its implementation and that there be transparency for the whole process. It was the jamming down, or up, the various bodily orifices, as was done by the last administration, that brought most of the opposition to P4P. That, and all the secrecy involved in the development of standards and the determination of ratings, which upset Federal civil servants.
Re: Pay for Performance (P4P)
Labor Employee Relations Manager VA Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:39 AM
I would disagree. In DoD as much as 85% of the employees and supervisors that were forced into a p4p, aka NSPS were and are still against the program.
Many in the HR community left DoD when it became clear that "quotas" were set by HQ on raises and ratings.
Re: Pay for Performance (P4P)
Nameless, Faceless Nobody DOD Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:36 AM
I am against it. It is fundamentally flawed with the negative "unintended consequences" far overwhelming any good it might do. I am not surprised at what Dr. Deming apparently said.
Many years ago I was asked to make a process that was new employee proof. (Actually, the chief said, "sailor proof",) but I told him it wasn't possible. Once we had to make judgement calls we had to rely on the judgement of the person making the call. We also had to allow for a learning curve. I could draw decision trees that would take care of 80% or more but the rest was why we needed people instead of just computers.
NSPS wants to try and judge by the numbers without any regard to complexity, difficulty, or any other non-quantifiable attribute.
We had a metric based on how many new packets of work were completed by a short time frame. Thing is, people would take the easier packets and leave the difficult ones for others. More packets done, better score. Figure the upset!
Re: Pay for Performance (P4P)
HR Specialist Dept of Labor Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:45 AM
The point I was trying to make, and maybe I phrased it poorly, is that many Feds don't hate P4P as a principle. They hate how P4P was forced upon them and how the various programs worked. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but I think that through negotiations and the input of all interested parties, an equitable P4P system could be developed.
Don't get me wrong I think that most, if not all, the plans foisted upon Feds by the last administration were horrible. I worked for the SEC when "Political" management created a P4P program that recently resulted in a huge backpay settlement with the NTEU. Since I was outside the bargaining unit and have since left, I am out in the cold on that settlement. Personally, I lost about $1500 per year, because of the actions of my Weasel of a 2nd Level Supervisor. He was so bad, I even took a cut in pay to get out of there. Since then, his karma caught up to him, but that is another story.
Re: Pay for Performance (P4P)
Also Tech Ops FAA Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:35 PM
It should be obvious from the number of negative comments on these articles concerning PFP or NSPS that the majority of employees are disenchanted with these systems. As one who has been part of FAA core comp (and done well) I believe we as an agency would have been better off under the GS system. Not only would the FAA not have such a bloated operations budget but we would not have the terrible LR problem we have now. Lets get back to GS and force management to remove the poor performers as they have always had the ability to do.
NSPS
Government Civilian DOD Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:29 AM
After two years I see nothing positive from my experience with NSPS. I recognize other orginizations may be doing things differently or correctly and care about there people but my impression in my orginization is of a quota system and taking care of senior management. As we were told everybody is a 3 with 4's and 5's for a few people. If your supervisor is worthless or doesn't care as happened to me, he or she does not fight for you during the pay pool board and you get a three, just like "Joey bag of donuts" next to you got no mater how well you did your job. Your objectives, self appraisal and supervisors apprasial mean nothing, its a numbers game plain and simple.
Performance Appraisals
Program Technician FSA Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:34 AM
I believe if you are a good employee, you will do the best work possible whether you get recognition or not. I have been working for USDA for 25 years and from what I have seen is that if one employee gets an award and the rest of the employees in that office do not get one, the morale for all goes down. The employee that gets the award seems to feel like they are better than the other employees and the rest of the employees feel like they should have received the award also. Therefore, everyone has problems. Usually we all work together to get the work done, but when one employee gets an award, the rest of us feel like what is the use in helping her with her work-she is the one that gets the recognition and we have all helped. I just feel like if you change to pay-by-performance plans, it would lower the morale and overall performance that employees have been doing by working together.
P4P
Log Daddy DON Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:36 AM
The fact that the DON SES have exempted themselves from NSPS and excluded union members from participation (too hard) tells you all you need to know. If senior supervisors had executed their performance appraisal duties under the former system to anything close to an acceptable level, there would have been no reason to implement NSPS. Why would anyone believe that they will make the significant effort required to make NSPS work?
Re: P4P
Retired HR SES USAF Tue Apr 14, 2009 10:37 AM
RE the comment that DON SES members exempted themselves from NSPS, all SES members including those in DON have been under a pay for performance system that predates NSPS implementation.
FUTURE OF PFP
HUMAN RESOURCES SPECIALIST USAF Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:44 AM
Mr. Gunreuther should hold a Cabinet position.
PFP
Supv HR Specialist DoD Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:44 AM
Being the the HR field we have seen a large impact PFP has caused employees to jump ship to agencies not under PFP. Employees want to feel they are being treated equally for the work they do. PFP seems to pick only a select few for outstanding work and leave the rest behind, saying their work isn't as important as the select few. This has caused a downward spiral in morale.
Re: PFP
Labor Employee Relations Manager VA Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:58 PM
Amen! I left Army because of NSPS. When you are told that the ONLY way to get a rating above a 3 (fully sucessful) was
1. A rating of "4" required work on a project from CHRA
2. A rating of "5" required work on an Army HQ project.
We HR folks in the field scratched our heads and asked "Huh?" It was then most of us start jumping ship.
Silent Majority
DOD Employee DOD Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:01 AM
I’ve been in NSPS for three years and AcqDemo before that. Pay for performance systems can and do work.
The vast majority of folks fair noticeably better under NSPS with average pay increases in the 5-7% range vs. 2-4% for GS. In addition most positions are in pay bands that provide increased growth opportunity without having to change positions.
I hear a lot of whining from people that want to hang onto the legacy systems where everyone received the highest rating and the same pay increase/bonus every year. That is a system that promotes mediocrity.
I anticipate that if the folks complaining about NSPS would spend less time whining and invest more energy into exceeding their jobs and documenting their accomplishments they too would benefit from the system.
Re: Silent Majority
Labor Employee Relations Manager VA Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:02 PM
I would disagree! I was in instructor for NSPS. I trained the pay pool panel. One of the issues I had to teach was the distruction of records by the pay pool.
If I as your supervisor rated you as a "4" and then it was over turned by the Pay Pool and Pay Pool manager, then the ONLY thing the employee sees is the rating of a "3." All records pertaining to the rating of a "4" were to be distroyed so that the unions or others could not obtain those records under a FOIA request.
Re: Silent Majority
A for the moment Golden HR Specialist AF Wed Jan 28, 2009 5:27 PM
Hey, I don't know why we're complaining. I actually made out like a bandit $$$
~~~BUT~~~
It's not good for the organization, agency or DoD to pay me at the $$ I make while doing work 2 grades below; just because I happened to be a golden child one year? Don't get me wrong, I won't give the $ back, but at least GS grades kept salaries in check with level of work...
Re: Silent Majority
Union Rep DOD Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:04 PM
DOD employee in an Acq Dem project: Your AcqDem project was funded differently than NSPS. I am probably the only union rep who has actually witnessed a pay pool panel deliberations process. It was extremely troubling to watch the whole process and know the flaws were based on human nature, not on any deliberate biases. You tend to know people who are just like you, you're likely to have friends and acquaintances with similar interests, ergo an inherent bias against folks not like you. Let's look around the table at our senior leadership in DOD, pale, male, and stale, to borrow a phrase from a US Today article.
Re: Silent Majority
Chemist DOD Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:14 PM
The problem is not with the annual raises so much, but when one is attempting to gain a promotion. When going from what was a GS-7 to 9 to 11 to 12 is where the problem lies. You can only get a 3% raise. A 5% raise has to go through our commander! Under NSPS a 3% raise for me to go from a fromer "GS-11 to a GS-12" promotion is about $1,755 per year! Under the old system it would be about $7,000 annually. WOULD ANYONE LIKE THAT???? THIS IS A MAJOR DOWNFALL WITH NSPS. YOU CAN'T GET A DECENT RAISE WHEN BEING PROMOTED!!!! ANYONE ELSE FEEL THIS WAY!
NSPS
Recruiter DOD Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:13 AM
The NSPS pay bands/scales and the opportunity for merit pay increases has dramatically improved our recruitment ability within the DOD medical community. In many cases fill rates for hard-to-fill occupations have improved by over 100% since implementing NSPS. In most cases, we weren’t remotely competitive under the GS system. Going back to the ridged GS system would be a disaster for us.
Re: NSPS
Labor Employee Relations Manager VA Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:07 PM
Maybe so in the medical community as you compete with us in the VA. You really need to get Title 38 appointing authority as we have.
One problem with recruiting. Say I have a vacancy, if I hire internal, I can only give the new employee a 5% raise over his last position, actually they call it a "reassignment, not a promotion.
If I bring someone off the street, with the proper approval I can give that employee up to 25% within the payband.
Not quite fair is it.
Re: NSPS
HR DOD Tue Mar 3, 2009 11:43 AM
What is your retention rate for these same (NSPS) employees a year, 2 years after completion of their probationary period compared to GS.
PFP
HR Specialist DoD Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:13 AM
Those who commented they didn't think PFP was an issue are in agencies that do not have PFP. I can tell you PFP is the Golden Parachute for the Good Ol Boy system. It's evident by virtue of looking at the data that PFP excessively rewarded a few and beat down quality employees. Manipulating the money to increase salaries for a few resulted in many getting just bonus $$'s which hurt future retirement annuities (and they are not near the top of their payband nor were they in a high GS-step range had they stayed in GS). Different organizations on base had share values differ by up to 1.5% so those who received the same ratings and shares did not receive equal $$'s on their raises or bonus $$'s. Talk about some disgruntled employees...
Re: PFP
Labor Employee Relations Manager VA Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:13 PM
I had forgotten that. My first rating raise 60% was mandated to be paid as a "bonus" (one time gift). IRS took most of that. AND as you stated, none of this went toward retirement.
The other 40% was given to me as a salary raise (gift that keeps giving). I receive LESS than my GS counter parts received in their annual raise.
So if you start looking at the big picture, especially if you are within 10 years of retirement, that is a significant lose in retirement funds under NSPS, while your GS counterparts are making 30-40% higher wages that DO count toward retirement.
P4P
HR Specialist DON Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:23 AM
I am a new federal employee in terms of years in service (3). I have only experienced NSPS, and have had great success from it. NSPS, when used in its true form allows for the people who care about working with a sense of purpose excel, and move up. I see many inflated salaries of past GS federal employees just hanging on for their retirement. What do they care, they are going to move and get increases as long as they can put their but in a seat and stay alive. I hate the rules and restrictions of the old system. That is not my point though; there are great employees in both systems. Where the system(s) is flawed, and will always stay flawed is the human element. When ever you have supervisors, who do not work hard to communicate with their employees, and or try to motivate them there will always be something wrong regardless of what system we are in.
Re: P4P
Labor Employee Relations Manager VA Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:15 PM
Many others in the HR field would tend to disagree.
But if you were to experience the GS system, I think you would have a different opinion.
Re: P4P
Union Rep DOD Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:08 PM
HR DON:
You made out well due to a payout process called rate range penetration, that is a calculation for employees just like you to ensure you get the same raise you would have gotten under the GS system. You didn't make out any better than you would have, except when it came to the bonus. I hope you understand you will not carry the same opinion as you gain years in DOD under NSPS. Sorry, but that's how it is.
NSPS-Pay for Performance
HR Specialist Navy Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:24 AM
NSPS is the worst system the government could have implemented. It has added to the already prevalent "good old boy" network. Too many of the assessments are subjective based on personality and not quality of work. The money funded to agencies isn't always distributed fairly. The quickest way to demoralize a quality performer is to put them under NSPS-Not only does most of the pay lag the GS system (not good in these recession times) but equal performers do not get equal pay. NSPS is not liked by employees or supervisors. For both, it has decreased their productivity because both are busy documenting actions/tasks/results so they can write assessments that may result in a pay raise. My organization has seen a large increase in employees "jumping ship" back to GS pay system and willing to take change to lower grade to just get out!. In my 30 years of government experience, I have found most Federal employees to be conscientious, hard working and proud of their products.
P4P
HR Specialist VA Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:30 AM
As long as there are rating "quotas" that must be met and a requirement for bell curves to stastically show the majority of employees are an expected level 3, NSPS will never be objective. How can employees be rated fairly when performance metrics reflect a level 5 rating but the "quota" of level 5 ratiings has been met so the employee rating is lowered in an effort to get the desired bell curve.
Re: P4P
Labor Employee Relations Manager VA Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:20 PM
I agree. When teaching NSPS to the pay pool, one of the issues we looked at was: How much money is there in the pool? The more 5s you have the less the pay raise.
There was a quota on ratings of "4" and "5" and I instructed the pay pool that they would have to differentiate all the employees and then reduce their ratings to meet the quota and pay pool money objective.
Do What?
Supreme Mongo Bureau of Mongo Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:35 AM
Someone (Robbie) with some sense made the best suggestion I've seen yet. Do away with NSPS and other similar systems, and roll back to GS. If we're lucky, the sunset provision will take effect this October and the system will die on it's own. I just hope congress will run a stake through it's heart so that the evil doesn't come back in some other form.
Re: Do What?
Union Rep DOD Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:19 PM
Supreme Mongo Bureau of Mongo: I agree with you except the Sunset Provision of NSPS was only on the Labor Relations system, not the PFP system. The unions beat the Labor Relations system back in court anyway, but don't look for any sunset on PFP.
Re: Do What?
Pay For Performance Retired Fri Jan 30, 2009 9:53 AM
President Obama can do away with PFP with the stroke of a pen by Executive Order.
The Future of PFP in the Federal Government
Another HR Specialist DOD Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:36 AM
After serving 2 years under NSPS and trying to train managers/supv who truly don't have time for the process, something must change. On the surface, the goal of NSPS was to have the "right person, right place" and get rid of "non-performers" easier. Nothing about NSPS made those changes possible to the full extent that was hyped. It has served to give Peter's favorites 5% increases every 4 months "just-because". NSPS doesn't require reasons for pay increases. At least under GS, pay for GS-9 work had a reasonable limit. Now, GS equiv work is being rewarded with GS-13 pay because we "can". Any financial person can attest to that. This org shouldn't complain but isn't a 4% per share value a bit unrealistic? Keep that up and they'll be broke in minutes. The GS system kept salaries in check. To resolve the issue to "non-performers", supervisor must do their side. Waiting to discipline someone 4-6 months after an event never stands up at a higher level.
DoD has what they came for - Dump NSPS
Engineer DoD Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:38 AM
With recent 11th hour posting of final regs to the Fed Register DoD has flexibility in hiring, Time in grade restrictions removed, PPP, etc. DoD said they didn't want to negotiate with 1300 Unions, but there has been no willingness of DoD to even approach the Unions at the International level and start a dialog of negotiating NSPS. Take your flexibilities and dump NSPS. Besides everyone knows that p4p requires funding. Where is that additional funding going to come from when our econonmy is bad and not expected to get any better for many, many years.
Future of Pay Performance
HR Specialist DoD Civilian in Kansas Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:02 AM
I have been in this NSPS mess since the beginning, and the old saying of "things get better with time" does not fit in this PFP system. I don't think anyone can fix this. I know here at our civilian work place the moral is bad, people are jumping ship, and the team concept is no longer even apparent. Now lets add insult to injury, and go back a couple of years to when we got NSPS shoved at us. Since that time we have slowly been losing people to the point that we could eventually close. Under this current PFP system, we don't have the rights that the GS pay system would have allowed us so we can stay in the area we now work in. I don't see any one helping us, the only people who are going to be stuck with this abomination of a pay system that fails to work, are the employees NOT associated with the unions.
Re: Future of Pay Performance
Prof Small College Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:23 AM
Amazing; federal are against performance accountability criteria, being paid for the work actually accomplished, a system wherein those that actually work are rewarded, being supervised and denigrated those employees that follow supervisory instructions. Federal employees call those high need achievers that cooperate with supervisors and management "good ole boys" and other names. Federal employees then whine and complain because they are held in such disregard by the public. The private sector awaits if they are so put upon.
Re: Future of Pay Performance
IT Spec USDA Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:45 AM
The professor at the small college needs to re-read all these responses. The complaints are not that Federal employees must do their jobs. The complaints are that the ones who are doing their jobs are not be treated fairly, and the Government is not a business producing widgets or whatsits or thingamajigs that can be counted like a piecemeal factory. I'm very familiar with that type of work, since my family all worked in factories most of their lives. I myself had twenty years in the private sector before taking a job in the public sector. My supervisor is fair and straightforward. Our previous reviewing official was also fair and straightforward, as well as supportive. Now we have less experienced, less well-trained and less-than-supportive management. In the private sector or in the public sector, those are qualities sure to destroy morale and initiative.
Re: Future of Pay Performance
Prof Small College Wed Jan 28, 2009 3:36 PM
I appologise for my misguided bigotted opinions, I was fired from govt a couple of years ago for incompetence and cant get over it.
Re: Future of Pay Performance
Fed Peasant DOD Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:16 PM
Prof Small College:
Your confession will do you much good.
"I appologise for my misguided bigotted opinions, I was fired from govt a couple of years ago for incompetence and cant get over it".
And YES, government employees can be fired, as you admit.
P4P from a GS Perspective
IT Spec USDA Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:34 AM
I am in the GS system, and I can tell you how subjective the ratings are and how inadequate the reviewers can be. How much more so when there are no controls at all on their whims! Reviewing officials should be limited to requesting additional information from the raters, not substituting their judgment for a supervisor's. I would hate to see this partiality and inefficiency and unfairness condoned through the establishment of a system dedicated to Pay Pools and panels.
Pay-for-Performance
RN VA Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:11 PM
Evaluations in the VA system make no difference in pay. The best employee and the worst employee get the same pay. Good employees can not be given a higher evaluation because the bad employees will file a union complaint and demand the same higher rating and get it. Even those with multiple AWOL write-ups get a good evaluation because of the union. As far as actually getting a pay raise at the VA -- you have to be in the "click" to get that. PFP is just a snake waiting to bite anyone not a buddy of the boss. If you thinks PFP will be fair needs to have an unannounced drug test. This opinion was formed during my management years with the VA.
NSPS: Pay for Politics
Industrial Hygienist USAF Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:15 PM
I have a boss who talks to me twice a year, semi-annual and annual appraisal. He doesn't even know where my office is located or what my job is. I have gotten 3.2 for an NSPS rating. When I ask what can I do to get above a 3.2, he stares at me blindly without an answer. I have been told by those within the Pay Pool, that ratings are determined without ever looking at Objectives or Accomplishments. A name is mentioned and a "He's a four" is said. It is based on popularity, politics, and good old boy system. Very sad.
Re: NSPS: Pay for Politics
Pay Pool Observer DoD Wed Jan 28, 2009 5:35 PM
Yep, that's exacty what happened. No review of the perf plan; just a name and a rating. If the pool mgt didn't know who a person was, they didn't ask, they just assigned a 3.
NSPS Inequities
Just one of the cogs USACE Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:44 PM
I've been involved in both sides of the PFP coin, as a manager and as an employee. As part of a new project, I managed to "cherry pick" a number of folks from different projects to form my team - all people who had been rated consistently as 1's under the GS system, and were top performers.
When rating time came around, and everyone had exceeded the Divisions expectations, I was still given a pay pool that reflected a bell curve. Of my 8 people, I could either have have 1 Outstanding, 1 Excellent and 6 Meets standards, or 3 Excellents and 5 Meets standards. I had all the documentation to show the whole team deserved to be rated "outstanding" based on concrete results. MY boss felt the same way I did, but in the end, 5 people got negligible raises compared to lower performing people in other Departments, because they were in a different pay pool.
Unless you provide the funding to meet the "deserved" ratings, the NSPS System will never be equitable.
Re: NSPS Inequities
Diversity Manager DOL Wed Jan 28, 2009 7:25 PM
The pool is more than adequate the problem is not enough 1's and 2's are given out. There should be as many 1/2 as 4/5's. I've met very very few 5's in CS but a lot of 2's
Re: NSPS Inequities
Operations Manager USACE Thu Jan 29, 2009 10:10 AM
DOL -
I'm not sure where you thinking comes from, but life is not a bell curve. You don't HAVE to have as many poorer performers as outstanding performers. If you arer a good manager and motivate a team well, there's a less chance of poor performers not standing out and probably eventually coming around or in some cases voluntarily leaving the organization. Also, especially in smaller organizations or teams, the "BELL" may never ring and it can be, believe or not, honest. I've worked with a lot of team members over my careeer and there have been some poor performers, but never near as many as good or outstanding performers. Crawl back in your hole and evolve some more before coming out!
Re: NSPS Inequities
Quality Assurance NAVY Tue Feb 3, 2009 3:27 PM
I'm being told I'm an outstanding employee on every rating, but I get mostly 3-4 rating. I hae less money going into my base pay than I would if I was under the old system, even with two shares. There is no way I can do a better job, so I'm told. I think the money is going to supervisors.
A Curse!!!
Fed Peasant DOD Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:56 PM
NSPS, & like concoctions, are a CURSE upon workers!! Trash them all!!!
Pay for Performance
Pay Pool Manager DOD Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:15 PM
The issue with performance systems is that virtually all employees assume they are “above average.” Statistically this is impossible.
Most Federal systems give the majority of employees the top rating along with a token pay increase each year.
In contrast NSPS provides several layers of review that include representatives from inside and outside the employee’s organization. Multiple appeal/review options exist to help ensure that employees receive a fair assessment. As you might statistically expect, most performance ends up being rated as average.
Unfortunately this is a truth that many don’t want to accept. Rather than take the initiative to improve their performance, establish better objectives or take the time (hours not days) to document their accomplishments many seemed content to whine or bash the system.
If you don’t like NSPS, try private industry where most positions (service and production) have a direct linkage between pay and performance.
Re: Pay for Performance
Labor Employee Relations Manager VA Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:45 PM
I totally disagree! Your attitude of "if you don't like it work somewhere else!" is the reason DoD is loosing so many good, excellent employees!
You are carrying the political party line for NSPS. However, I would guess and this is only a guess, the majority of employees under NSPS and those who have left NSPS would strongly disagree with you.
NSPS was nothing more than a scam to save money by allowing HQ to have access to civilian pay pots that in the past they were prohibited from touching. It was also a scam to "turn down" the unions, which was also a failure.
Bottom line: NSPS is a failure! Get rid of it.
Re: Pay for Performance
Pay Pool Manager DOD Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:15 PM
Having sat on several pay pool panels and handled the relatively few follow-on reconsideration reuqests, my observation is that the vast majority of employees are pleased with the system. Most are too busy doing their job to post here. I suspect that is why the postings appear skewed against the system.
The only employees that I have seen leave as a result of NSPS are the lowest performers, which underscores that the system is working. in my book.
All the high performers that I know appreciate the opportunity to do better than the one-size-fits all GS system. They also know that their rating was endorsed by a wide-cross section of organization leadership. A top rating under NSPS means something. That could not be said of the legacy system where 98% of employees received it.
Incidentially, I've personnally crunched the nubmers in our pay pool. All of our level 3 "valued performers" did as well or better than their GS counterparts.
Re: Pay for Performance
Diversity Manager DOL Wed Jan 28, 2009 7:27 PM
DOD is losing so many excellent employees, what DOD activity did you work for?? I can count the number of 4/5's that I've worked with on 1 hand
Re: Pay for Performance
Union Rep DOD Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:16 PM
Pay Pool Manager: Read my earlier post - There is an inherent bias in this whole process - The GAO provided the data: You cannot debate it.
Pale, male, and stale.........if you fit into that group, you will do well in NSPS, and don't tell me otherwise. I witnessed it first hand.
And, oh, by the way, it's 11pm at night, and you're right, except for one thing, I'm too busy under the GS system to provide a post here during duty hours, unlike you.
Re: Pay for Performance
Pay Pool Manager DOD Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:29 AM
Typical performance management system:
First line supervisor rates employee with little/no additional review. If you don’t keep your boss happy you loose. If treat the rest of the organization poorly but cater to your boss whims you can still win. This system does not promote teamwork and is driven by a single opinion from a line manger who frequently has a limited organizational perspective. This is the system that the unions were complaining about prior to NSPS.
Contrast that with NSPS.
First line supervisor provides a recommendation. Higher level reviewer provides input. Cross section of organization leadership validates. If a line manager is over/under inflating ratings it becomes very obvious the panel. If the employee disagrees with the rating, they can request a review from the pay pool manager or a performance review authority who is independent of the process. In the pay pools that I’ve been involved with typically 1/3 of the ratings are increased.
Re: Pay for Performance
Pay Pool Manager DOD Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:31 AM
Incidentally while the latest GAO report (Oct 2008) identified 3 improvement opportunities with NSPS (all of its reports have some recommendations), it also identified 9 positive areas associated with NSPS implementation. My observation is most negative comments about NSPS are based on union mis-information about the system.
Re: Pay for Performance
IT Specialist DOD Thu Jan 29, 2009 1:14 PM
Pay Pool Manager - In my case, First Line Supervisor gives me a rating, 2nd line validates, and cross section of my organization's leadership has absolutely zero visibility of the work I do. That is the problem with Pay Pools if they are not set up correctly.
RE: The professor at the small college
HR Specialist DON Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:55 PM
I agree 100 % with the professor from the small college. I worked in the private sector where every metric, hour, minute, second was accounted for. The Federal government and the old guard in the civil service have a huge amount of employees that have no idea how good they have it. I came in and moved up fast under NSPS because get this I came to work to "WORK". I encountered federal employees with many, many years of service that could barely do their job.
I am sorry if some people get offended, they should! If it applies to them, but the sad fact is that many do, because all the years they were skating and had little to no accountability are now gone.
Many complain that if they are not in the click or the liked employee group they will not get paid. Last years pay outs showed that in whole the NSPS employees got bigger pay outs/salary increases. What are you doing to change your perception with your coworkers/bosses? Accountability is here, be afraid!
Re: RE: The professor at the small college
Prof Small College Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:46 AM
You should agree with me, my IQ is well above a govt employee
Specialist
SA DHS Thu Jan 29, 2009 12:19 AM
With the merger of ICE and the constant threat of PFP is no reason that morale is low. It was getting a little better, but once again with PFP glooming, here we go again. DHS employees are one of the lowest in the motivation department. We all need strong union.
Need a Union
SA DHS Thu Jan 29, 2009 12:24 AM
It’s astonishing that the U.S.B.P. and the CBP; the front line of defense has a union to speak for them. ICE SA'S nothing, just low morale.
Just saw the averages for DLA payouts
First Line Supervisor DLA Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:58 AM
NSPS has to go! On average, all 12's received a 3, all 13's received a 4, all 14's and higher received a 4. Hmmm...so much for giving fair evaluations. the First-lines do all the work, while the 13's and higher get all the credit. Good job DLA!! I have never heard and seen so many pissed off first-line supervisors in my life. This is a disaster and has done nothing but destroy morale. And I quote from three first-lines who are exceptional employees, "Why should I work harder, if all they are going to do is give me a 3". Good luck fixing the mess. Command should be ashamed of themselves!
PFP TO THE DOD MANAGER
HR Specialist DoD Civilian in Kansas Thu Jan 29, 2009 9:35 AM
"If the employee disagrees with the rating, they can request a review from the pay pool manager or a performance review authority who is independent of the process. In the pay pools that I’ve been involved with typically 1/3 of the ratings are increased." This statement is not true. I tried to disagree with my rating. There are many things that you can't disagree with and most of them are the things that we as NSPS employees would like to know about. These are the exclusions: - A performance payout, number of performance shares assigned, value of performance shares, or distribution of payout between increase to base salary and bonus; A recommended rating of record; - An interim review; or, - A closeout assessment.
Doesn't leave you much that you can question. And yes, the form would go back to the PAY POOL MANAGER that decided your first mediocre rating.
Re: PFP TO THE DOD MANAGER
Pay Pool Manager DOD Fri Jan 30, 2009 9:22 AM
If you do everything that you were asked to do in your performance plan (as is the case for most), under NSPS you should expect to receive a level 3 rating. If you clearly document that you exceeded one or more (significantly weighted) objective you will likely be rated higher. If you did not fully meet one or more objective you can expect to be rated lower. In the end, documenting how you supported each individual objective is what matters. It’s the average of these objective ratings that determine your final evaluation and pay out. If you are basing a reconsideration on non-related items, don’t expect to be successful. I’ve sat on pay pools for three different organizations. My observation is that most employees who credible document that they exceeded one or more objectives are generally successful with reconsiderations. More than 50% of the requests that I have reviewed have been decided in the employee’s favor.
Executive Order
Pay For Performance Retired Thu Jan 29, 2009 10:22 AM
I suppose Pres. Obama could issue an Executive Order abolishing Pay for Performance systems until he decides what he wants to do. USDA just came out with another demonstration project in a Federal Register Notice.
NSPS
Engineering Data Specialist USAF Thu Jan 29, 2009 1:37 PM
Wider pay bands means fewer kangaroo panels!
Pay Pools are not doing thier job
Analyst 343 series DOD (Navy) Thu Jan 29, 2009 9:37 PM
I am one of thousands of people under NSPS.
Submitted a very strong self assessment. My supervisor also gave me a very positive assessment. He also clearly stated on each objective that I went "above and beyond'.
Pay pool did their thing and I was rated a 3. Decided to ask for reconsideration as I felt I should have been rated a 4. Low and behold I was right. After reconsideration, my rating was adjusted up to a 4.
I'm starting to think they didn't even look at my assessment package. Both my and my supervisor's assessment clearly demonstrated I should have been a 4. Seems to me like the pay pool are not applying the same standards to all employees' assessments OR they aren't even looking at all.
I tried to be open minded about NSPS...but this is further evidence that it doesn't work.
I also spend way too much time trying to keep a record and log of my objectives. Not to mention I spent 3 days writing my self assessment.
Yet the system still seems to work...
Pay Pool Manager DOD Fri Jan 30, 2009 9:46 AM
Based on your comments I would suggest that the process worked as designed. Your input was reviewed. You felt that your final rating was not accurate. You provided additional information and your rating was adjusted. You now have a rating that you view as fair and have better insight into how to more effectively document your accomplishments in the future. I suspect that even as a level 3 you received a larger aggregate pay increase than your GS peers. As a level 4 you are probably doing notably better. Not to mention the additional career growth that you have available to you within your current and/or next pay band.
Clarification
Specialist Federal agency Thu Feb 12, 2009 2:23 PM
Military members are evaluated every year of their careers and this evaluation determines whether they get to be promoted and whether they get to continue their career what you suggest is misleading.
There's a reason why the system use to be called "merit" however that has clearly fallen by the side and now some agencies (like mine) are rife with extremely poor management who are never held accountable. Perhaps they should consider measuring management first before looking at the people who actually do the buisness of government.
NSPS
Chemist DOD Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:16 PM
Labor Employee Relations Manager--VA knows the downfall of NSPS. It's not the annual raises, but the reassignments!!! HELP!!
P4P
HR DOD Tue Mar 3, 2009 11:27 AM
Here we are again, 2nd year of P4P and the saga continues - as usual, no money. P4P was sold to management and employees as fair and equitable in rewarding/retention of good employees, and recruitment for new employees. Individuals serving and competing under a GS System make more than their counterparts in a P4P system. New hires obtain significant training and experience, upon completion of their training plan - leave for GS positions. Promotions from technicians to supervisors are treated as reassignments - due to limited funds (or management not acknowledging they don't understand the system). Individuals retiring receive "2" because "they are leaving, it doesn't matter" - it does matter to those still under the CSRS. Employee removed from the position and returned to their former position because they couldn't do the job is a "3". New supervisor in position 6 months, no previous training/experience is a "4". Old merit pay is alive and well.
PFP
President NALC USPS Tue Mar 3, 2009 10:19 PM
I've worked for the Postal Service for 23 years. I was in the military for 10 years. To give management PFP bonuses has only encouraged them to take steps to 'improve' the preformance of the craft employees in negative ways. Give them pay increases per their management negotiated contracts, such as the unions have bargained over the years. That's the only way to achieve dignity and respect in the workplace and to have a workplace that is concerned with working together, not working 'in spite' of each other. The only performance issue would be 'how do I make this job more efficient and more productive' within the scope of a true team. As a government employee, my purpose is to give my customers the best possible service, to keep my body intact (go home from work enjoying the same health as I had coming in) and be proud of what I do.
NSPS is Serioussly Flawed
Manager DoD Wed Sep 9, 2009 10:00 AM
NSPS was not designed to help federal employees in any way, shape, form, or fashion. This debilitating and ill conceived pay for performance system was designed and implemented to help Government reduce the annual cost associated with anual performance appraisals. Implementation of any system without important input from employees is bound to fail, just as has occured with NSPS. Moreover, NSPS was implemented to appease certain employess who complained about other employees whom they thought were not worthy of a performance award. Instead of doing their own work and not concerning themselves with the performance of fellow employees, they complained voicerously about their fellow employees. Evaluating performance is a supervisory responsibility that should not and must not be influenced by employees who whine and complain about the performance of others. Employees should mind their own business and allow the supervisor/manager to evaluate employees based on merit.
Step limits
Computer Scientist DOD Thu Sep 10, 2009 9:07 AM
I reached 12 step 10 and for years (32 years) I had an excellent / superior job performance ratings. NPS allowed me to move up in base pay instead of relying on cost of living increases.
Get Rid of NSPS
NSPS Victim DoD Thu Sep 10, 2009 9:32 AM
Pay for performance is a joke. You have a pay pool, who can't figure out what you do in the 2000 character assessment you submit. Your supervisor's input means nothing in the pay pool, because.....the good ole boys are taking care of their own by downgrading other dedicated hard working employees. In the last appraisal outbrief our Agency provided employees, they were so proud that the "bell" had the majority of the employees rated as 3's. This is "what it's suppose to look like" according to our HR staff. Did I miss something, I thought this was pay for performance, not looking good when reporting the results. Why have supervisors when their input is disregarded in order to "look good." DoD could save a lot of money by removing all supervisors. I am actively looking for a job out of NSPS, at least in the GS system, your supervisor's input counted. Get rid of NSPS just like we got rid of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfield. Obama needs to pay more attention to employee opinions!!!
Pay for Performance
Program Technician Farm Service Agency Thu Sep 10, 2009 12:47 PM
I have seen it so often in my many years working for the USDA and it's unfortunate but human nature dictates:
There is favoritism out there when it comes to awards/promotions/recognition.
There are many who truly deserve them, but managers are only human and do have favorites and biases, just like the rest of us.
This is why I do not support Pay for Performance.
Pay For Performance
COR Department of the Army Fri Sep 11, 2009 10:56 AM
The NSPS system needs to be completely overhauled. You are put into a pool with other workers under the same title but when your work is completely different than the criteria for your position, the board is at a loss as to how to judge your performance in this different area, consequently you are with others that do a different type of work. You are not judged on the type of work you are doing only whether it meets or excels over the general criteria.
The other problem is the buddy system. If you are really liked by the supervisor you receive a higher rating than the common Joe. It doesn't have anything to do with your work ethic or the amount of work that you produce.
Put all employees on the same system for fairness.
Help-Free Us from P4P
FAA Security Inspector-R.U.P.O. FAA-Aviation Security and Hazardous Materials Division Tue Oct 27, 2009 3:15 PM
Having been in P4P for over 7 years, the inspectors of this FAA Program are paid as much as $10-15,000 less than the (unionized) FAA employees in the GS system with the same grade and time. In my case this is true even though I have received “performance awards” most years. The awards are .06 and 1.8% (no step increases) and are based on forced distribution meaning no peer review, no transparency, no feedback, no way to grieve and not enough money for performers. The recipients at times seem selected on an ever changing, end of the year criteria that ends up demotivating employees. Bad pay system, and a management that conjures up its own local rules. I appreciate my job but why should I get treated and paid like a second class employee just because we are not in the GS system. Path of least resistance! No representation allowed for non-gun carrying inspectors! We should not have to be in a union to get equal compensation. Fair pay for all!
Future Pay for performance.
Aviation Safety Inspector FAA Fri Nov 20, 2009 9:28 PM
The article makes sense but won't work.
The government should reward personnel by their degree of education (similar to the board of education pay schedule) and aviation experience.
Bonuses or rewards could be given to an outstanding few when selected by a committee.
We need better educated, certificated and an expert in the field in aviation before the hiring process should begin.
Ironic Words
DoD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 8:11 AM
Obama states "Our country is in a sense continually at war against the ramparts of liberty, equality and justice on which our Republic is founded. Surging constantly are the evil forces of greed, or materialism, of selfishness, headed by those who cynically deny that there is any prosperity that cannot be expressed in dollars and cents, or happiness except in bank balances."
This is funny coming from a politician. The statement "Surging constantly are the evil forces of greed, or materialism, of selfishness..." is an accurate description of what most, if not all members of Congress and former members over the last 40 years, have succumbed to.
Re: Ironic Words
DOJ
Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:12 AM
Re: Ironic Words
DOD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:07 AM
Maybe you should look up the word "ramparts" before resorting to partisan rhetoric.
The Future of Pay-for-Performance in the Federal G
DoD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 8:59 AM
Kunreuther understands the civil servant's motivation, the futility of chasing "objective" appraisal systems, and the counterproductive effects of current attempts to motivate through Pay for Performance. Let's hope the new administration is listening.
Above article
OPM
Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:05 AM
Many years ago in the mid-'80s, the late, legendary Dr. Edwards Deming was asked to address OPM senior staff charged with establishing performance management program policy and regulatory guidance to agencies, including the performance appraisal process. In a videotaped session that never was released outside of OPM, he essentially derided the effort as "an impossible job," in the sense of achieving the goal of an objective, metrics-driven process that would actually result in a system of stratifying employees in terms of objective and credible assessments of performance accomplishments by individual employees that would contribute to efficient management of the Federal workforce. He said any such systems invariably act to cause dissension and disrupt teamwork. Congress in requiring OPM to establish such a system had done little more, in his view, than ensuring ongoing frustration in the workplace. Having witnessed the strurm and drang prior to and since then, I can only agree.
Re: Above article
DOL
Wed Jan 28, 2009 6:57 PM
Pay For Performance
FAA
Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:12 AM
I am currently under the GS pay structure but was part of a Pay for Performance Syatem for 5 years. I can tell you from my personal experience that PFP is the easiest way to turn a good employee into a bad one.
I watched my counterparts submit their evaluations each year. Since there is not enough money to give all the good performers a raise, only a few received raises. The grubling afterwards and loss in productivity became quite evident. If they did not get a raise, they were mad and would wonder out loud why they should work so hard. This was especially evident when 2 people were basically the same, yet only one received compensation.
I hope they government goes the the GS type system for all employees. I was also in the military for 12 years and these sort of pay systems are the best in my opinion.
We need to drop all pay for performance type systems as soon as possible.
Re: Pay For Performance
FAA
Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:07 AM
I can say that the SCI and cash award system this year amounted to our leadership team sitting in a room and doling out the money to those who did not receive it last year, regardless of accomplishments.
I am sure there would not be any arguments if there was a way for those wanting to EARN more to get it, but there simply is not, and the disparity in pay grows every year. And since the FAA has moved out from under OPM, there is no way to challenge any of this. And when you try, you are simply told that you chose this job.
Please terminate PFP in the FAA forever. We do not have the "leadership" (not management) to administer it effectively.
Re: Pay For Performance
DOL
Wed Jan 28, 2009 7:00 PM
Re: Pay For Performance
FAA
Thu Jan 29, 2009 9:40 AM
I think if you spent some time among the Tech Ops ranks you might see things differently. There are those among ALL of our ranks that are merely getting by until retirement. (including DOL)
Do not forget that these "high school educated" Technicians have spent the equivalent of a bachelors degree in training on highly complex systems to make sure you and your family get from point A to point B safely. The ONLY reason some do not have a college diploma is because they do not have credits in english composition, P.E. or similar courses. Personally, I could care less if the Technician knows the anatomical make up of a badger, but I am proud to be associated with those who know the mathematical equation required to calcualte line lengths, powers, etc required to propagate glidepaths which allow aircraft to land SAFELY in zero visibility. That, Sir is AWESOME!
So, I beg of you: Before you cast a widespread net over Technical Operations, walk a mile in their shoes.
Money and Resourses
VA
Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:15 AM
Within DoD, look at all the money and recourses that have been spent on a system that was originally conceived to put the thumbs on the unions!
Yep, that's right, it would appear that the main focus of NSPS was to put down the unions. It is time to throw out NSPS return back to the good ol GS system and get on with conducting this nation's business.
After all it is "Joe the Plumber" that pays our wages!
Isn't Obama
DCMA
Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:16 AM
the one that said the Constitution was flawed and needed changing? After 200+ years maybe we need to return to the constitiution and the founding fathers dreams for this great experiment and quit letting politicians(empty suits) and bird brains like the author fail to understand that liberty cannot survive in a nanny state. To remove from those that which is rightfully theirs to give to someone else is stealing no matter how you dress this pig. Greed, selfishness, materialism, sounds like the great one is talking about taking care of his family.....oooooooops.
Pay for Performance (P4P)
DOL
Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:17 AM
Personally, I don't think that most Federal employees are opposed to P4P. They just want their union representatives to have input into its implementation and that there be transparency for the whole process. It was the jamming down, or up, the various bodily orifices, as was done by the last administration, that brought most of the opposition to P4P. That, and all the secrecy involved in the development of standards and the determination of ratings, which upset Federal civil servants.
Re: Pay for Performance (P4P)
VA
Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:39 AM
Many in the HR community left DoD when it became clear that "quotas" were set by HQ on raises and ratings.
Re: Pay for Performance (P4P)
DOD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:36 AM
Many years ago I was asked to make a process that was new employee proof. (Actually, the chief said, "sailor proof",) but I told him it wasn't possible. Once we had to make judgement calls we had to rely on the judgement of the person making the call. We also had to allow for a learning curve. I could draw decision trees that would take care of 80% or more but the rest was why we needed people instead of just computers.
NSPS wants to try and judge by the numbers without any regard to complexity, difficulty, or any other non-quantifiable attribute.
We had a metric based on how many new packets of work were completed by a short time frame. Thing is, people would take the easier packets and leave the difficult ones for others. More packets done, better score. Figure the upset!
Re: Pay for Performance (P4P)
Dept of Labor
Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:45 AM
Don't get me wrong I think that most, if not all, the plans foisted upon Feds by the last administration were horrible. I worked for the SEC when "Political" management created a P4P program that recently resulted in a huge backpay settlement with the NTEU. Since I was outside the bargaining unit and have since left, I am out in the cold on that settlement. Personally, I lost about $1500 per year, because of the actions of my Weasel of a 2nd Level Supervisor. He was so bad, I even took a cut in pay to get out of there. Since then, his karma caught up to him, but that is another story.
Re: Pay for Performance (P4P)
FAA
Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:35 PM
NSPS
DOD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:29 AM
After two years I see nothing positive from my experience with NSPS. I recognize other orginizations may be doing things differently or correctly and care about there people but my impression in my orginization is of a quota system and taking care of senior management. As we were told everybody is a 3 with 4's and 5's for a few people. If your supervisor is worthless or doesn't care as happened to me, he or she does not fight for you during the pay pool board and you get a three, just like "Joey bag of donuts" next to you got no mater how well you did your job. Your objectives, self appraisal and supervisors apprasial mean nothing, its a numbers game plain and simple.
Performance Appraisals
FSA
Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:34 AM
I believe if you are a good employee, you will do the best work possible whether you get recognition or not. I have been working for USDA for 25 years and from what I have seen is that if one employee gets an award and the rest of the employees in that office do not get one, the morale for all goes down. The employee that gets the award seems to feel like they are better than the other employees and the rest of the employees feel like they should have received the award also. Therefore, everyone has problems. Usually we all work together to get the work done, but when one employee gets an award, the rest of us feel like what is the use in helping her with her work-she is the one that gets the recognition and we have all helped. I just feel like if you change to pay-by-performance plans, it would lower the morale and overall performance that employees have been doing by working together.
P4P
DON
Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:36 AM
The fact that the DON SES have exempted themselves from NSPS and excluded union members from participation (too hard) tells you all you need to know. If senior supervisors had executed their performance appraisal duties under the former system to anything close to an acceptable level, there would have been no reason to implement NSPS. Why would anyone believe that they will make the significant effort required to make NSPS work?
Re: P4P
USAF
Tue Apr 14, 2009 10:37 AM
FUTURE OF PFP
USAF
Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:44 AM
Mr. Gunreuther should hold a Cabinet position.
PFP
DoD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:44 AM
Being the the HR field we have seen a large impact PFP has caused employees to jump ship to agencies not under PFP. Employees want to feel they are being treated equally for the work they do. PFP seems to pick only a select few for outstanding work and leave the rest behind, saying their work isn't as important as the select few. This has caused a downward spiral in morale.
Re: PFP
VA
Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:58 PM
1. A rating of "4" required work on a project from CHRA
2. A rating of "5" required work on an Army HQ project.
We HR folks in the field scratched our heads and asked "Huh?" It was then most of us start jumping ship.
Silent Majority
DOD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:01 AM
I’ve been in NSPS for three years and AcqDemo before that. Pay for performance systems can and do work.
The vast majority of folks fair noticeably better under NSPS with average pay increases in the 5-7% range vs. 2-4% for GS. In addition most positions are in pay bands that provide increased growth opportunity without having to change positions.
I hear a lot of whining from people that want to hang onto the legacy systems where everyone received the highest rating and the same pay increase/bonus every year. That is a system that promotes mediocrity.
I anticipate that if the folks complaining about NSPS would spend less time whining and invest more energy into exceeding their jobs and documenting their accomplishments they too would benefit from the system.
Re: Silent Majority
VA
Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:02 PM
If I as your supervisor rated you as a "4" and then it was over turned by the Pay Pool and Pay Pool manager, then the ONLY thing the employee sees is the rating of a "3." All records pertaining to the rating of a "4" were to be distroyed so that the unions or others could not obtain those records under a FOIA request.
Re: Silent Majority
AF
Wed Jan 28, 2009 5:27 PM
~~~BUT~~~
It's not good for the organization, agency or DoD to pay me at the $$ I make while doing work 2 grades below; just because I happened to be a golden child one year? Don't get me wrong, I won't give the $ back, but at least GS grades kept salaries in check with level of work...
Re: Silent Majority
DOD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:04 PM
Re: Silent Majority
DOD
Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:14 PM
NSPS
DOD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:13 AM
The NSPS pay bands/scales and the opportunity for merit pay increases has dramatically improved our recruitment ability within the DOD medical community. In many cases fill rates for hard-to-fill occupations have improved by over 100% since implementing NSPS. In most cases, we weren’t remotely competitive under the GS system. Going back to the ridged GS system would be a disaster for us.
Re: NSPS
VA
Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:07 PM
One problem with recruiting. Say I have a vacancy, if I hire internal, I can only give the new employee a 5% raise over his last position, actually they call it a "reassignment, not a promotion.
If I bring someone off the street, with the proper approval I can give that employee up to 25% within the payband.
Not quite fair is it.
Re: NSPS
DOD
Tue Mar 3, 2009 11:43 AM
PFP
DoD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:13 AM
Those who commented they didn't think PFP was an issue are in agencies that do not have PFP. I can tell you PFP is the Golden Parachute for the Good Ol Boy system. It's evident by virtue of looking at the data that PFP excessively rewarded a few and beat down quality employees. Manipulating the money to increase salaries for a few resulted in many getting just bonus $$'s which hurt future retirement annuities (and they are not near the top of their payband nor were they in a high GS-step range had they stayed in GS). Different organizations on base had share values differ by up to 1.5% so those who received the same ratings and shares did not receive equal $$'s on their raises or bonus $$'s. Talk about some disgruntled employees...
Re: PFP
VA
Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:13 PM
The other 40% was given to me as a salary raise (gift that keeps giving). I receive LESS than my GS counter parts received in their annual raise.
So if you start looking at the big picture, especially if you are within 10 years of retirement, that is a significant lose in retirement funds under NSPS, while your GS counterparts are making 30-40% higher wages that DO count toward retirement.
P4P
DON
Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:23 AM
I am a new federal employee in terms of years in service (3). I have only experienced NSPS, and have had great success from it. NSPS, when used in its true form allows for the people who care about working with a sense of purpose excel, and move up. I see many inflated salaries of past GS federal employees just hanging on for their retirement. What do they care, they are going to move and get increases as long as they can put their but in a seat and stay alive. I hate the rules and restrictions of the old system. That is not my point though; there are great employees in both systems. Where the system(s) is flawed, and will always stay flawed is the human element. When ever you have supervisors, who do not work hard to communicate with their employees, and or try to motivate them there will always be something wrong regardless of what system we are in.
Re: P4P
VA
Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:15 PM
But if you were to experience the GS system, I think you would have a different opinion.
Re: P4P
DOD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:08 PM
You made out well due to a payout process called rate range penetration, that is a calculation for employees just like you to ensure you get the same raise you would have gotten under the GS system. You didn't make out any better than you would have, except when it came to the bonus. I hope you understand you will not carry the same opinion as you gain years in DOD under NSPS. Sorry, but that's how it is.
NSPS-Pay for Performance
Navy
Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:24 AM
NSPS is the worst system the government could have implemented. It has added to the already prevalent "good old boy" network. Too many of the assessments are subjective based on personality and not quality of work. The money funded to agencies isn't always distributed fairly. The quickest way to demoralize a quality performer is to put them under NSPS-Not only does most of the pay lag the GS system (not good in these recession times) but equal performers do not get equal pay. NSPS is not liked by employees or supervisors. For both, it has decreased their productivity because both are busy documenting actions/tasks/results so they can write assessments that may result in a pay raise. My organization has seen a large increase in employees "jumping ship" back to GS pay system and willing to take change to lower grade to just get out!. In my 30 years of government experience, I have found most Federal employees to be conscientious, hard working and proud of their products.
P4P
VA
Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:30 AM
As long as there are rating "quotas" that must be met and a requirement for bell curves to stastically show the majority of employees are an expected level 3, NSPS will never be objective. How can employees be rated fairly when performance metrics reflect a level 5 rating but the "quota" of level 5 ratiings has been met so the employee rating is lowered in an effort to get the desired bell curve.
Re: P4P
VA
Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:20 PM
There was a quota on ratings of "4" and "5" and I instructed the pay pool that they would have to differentiate all the employees and then reduce their ratings to meet the quota and pay pool money objective.
Do What?
Bureau of Mongo
Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:35 AM
Someone (Robbie) with some sense made the best suggestion I've seen yet. Do away with NSPS and other similar systems, and roll back to GS. If we're lucky, the sunset provision will take effect this October and the system will die on it's own. I just hope congress will run a stake through it's heart so that the evil doesn't come back in some other form.
Re: Do What?
DOD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:19 PM
Re: Do What?
Retired
Fri Jan 30, 2009 9:53 AM
The Future of PFP in the Federal Government
DOD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:36 AM
After serving 2 years under NSPS and trying to train managers/supv who truly don't have time for the process, something must change. On the surface, the goal of NSPS was to have the "right person, right place" and get rid of "non-performers" easier. Nothing about NSPS made those changes possible to the full extent that was hyped. It has served to give Peter's favorites 5% increases every 4 months "just-because". NSPS doesn't require reasons for pay increases. At least under GS, pay for GS-9 work had a reasonable limit. Now, GS equiv work is being rewarded with GS-13 pay because we "can". Any financial person can attest to that. This org shouldn't complain but isn't a 4% per share value a bit unrealistic? Keep that up and they'll be broke in minutes. The GS system kept salaries in check. To resolve the issue to "non-performers", supervisor must do their side. Waiting to discipline someone 4-6 months after an event never stands up at a higher level.
DoD has what they came for - Dump NSPS
DoD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:38 AM
With recent 11th hour posting of final regs to the Fed Register DoD has flexibility in hiring, Time in grade restrictions removed, PPP, etc. DoD said they didn't want to negotiate with 1300 Unions, but there has been no willingness of DoD to even approach the Unions at the International level and start a dialog of negotiating NSPS. Take your flexibilities and dump NSPS. Besides everyone knows that p4p requires funding. Where is that additional funding going to come from when our econonmy is bad and not expected to get any better for many, many years.
Future of Pay Performance
DoD Civilian in Kansas
Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:02 AM
I have been in this NSPS mess since the beginning, and the old saying of "things get better with time" does not fit in this PFP system. I don't think anyone can fix this. I know here at our civilian work place the moral is bad, people are jumping ship, and the team concept is no longer even apparent. Now lets add insult to injury, and go back a couple of years to when we got NSPS shoved at us. Since that time we have slowly been losing people to the point that we could eventually close. Under this current PFP system, we don't have the rights that the GS pay system would have allowed us so we can stay in the area we now work in. I don't see any one helping us, the only people who are going to be stuck with this abomination of a pay system that fails to work, are the employees NOT associated with the unions.
Re: Future of Pay Performance
Small College
Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:23 AM
Re: Future of Pay Performance
USDA
Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:45 AM
Re: Future of Pay Performance
Small College
Wed Jan 28, 2009 3:36 PM
Re: Future of Pay Performance
DOD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:16 PM
Your confession will do you much good.
"I appologise for my misguided bigotted opinions, I was fired from govt a couple of years ago for incompetence and cant get over it".
And YES, government employees can be fired, as you admit.
P4P from a GS Perspective
USDA
Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:34 AM
I am in the GS system, and I can tell you how subjective the ratings are and how inadequate the reviewers can be. How much more so when there are no controls at all on their whims! Reviewing officials should be limited to requesting additional information from the raters, not substituting their judgment for a supervisor's. I would hate to see this partiality and inefficiency and unfairness condoned through the establishment of a system dedicated to Pay Pools and panels.
Pay-for-Performance
VA
Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:11 PM
Evaluations in the VA system make no difference in pay. The best employee and the worst employee get the same pay. Good employees can not be given a higher evaluation because the bad employees will file a union complaint and demand the same higher rating and get it. Even those with multiple AWOL write-ups get a good evaluation because of the union. As far as actually getting a pay raise at the VA -- you have to be in the "click" to get that. PFP is just a snake waiting to bite anyone not a buddy of the boss. If you thinks PFP will be fair needs to have an unannounced drug test. This opinion was formed during my management years with the VA.
NSPS: Pay for Politics
USAF
Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:15 PM
I have a boss who talks to me twice a year, semi-annual and annual appraisal. He doesn't even know where my office is located or what my job is. I have gotten 3.2 for an NSPS rating. When I ask what can I do to get above a 3.2, he stares at me blindly without an answer. I have been told by those within the Pay Pool, that ratings are determined without ever looking at Objectives or Accomplishments. A name is mentioned and a "He's a four" is said. It is based on popularity, politics, and good old boy system. Very sad.
Re: NSPS: Pay for Politics
DoD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 5:35 PM
NSPS Inequities
USACE
Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:44 PM
I've been involved in both sides of the PFP coin, as a manager and as an employee. As part of a new project, I managed to "cherry pick" a number of folks from different projects to form my team - all people who had been rated consistently as 1's under the GS system, and were top performers.
When rating time came around, and everyone had exceeded the Divisions expectations, I was still given a pay pool that reflected a bell curve. Of my 8 people, I could either have have 1 Outstanding, 1 Excellent and 6 Meets standards, or 3 Excellents and 5 Meets standards. I had all the documentation to show the whole team deserved to be rated "outstanding" based on concrete results. MY boss felt the same way I did, but in the end, 5 people got negligible raises compared to lower performing people in other Departments, because they were in a different pay pool.
Unless you provide the funding to meet the "deserved" ratings, the NSPS System will never be equitable.
Re: NSPS Inequities
DOL
Wed Jan 28, 2009 7:25 PM
Re: NSPS Inequities
USACE
Thu Jan 29, 2009 10:10 AM
I'm not sure where you thinking comes from, but life is not a bell curve. You don't HAVE to have as many poorer performers as outstanding performers. If you arer a good manager and motivate a team well, there's a less chance of poor performers not standing out and probably eventually coming around or in some cases voluntarily leaving the organization. Also, especially in smaller organizations or teams, the "BELL" may never ring and it can be, believe or not, honest. I've worked with a lot of team members over my careeer and there have been some poor performers, but never near as many as good or outstanding performers. Crawl back in your hole and evolve some more before coming out!
Re: NSPS Inequities
NAVY
Tue Feb 3, 2009 3:27 PM
A Curse!!!
DOD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:56 PM
NSPS, & like concoctions, are a CURSE upon workers!! Trash them all!!!
Pay for Performance
DOD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:15 PM
The issue with performance systems is that virtually all employees assume they are “above average.” Statistically this is impossible.
Most Federal systems give the majority of employees the top rating along with a token pay increase each year.
In contrast NSPS provides several layers of review that include representatives from inside and outside the employee’s organization. Multiple appeal/review options exist to help ensure that employees receive a fair assessment. As you might statistically expect, most performance ends up being rated as average.
Unfortunately this is a truth that many don’t want to accept. Rather than take the initiative to improve their performance, establish better objectives or take the time (hours not days) to document their accomplishments many seemed content to whine or bash the system.
If you don’t like NSPS, try private industry where most positions (service and production) have a direct linkage between pay and performance.
Re: Pay for Performance
VA
Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:45 PM
You are carrying the political party line for NSPS. However, I would guess and this is only a guess, the majority of employees under NSPS and those who have left NSPS would strongly disagree with you.
NSPS was nothing more than a scam to save money by allowing HQ to have access to civilian pay pots that in the past they were prohibited from touching. It was also a scam to "turn down" the unions, which was also a failure.
Bottom line: NSPS is a failure! Get rid of it.
Re: Pay for Performance
DOD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:15 PM
The only employees that I have seen leave as a result of NSPS are the lowest performers, which underscores that the system is working. in my book.
All the high performers that I know appreciate the opportunity to do better than the one-size-fits all GS system. They also know that their rating was endorsed by a wide-cross section of organization leadership. A top rating under NSPS means something. That could not be said of the legacy system where 98% of employees received it.
Incidentially, I've personnally crunched the nubmers in our pay pool. All of our level 3 "valued performers" did as well or better than their GS counterparts.
Re: Pay for Performance
DOL
Wed Jan 28, 2009 7:27 PM
Re: Pay for Performance
DOD
Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:16 PM
Pale, male, and stale.........if you fit into that group, you will do well in NSPS, and don't tell me otherwise. I witnessed it first hand.
And, oh, by the way, it's 11pm at night, and you're right, except for one thing, I'm too busy under the GS system to provide a post here during duty hours, unlike you.
Re: Pay for Performance
DOD
Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:29 AM
First line supervisor rates employee with little/no additional review. If you don’t keep your boss happy you loose. If treat the rest of the organization poorly but cater to your boss whims you can still win. This system does not promote teamwork and is driven by a single opinion from a line manger who frequently has a limited organizational perspective. This is the system that the unions were complaining about prior to NSPS.
Contrast that with NSPS.
First line supervisor provides a recommendation. Higher level reviewer provides input. Cross section of organization leadership validates. If a line manager is over/under inflating ratings it becomes very obvious the panel. If the employee disagrees with the rating, they can request a review from the pay pool manager or a performance review authority who is independent of the process. In the pay pools that I’ve been involved with typically 1/3 of the ratings are increased.
Re: Pay for Performance
DOD
Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:31 AM
Re: Pay for Performance
DOD
Thu Jan 29, 2009 1:14 PM
RE: The professor at the small college
DON
Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:55 PM
I agree 100 % with the professor from the small college. I worked in the private sector where every metric, hour, minute, second was accounted for. The Federal government and the old guard in the civil service have a huge amount of employees that have no idea how good they have it. I came in and moved up fast under NSPS because get this I came to work to "WORK". I encountered federal employees with many, many years of service that could barely do their job.
I am sorry if some people get offended, they should! If it applies to them, but the sad fact is that many do, because all the years they were skating and had little to no accountability are now gone.
Many complain that if they are not in the click or the liked employee group they will not get paid. Last years pay outs showed that in whole the NSPS employees got bigger pay outs/salary increases. What are you doing to change your perception with your coworkers/bosses? Accountability is here, be afraid!
Re: RE: The professor at the small college
Small College
Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:46 AM
Specialist
DHS
Thu Jan 29, 2009 12:19 AM
With the merger of ICE and the constant threat of PFP is no reason that morale is low. It was getting a little better, but once again with PFP glooming, here we go again. DHS employees are one of the lowest in the motivation department. We all need strong union.
Need a Union
DHS
Thu Jan 29, 2009 12:24 AM
It’s astonishing that the U.S.B.P. and the CBP; the front line of defense has a union to speak for them. ICE SA'S nothing, just low morale.
Just saw the averages for DLA payouts
DLA
Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:58 AM
NSPS has to go! On average, all 12's received a 3, all 13's received a 4, all 14's and higher received a 4. Hmmm...so much for giving fair evaluations. the First-lines do all the work, while the 13's and higher get all the credit. Good job DLA!! I have never heard and seen so many pissed off first-line supervisors in my life. This is a disaster and has done nothing but destroy morale. And I quote from three first-lines who are exceptional employees, "Why should I work harder, if all they are going to do is give me a 3". Good luck fixing the mess. Command should be ashamed of themselves!
PFP TO THE DOD MANAGER
DoD Civilian in Kansas
Thu Jan 29, 2009 9:35 AM
"If the employee disagrees with the rating, they can request a review from the pay pool manager or a performance review authority who is independent of the process. In the pay pools that I’ve been involved with typically 1/3 of the ratings are increased." This statement is not true. I tried to disagree with my rating. There are many things that you can't disagree with and most of them are the things that we as NSPS employees would like to know about. These are the exclusions: - A performance payout, number of performance shares assigned, value of performance shares, or distribution of payout between increase to base salary and bonus; A recommended rating of record; - An interim review; or, - A closeout assessment.
Doesn't leave you much that you can question. And yes, the form would go back to the PAY POOL MANAGER that decided your first mediocre rating.
Re: PFP TO THE DOD MANAGER
DOD
Fri Jan 30, 2009 9:22 AM
Executive Order
Retired
Thu Jan 29, 2009 10:22 AM
I suppose Pres. Obama could issue an Executive Order abolishing Pay for Performance systems until he decides what he wants to do. USDA just came out with another demonstration project in a Federal Register Notice.
NSPS
USAF
Thu Jan 29, 2009 1:37 PM
Wider pay bands means fewer kangaroo panels!
Pay Pools are not doing thier job
DOD (Navy)
Thu Jan 29, 2009 9:37 PM
I am one of thousands of people under NSPS.
Submitted a very strong self assessment. My supervisor also gave me a very positive assessment. He also clearly stated on each objective that I went "above and beyond'.
Pay pool did their thing and I was rated a 3. Decided to ask for reconsideration as I felt I should have been rated a 4. Low and behold I was right. After reconsideration, my rating was adjusted up to a 4.
I'm starting to think they didn't even look at my assessment package. Both my and my supervisor's assessment clearly demonstrated I should have been a 4. Seems to me like the pay pool are not applying the same standards to all employees' assessments OR they aren't even looking at all.
I tried to be open minded about NSPS...but this is further evidence that it doesn't work.
I also spend way too much time trying to keep a record and log of my objectives. Not to mention I spent 3 days writing my self assessment.
Yet the system still seems to work...
DOD
Fri Jan 30, 2009 9:46 AM
Based on your comments I would suggest that the process worked as designed. Your input was reviewed. You felt that your final rating was not accurate. You provided additional information and your rating was adjusted. You now have a rating that you view as fair and have better insight into how to more effectively document your accomplishments in the future. I suspect that even as a level 3 you received a larger aggregate pay increase than your GS peers. As a level 4 you are probably doing notably better. Not to mention the additional career growth that you have available to you within your current and/or next pay band.
Clarification
Federal agency
Thu Feb 12, 2009 2:23 PM
Military members are evaluated every year of their careers and this evaluation determines whether they get to be promoted and whether they get to continue their career what you suggest is misleading.
There's a reason why the system use to be called "merit" however that has clearly fallen by the side and now some agencies (like mine) are rife with extremely poor management who are never held accountable. Perhaps they should consider measuring management first before looking at the people who actually do the buisness of government.
NSPS
DOD
Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:16 PM
Labor Employee Relations Manager--VA knows the downfall of NSPS. It's not the annual raises, but the reassignments!!! HELP!!
P4P
DOD
Tue Mar 3, 2009 11:27 AM
Here we are again, 2nd year of P4P and the saga continues - as usual, no money. P4P was sold to management and employees as fair and equitable in rewarding/retention of good employees, and recruitment for new employees. Individuals serving and competing under a GS System make more than their counterparts in a P4P system. New hires obtain significant training and experience, upon completion of their training plan - leave for GS positions. Promotions from technicians to supervisors are treated as reassignments - due to limited funds (or management not acknowledging they don't understand the system). Individuals retiring receive "2" because "they are leaving, it doesn't matter" - it does matter to those still under the CSRS. Employee removed from the position and returned to their former position because they couldn't do the job is a "3". New supervisor in position 6 months, no previous training/experience is a "4". Old merit pay is alive and well.
PFP
NALC USPS
Tue Mar 3, 2009 10:19 PM
I've worked for the Postal Service for 23 years. I was in the military for 10 years. To give management PFP bonuses has only encouraged them to take steps to 'improve' the preformance of the craft employees in negative ways. Give them pay increases per their management negotiated contracts, such as the unions have bargained over the years. That's the only way to achieve dignity and respect in the workplace and to have a workplace that is concerned with working together, not working 'in spite' of each other. The only performance issue would be 'how do I make this job more efficient and more productive' within the scope of a true team. As a government employee, my purpose is to give my customers the best possible service, to keep my body intact (go home from work enjoying the same health as I had coming in) and be proud of what I do.
NSPS is Serioussly Flawed
DoD
Wed Sep 9, 2009 10:00 AM
NSPS was not designed to help federal employees in any way, shape, form, or fashion. This debilitating and ill conceived pay for performance system was designed and implemented to help Government reduce the annual cost associated with anual performance appraisals. Implementation of any system without important input from employees is bound to fail, just as has occured with NSPS. Moreover, NSPS was implemented to appease certain employess who complained about other employees whom they thought were not worthy of a performance award. Instead of doing their own work and not concerning themselves with the performance of fellow employees, they complained voicerously about their fellow employees. Evaluating performance is a supervisory responsibility that should not and must not be influenced by employees who whine and complain about the performance of others. Employees should mind their own business and allow the supervisor/manager to evaluate employees based on merit.
Step limits
DOD
Thu Sep 10, 2009 9:07 AM
I reached 12 step 10 and for years (32 years) I had an excellent / superior job performance ratings. NPS allowed me to move up in base pay instead of relying on cost of living increases.
Get Rid of NSPS
DoD
Thu Sep 10, 2009 9:32 AM
Pay for performance is a joke. You have a pay pool, who can't figure out what you do in the 2000 character assessment you submit. Your supervisor's input means nothing in the pay pool, because.....the good ole boys are taking care of their own by downgrading other dedicated hard working employees. In the last appraisal outbrief our Agency provided employees, they were so proud that the "bell" had the majority of the employees rated as 3's. This is "what it's suppose to look like" according to our HR staff. Did I miss something, I thought this was pay for performance, not looking good when reporting the results. Why have supervisors when their input is disregarded in order to "look good." DoD could save a lot of money by removing all supervisors. I am actively looking for a job out of NSPS, at least in the GS system, your supervisor's input counted. Get rid of NSPS just like we got rid of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfield. Obama needs to pay more attention to employee opinions!!!
Pay for Performance
Farm Service Agency
Thu Sep 10, 2009 12:47 PM
I have seen it so often in my many years working for the USDA and it's unfortunate but human nature dictates:
There is favoritism out there when it comes to awards/promotions/recognition.
There are many who truly deserve them, but managers are only human and do have favorites and biases, just like the rest of us.
This is why I do not support Pay for Performance.
Pay For Performance
Department of the Army
Fri Sep 11, 2009 10:56 AM
The NSPS system needs to be completely overhauled. You are put into a pool with other workers under the same title but when your work is completely different than the criteria for your position, the board is at a loss as to how to judge your performance in this different area, consequently you are with others that do a different type of work. You are not judged on the type of work you are doing only whether it meets or excels over the general criteria.
The other problem is the buddy system. If you are really liked by the supervisor you receive a higher rating than the common Joe. It doesn't have anything to do with your work ethic or the amount of work that you produce.
Put all employees on the same system for fairness.
Help-Free Us from P4P
FAA-Aviation Security and Hazardous Materials Division
Tue Oct 27, 2009 3:15 PM
Having been in P4P for over 7 years, the inspectors of this FAA Program are paid as much as $10-15,000 less than the (unionized) FAA employees in the GS system with the same grade and time. In my case this is true even though I have received “performance awards” most years. The awards are .06 and 1.8% (no step increases) and are based on forced distribution meaning no peer review, no transparency, no feedback, no way to grieve and not enough money for performers. The recipients at times seem selected on an ever changing, end of the year criteria that ends up demotivating employees. Bad pay system, and a management that conjures up its own local rules. I appreciate my job but why should I get treated and paid like a second class employee just because we are not in the GS system. Path of least resistance! No representation allowed for non-gun carrying inspectors! We should not have to be in a union to get equal compensation. Fair pay for all!
Future Pay for performance.
FAA
Fri Nov 20, 2009 9:28 PM
The article makes sense but won't work.
The government should reward personnel by their degree of education (similar to the board of education pay schedule) and aviation experience.
Bonuses or rewards could be given to an outstanding few when selected by a committee.
We need better educated, certificated and an expert in the field in aviation before the hiring process should begin.