The Post's Stephen Barr is the author of The Federal Diary, which runs Sunday through Friday in the Metro section. Steve has been a reporter and editor at The Post since 1979, including stints as Federal Page editor, congressional editor and a staff writer covering the federal bureaucracy.
What changes are planned at the Defense Department as it launches the
National Security Personnel System? How will civil service pay rules
change? How will layoff rules change? What does NSPS mean for
labor-management relations?
J. Ward Morrow, assistant general counsel for the American Federation of
Government Employees, joined Barr to take questions and comments on the Pentagon's plans for
NSPS today at Noon.
Morrow assists the AFGE's legislative department on legal issues,
researches labor issues and serves as the union's in-house expert on the
Hatch Act and federal campaign law. Prior to joining the union, he served
as chief counsel and legislative director for the American Federation of
Teachers--Maryland. He also has served as an assistant state's attorney for
Baltimore and as a special assistant U.S. attorney, where he prosecuted
criminal cases in Maryland district and circuit courts.
A transcript follows.
Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
_____________
Washington, D.C.:
Will the new system do anything to alleviate the ridiculously long time it takes to hire or not hire? I have applied for a number of jobs (GS14/15 level) that I was well qualified for with the online resume application process and the applications were forwarded but then I didn't hear anything until six months later when I received an email stating that I was not selected. By that time I had already moved on and found a job on the Hill. The entire process is a mystery to me and one I am not inclined to try again.
J. Ward Morrow: NSPS, the National Security Personnel System doesn't really hit this issue head on. There are other things that OPM is working on that are supposed to address that issue. But I can certainly understand the frustration.
For many years now, in many agencies, staffing levels have been underfunded. When a vacancy occurs employees have to perform double duty until the position is filled. It almost seems like some in management want the delay to save money to correct any other deficits in the agency budget.
J. Ward Morrow: Really NSPS seems to be about reducing the role of employee representatives and a potentially demoralizing pay system.
_______________________
Stephen Barr:
Thanks to all of you joining in this discussion today, especially our guest, Ward Morrow of the American Federation of Government Employees. To get this discussion rolling, Ward, I'd like to start off by hearing from you about AFGE's concerns on "pay for performance" and why federal employees should care about this coming change at the Defense Department. Again, thanks for taking time to field questions today from Diary readers.
J. Ward Morrow: Thank you for this opportunity.
We have had a lot of federal employees ask the same question. Most all employees view themselves as outstanding performers, but under this system managers will a great deal of authority. DOD's proposed system is not yet clear how an employee can give an unfair or incorrect evaluation. Since pay will now be tied to your supervisor's opinion of your work it raises a lot of red flags. How will the system make certain that cronyism, politics, or other prejudice does come into play?
Most federal employees came in hoping to get their step increases and cost of living adjustments as it has normally been laid out. That will be gone.
So now if the cost of bread and gas goes up, forget that COLA, you may only get one if your supervisor allows for it. Seems like this will be a budgetary nightmare, either the agency will have one pot of money to disperse or there is no way to budget for this. If it is one pot, then this becomes a zero sum game. You only get an increase if some co-worker does not. The more they get, the less you get.
In an area like National Defense you really need team work and unity. Yet pay is based upon you looking better than your co-worker. This type of system divides the workforce.
Not something to be sought in the defense sector.
_______________________
Windsor Mill, Md.:
It seems that the TSA was a Trojan horse with a new personnel system inside. What is AFGE doing to highlight the failures and abuses endemic within the TSA as a cautionary tale for Congress to consider regarding implementing similar systems in the DHS and DOD?
J. Ward Morrow: You are correct that TSA has been a very strange situation. AFGE has been involved in a substantial amount of litigation based upon the fact that the statute is poorly worded and and the courts have thus far seemed to exempt TSA from any normal personnel system. The employees appear to be outraged, and even without collective bargaining or grievance process, are joining AFGE in ever larger numbers. We have even had one TSA employee who was terminated for talking to a lawyer regarding a desire to file a grievance. TSA claimed the consultation with a person outside the agency constituted some kind of breach of security!
Manangement has even disputed whistle blower rights!
These are the folks on our first line of defense and if they see something wrong the agency wants the ability to fire them if they consult a lawyer or blow the whistle on agency wrongdoing!
I guess this is what the agency mean by having flexibility.
_______________________
Annapolis, Md.:
How will locality pay be dealt with under NPSP? Seems like a new system will be needed to ensure underpaid employees are paid right for each market and overpaid employees don't get pay increases based upon annual adjustments.
J. Ward Morrow: This is also not yet clear. Since they system seem to be moving quickly just to peformance, it looks like locality pay may be going away just like the COLA and steps. They have some language about being more market rate oriented, but since the federal scale is lower than the private sector one wonders where all this money will come from. Ask any agency lawyer what the private D.C. lawyer market rate is and then we have to ask what taxes will be raised to cover this? In this time of budget deficits, I don't see any reality to this claim.
Many employees fear this will all be used as a way to hold down pay.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
How will Pay Bands be increased for inflation or market conditions? Will they be static once established? Will older employees receive less in pay raises and more in bonus money as has happened at FAA prompting an age discrimination claim?
J. Ward Morrow: There seem to be several myths about pay banding. As I mentioned if somehow huge sums of money appeared, this could be workable in theory. But in the real world of federal deficits, who gets into what band will be extremely important. At this stage we simply don't know. with
J. Ward Morrow: Under the current system, everyone kind of knows where they stand. This is unknown territory.
What is most confusing is that DOD, like most agencies, already can give cash awards etc...So we already have a pay for performance system. This added uncertainty may well drive away good employees. If you are going to have a private sector type of program, why not go and really get the private sector pay.
If a strong grievance system does not exist as a check on arbitrary evaluations, one can assume lots of law suits and lots of EEOC filings over this.
_______________________
Germantown, Md.:
The problem of poor performers will not be corrected by Pay for Performance since the reason for poor performance under current pay system are the managers who don't rate employees objectively. In my 25 years of experience at DOE, I have mostly had supervisors who would simply ask me to sign the ratings which had already been approved by the second level supervisors. There was no objective discussion of how well I met or did not meet the performance standards. If I questioned any item, the supervisor became defensive and said go to his supervisor who had already approved the rating. I see nothing in the Pay for Performance, since managers will be the same, and a warm body training will not make them better managers. Bottom line is that good employees will lose the step increases and eventually leave. But then may be that is what the Administration wants.
J. Ward Morrow: Not sure how to answer that as a question, but I completely agree with your sentiments. Some employees have begun to call this the "no pay" for performance plan.
Even the managers seem to agree that a large component of this system needs to be extensive training on evaluations. That will be very costly if done correctly and even then there is no way to certain without lots of checks and balances. Those checks need to be independent, not as it seems to be an internal review.
I was amazed to see a recent article that said much of the training may be done via posting on a website!
_______________________
Stephen Barr:
Ward, the Pentagon has promised that no employee will take a pay cut when shifted into NSPS, and, in fact, some may get a bump up in pay because they will get a WIGI payment. Even though managers will have greater discretion over pay, they also want to keep a happy and productive workforce. Apart from these rules, in real life, don't you think most Defense employees will fare the same or better under NSPS?
J. Ward Morrow: It depends how this plays out. If you are correct and no one gets a cut this year or they get WIGI payment increase, they may not see the real effect for several years out. If the following year all the money is lumped together in one pot, there will be real winners and losers. The losers may not get a cut, but if you get no COLA for 3 years and no in grade, then that is a cut after you adjust for inflation. And that is not just going to hurt that year in in the following years and for getting higher years for pension purposes.
_______________________
Windsor Mill, Md.:
If I may add one comment regarding TSA. No screener has ever received a merit increase in the history of the agency. Also, TSA budgets only 2% annually for possible increases. Any employee who receives an increase would be ineligible for the next two years.
J. Ward Morrow: It really is sad that these patriotic employees who go to work everyday to protect our homeland would get treated that way. You can see why they really need to be unionized and why it is in the public's interest too.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
Will the pay scales be capped at GS 15-10? Many in my office are at the GS-15 level (nonsupervisory), so we think merit pay can only help us.
J. Ward Morrow: This is one of the details that we have not yet seen. DOD was required under federal law to collaborate with us on this new system. It was to begin 60 days after Congress passed the NSPS in November of 2003. They never did. They had secret working groups where the employee representatives went unrepresented. It took them 15 months to publish this plan. The unions were not part of the development, and if they had been it really could have been a much better plan. There are over 36 different employee organizations at DOD. If they act in good faith and comply with the law, this will still be quite a while in the making.
On the other hand, if they simply go through the motions, make a minor modification that they pre-planned to make all
along for the purpose of saying they listened, this may move quickly. But it will be done without meaningful employee involvement and it will be without the input that could make it work much better.
_______________________
Stephen Barr:
Ward, David Walker, the comptroller general, suggested at a House subcommittee hearing yesterday that DoD will need to work at creating safeguards for employees that ensure a fair process. Based on your reading of the proposed regulation, what is DoD missing right now? And, in the area of pay, what unambiguous safeguards would AFGE like to see written into the regulation?
J. Ward Morrow: DOD should negotiate a process with appropriate bargaining units that is fair and appropriate. It is funny, DOD claims it wants something flexible, as if personnel rules are akin to yoga, but the reality is they wanted and got National level bargaining that takes away flexible processes that might work best at the various worksites. At a minimum, there should be a grievance system that goes outside of the chain of command. Assuming that the supervisory is not going to change his/her mind nor is it likely that the next level will either, there is a need arbitration or Administrative Law Judge hearing, with appeal to the Merit System Protection Board or other outside neutral third party and then eventually the Courts.
That kind of check and balance would give the process a bit of fairness.
_______________________
Lexington, Mass.:
With the 16 May DOD BRAC announcement pending, how do you see the DOD handling the implementation of NSPS, especially the Labor Relations portion at the same time that employees will be facing RIF, Transfer or Retirement? During all the chaos, it seems that the employees will not have any TRUST in a new Personnel System when their employment status is in question.
J. Ward Morrow: The RIF issue is a live issue. Although DOD claims to be keeping seniority and veterans preference, if you look at the proposed regulations, they almost totally do not. It is performance based almost exclusively. A one year employee with an outstanding rating is favored over a 20 year employee who had 19 years of outstanding ratings,but whose current rating is less than outstanding. Even if the 20 year employee is a veteran, it won't come into play unless they both have current outstanding ratings. This is really extreme on their part. They need to get serious about how RIF's will be handled.
At this critical stage in the war on terrorism and the need for armour by soldiers in the field, to be looking at rolling this out right now is in appropriate. With the BRAC situation, this added confusion will also make the situation far worse.
_______________________
Clifton, Va.:
In my 19 years of government service with DOD, federal employee unions have done nothing but make my job more difficult. DOD would be better off if it eliminated unions all together. Please name one thing any federal employee union has done in the last 19 years that benefitted me?
J. Ward Morrow: There are a number of very bad managers who share this view. They also oppose EEOC laws or anything that might bring fairness to the worksite.
Unions have been in the forefront on things like flextime, work at home, if you are a civilian employee the pay parity is putting 6% more in your pocket than you would have gotten from the administration bill. Unions have been the guarantee of the 40 hour work week and the weekend. I can assume you like weekends, if so thank your union.
There is always the private sector, where unions have the right to strike, which we do not have in the public sector.
_______________________
Stephen Barr:
Ward, on the issue of union involvement. Yesterday's House hearing left little doubt that the Pentagon stumbled coming out of the gate, but I came away thinking that the "meet and confer" process mandated by the law, which begins soon, will be the crucial phase for consideration of union comment. And where a lot of details will get hammered out. Am I right?
J. Ward Morrow: You are correct there are a lot of details to be worked out. DOD would be helpful if they made clear that this will take MUCH longer than 30 days to work through this. They took their time, 15 months to get this far, now when they finally begin to work with he unions they want to cram it into 30 days. 35 or 40 days are still not going to begin to do this. It would be helpful for them to note that going in. it would have moved much faster if the unions had been meaningful partners from the beginning,which we have always been willing to be.
_______________________
Silver Spring, Md.:
This is off topic. But what's going on inside the Office of Special Counsel? It's ironic that the Office charged with enforcing employee protections is accused of retaliating against whistleblowers. Is there anything that can be done?
J. Ward Morrow: That is a topic in need of serious review, but I will have to defer that one to another time.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Isn't it true that the reason your union and so many other unions object to NSPS is that it limits your power and authority in the Department of Defense process??? A process, in my opinion, that unions shouldn't be involved in anyway.
J. Ward Morrow: No. Keep in mind every police officer in NYC and every firefighter in NYC on 9/11 was a member of a bargaining unit and had union.DOD employees are patriotic American civil servants and deserving of fairness.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
I am a federal employee, and I am in favor of this new system. Know why? Because I am sick and tired of seeing the many, MANY employees (and don't delude yourself, there are many) who come into the office, chit chat for hours, scan the Internet, go to lunch, maybe get a little work in somewhere get the same within grade increases that others who work HARD ALL DAY AND PRODUCE RESULTS get. Unions fight to keep these poor employees in place, and unions go to bat when they get below outstanding reviews. Where's the fairness in that?
Stephen Barr:
Ward, this is a comment that I often hear from other employees. Do you think the union coalition would be more receptive to administration efforts aimed at emphasizing performance if the labor-management provisions had not been included?
J. Ward Morrow: Steve says this is the last one...
Very few union members file grievances. Unions spend very little of our effort on this. But just like public defenders we have the responsibility to represent the members. If you ever have a bad boss who unfairly treats you, you will want a good union representative. Much of our efforts have been to secure things like pay parity, the new dental benefits, and keeping decent health care benefits. These things benefit all employees and often even the managers benefit.
Certainly if the labor-relations provisions were reasonable it would be a big improvement. And the unions have been supportive aspects that will bring more market rate pay to the federal system. It is not the pay for performance concept that is problematic, it is the details of how you do it and how you make it fair and objective.
Thank you for this opportunity, hope we can do it again!
Ward Morrow
_______________________
