Federal Diary Live

The Post's Stephen Barr is the author of The Federal Diary, which runs Monday through Friday in the Business news section. Steve has been a reporter and editor at The Post since 1979, including stints as Federal Page editor, congressional editor and a National staff writer covering federal management and workplace issues. He began writing the column in May 2000, and takes the column live to answer your questions Wednesdays at noon ET.

Personnel Issues Find an Audience on Capitol Hill (Post, March 7)

The transcript follows.

____________________

Stephen Barr: Thanks to all joining in this discussion today. Congress is starting to review some federal workforce issues--such as pay raises, contracting out and reform efforts, such as the Defense Department's National Security Personnel System. At two House hearings I attended yesterday, it was interesting to see newly elected members of Congress trying to get a handle on the complexities of the government. With that, let's go on to the questions!

_______________________

Brentwood, Md.: Hi, Stephen. I'm so happy to have found your chat! I hope this question isn't too detailed. My husband just became employed by the federal government. He works in Washington and we live in Maryland. I understand that the state of Maryland requires insurers to cover certain procedures (infertility treatments, specifically). Would the federal insurance have to cover this, as we live in Maryland, or would it not apply because my husband works in Washington? Thanks!

Stephen Barr: Hi, Brentwood. Welcome aboard!

The Federal Employee Health Benefits Program operates under its own law and does not have to abide by state requirements or laws. My sense is that you'll have to abide by the coverage provided through your FEHBP plan. But I'm not a complete expert in this area, so I would make sure your spouse contacts his HR office for assistance. Best of luck!

_______________________

Bowie, Md.: We recently learned that the Dept of Commerce is making Microsofts Outlook its standard e-mail program and will be requiring all its agencies to switch. I shudder to think how much lost productivity (and maybe how many lost e-mails) there will be as my agency makes the switchover from Lotus Notes, which has been our agency's standard at least since I started almost 10 years ago. What, they couldn't read our e-mails downtown at DOC?

Stephen Barr: Sounds like one of those software integration deals to me. This IT stuff always makes me shudder! Getting trained on computers has never been my strong point.... Good luck with the switch over.

_______________________

Washington: Mr Barr -- what is the deal with Veteran's Preference? To make a long story short, three federal job offers tentatively have been extended then withdrawn because the hiring manager was obligated to hire the vet (even though in one case I was told flat-out that I was more qualified for the position). This seems to be a policy issue no one wants to even talk about, but I am frustrated and saddened that as a qualified job applicant I repeatedly have been turned away from public service. Is there any talk of reforming this system so that (gasp!) the most qualified applicant is the one ultimately hired? Thanks for taking my question -- I have been trying to get some sort of insight into this for months!

Stephen Barr: Yes, it certainly is a policy issue. Congress has directed the government to show a preference in hiring and many agencies try to give military veterans an edge in job competitions. Some agencies try to skirt the preference, assuming that veterans do not have the skills they need. Regardless, it is always a hot issue for agencies.

To some extent, your plight may be connected to the kind of hiring system being used by the agencies. One common approach calls for agencies to recommend three people for a job, and if a veteran gets passed over by the hiring manager, then the agency must tell the Office of Personnel Management why that happened. It's important to note that agencies are supposed to consider veterans only when meet the basic qualifications.

But, to circle back to the top of my response, this is a policy proclaimed by Congress, which believes the nation owes it to veterans because of their military service.

_______________________

Rockville, Md.: Who would ever have the gall to argue that Federal Employees salaries haven't fallen behind the private sector? New Federal employees won't be able to buy houses in most areas until the year 2025 (after they have saved for years and years). The situation is grave in the D.C. area. I have no idea what recruitment tool is out there to attract the best kids coming out of college with the current thinking that we will hire them at a GS 5 (or 7 or whatever) and have them "work" their way up to not being able to afford things, while their fellow classmates will get be able to afford their first home a few years out of college. The Federal government needs to hire some competent, motivated managers to make some changes. The me-first attitude in Congress needs to go. Think about the future! Pay people! It's that easy.

Stephen Barr: Thanks, Rockville! I remain eternally hopeful that OMB and OPM will try to rethink federal pay policy. Housing costs discourage many young people from relocating to the Washington area to take a federal job. Agencies can offer student-loan reimbursements and recruiting and retention incentives to make up for short falls in salary, but they don't seem to be widely used. Agencies don't have the money and don't seem to press their staffing needs with the Congress.

_______________________

Portland, Ore.: I will be in a meeting when you have the chat, so I will submit now: I saw your morning column, and as a DoD employee who will go through the NSPS conversion in April, I do not trust the system. In theory the idea of earning salary based on performance is a good idea -- but the system is seriously flawed. For many Defense civilians, their supervisors are military personnel, who have a very different system of rules. They are not held accountable to their evaluations.

I would feel more comfortable if the first line supervisor was a civilian, just like the system with government contractors. Only the very senior level personnel could fall under military supervisors(GS 12 level). The supervisors also need to be pure civilians, and not military retirees who have earned their military pension.

Here is a scenario that is a serious concern in the performance appraisal: With the military they tend to work longer hours while civilians generally are 40 hours per week. In the course of a year, many who work office jobs work about the same number of hours. If a project that you are expected to finish before you leave for the day occurs, you are not compensated for your time. Many allow themselves to be abused in this system, where some are only compensated for 40 hours but really put in 50-60 hours. They feel forced to do this if they want a decent performance appraisal.

Stephen Barr: Thanks, Portland, for your posting. NSPS is generating a lot of debate, and you touch on a sensitive issue -- is the 40-hour workweek obsolete, and what's to be done about it? The world of work is accelerating, and people often work from home on weekends and in evenings. My sense is that the top performance ratings are going to go to those who are creative, innovative, or just plain work longer hours.

_______________________

Warren, Mich.: Hi Steve. I cannot believe that our tax dollars continue to be wasted on unnecessary personnel system changes. DoD officials keep complaining about automatic raises -- there is no such thing. The annual GI is a cost-of-labor adjustment that does not even keep up with our increased costs for insurance, gas, food and so on. Don't you think it is time to treat federal employees like human beings instead of pawns?

Stephen Barr: Advocates for the NSPS contend it will promote improved communications between supervisors and employees. That seems like a worthy goal. The tougher question is how can Defense get employees to "buy in" to this new system.

_______________________

Washington: Having joined the government three years ago from the private sector, I didn't understand why so many feared "pay for performance." It's what I was used to ... however, after having been here three years, I can understand the sense of trepidation. I don't think that managers at the federal level are prepared for it -- is the government doing anything noticeable to prepare for this?

Stephen Barr: A good point. Defense and Homeland Security officials say that extensive training is under way to educate supervisors and employees about performance-based pay. The quality of this training is critical, of course, so I hope that the GAO or outside auditors are being tasked to ensure the training is more than adequate.

_______________________

Beltsville, Md.: In response to Washington, the first thing to get through your mind is that while the supervisor may be saying you are the best-qualified person for the job, it is only his/her opinion. If the veteran was on the certificate, than they had to have met the OPM basic qualifications and any agency-specific qualifications for the position. It's a judgment call as to who is the best person for the job from this point on -- decisions based on paper review of application, face-to-face interviews, reference checks. Veterans must meet all of the qualification requirements to get their preference.

Stephen Barr: Thanks, Beltsville.

_______________________

Northern Virginia: Just a comment on veteran's preference -- I also think we owe it to taxpayers to get the right people in the right jobs. I think if there are two equally qualified candidates, then the job probably should go to the veteran, but if there is a clear skill gap, we owe it to the public to hire the right person, regardless of veteran status.

Stephen Barr: Thanks, No. Va.

_______________________

Laurel, Md.: I had an e-mail exchange with a woman from our agency about a fellow employee who is hoping to retire before learning proper computer/Internet skills. Why are there federal employees who believe their lack of modern skills should not affect their job prospects? When should we start terminating these folks and letting them take their chances on the "outside"?

Stephen Barr: It is hard to believe in 2007 that anyone can function in a business environment without basic computer skills. This issue is one that can plunge us into a deep discussion on why managers tolerate employees who do not try to improve their skills....

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: In today's column I see that AFGE is calling for repeal of the NSPS. Do you think that will happen?

Stephen Barr: Not at all certain. It is difficult to reverse a law, and Congress will probably want to wait and see how a federal appeals court rules on key parts of the NSPS.

_______________________

Fairfax, Va.: When will the NSPS ruling be out?

Stephen Barr: Hopefully this month, but it could drag out into the summer. Judges set their own schedules.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Union leaders want an '08 raise higher than 3 percent? Really?

Stephen Barr: That's what they said. We are in the early part of the budget process, and union and White House views must be taken as opening bids, I suspect.

_______________________

Washington: I am a HR professional in the government, and the post from the applicant who wasn't selected because the manager "had to hire" the vet burns me up. Veterans don't make a certificate list unless they are qualified. The manager may have liked you better or liked your background, but that vet is no less qualified than you are -- plus the veteran put their life on the line to defend America's honor and our freedom. But you think you deserve the job more -- why? This is the Federal Government, all of us who work for the government are civil servants and it is our obligation to ensure that people who have fought for and defended America's freedoms have a job when they get home.

Stephen Barr: Thanks for that posting!

_______________________

Washington: Stephen, have you herd anything about Henry Waxman blaming the Walter Reed problems on the A-76 program?

Stephen Barr: I don't know that Rep. Waxman is blaming the Walter Reed situation on A-76 but he is looking to see if that, and perhaps the BRAC announcement, has made it more difficult for the Army to properly staff the outpatient services.

The A-76 process affected about 350 jobs as I recall and was a long and contentious affair, with decisions going back and forth up the chain of command on what to do. Del. Norton and Sen. Mikulski tried to sort out the confusion, and I'm sure they will be taking another look at it.

_______________________

Re: Portland: The 40-hour work week is obsolete, at least in my agency. There are people who do it, but they are seen as slackers and never get a raise. Frankly, it's not that our bosses intentionally are abusing us, it's that we don't have enough money or enough office space to hire the number of people we'd really need to get the job done in a 40-hour week. And that is with the abysmally low pay.

Stephen Barr: Thanks for your posting! Most companies understand that their employees work more than 40 hours a week at certain times of the year, and try to be flexible at other times on when people come and go from the office. I'm not sure how much flexibility the government enjoys here, but certainly an issue to explore, I would think.

_______________________

Bethesda, Md.: I would like to chime in on the stagnating wages. I started as a GS-5 with a college degree, simply to get a job (I should have been hired at least as a GS-6, but I wanted that toehold). I lived in a trailer 30 miles away from my job and was lucky to have found it and afforded it. That was (oh my god) 16 years ago. Now the many people who are telling people to "suck it up, tough it out, live with roommates!" often are the very same ones who scream NIMBY when young people try and do it. They moan about property value lost, noise, drama, etc.

We can't have it both ways. It's harder and harder to find affordable housing, and it's harder and harder to find shared housing that might prove affordable. And I'm not talking about the neighbors who have a really legitimate gripe about the noisiness, etc. (You can call the cops.) I don't want to say it should necessarily be easy, but it's really disingenuous and disheartening to hear how mean-spirited so many people who are not that old have become.

Sorry for the wordiness. I just feel badly that in order for me to give a helping hand to some of the new graduates who work in my lab, I have to lie and tell the neighbors they are my cousins in order to get around the zoning, and the nastiness. And these are nice twentysomethings...

Stephen Barr: Thanks for sharing this, Bethesda. Many of us in Washington got here before home prices soared, and have been more-or-less grandfathered into the real estate market. And, as you know, D.C. is becoming an increasingly affluent area, what with international businesses, etc. We can only hope that Congress permits agencies to step up to the plate and start offering higher pay to deserving rank and file.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: One problem with retention and recruitment bonuses is the way they are implemented, at least at my agency. We are in a crunch and need to hire something like 1,000 new employees each year for the next five years. In order to do that the agency is offering recruitment and retention bonuses to these new hires. This has caused huge resentment among those who have been here a while -- it means brand new employees are making more money than people with a few years' experience. Morale already was low, but things like this drive it even lower.

Stephen Barr: A good point, Arlington. Management needs to think carefully about what happens if perceptions develop that one group is getting outsized rewards over another.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Will you please explain to me what use the federal union is? They seem to be against any type of reform, unless it guarantees equal pay raises for everyone and 100 percent job security for all. Oh, that's right -- that's what we have now! But really, the federal unions have to get their heads out of their butts and realize that unless they want to go out of business as their membership retires in the next ten years, personnel reform has to happen. What's the average age of a union member anyway?

Stephen Barr: See the previous posting. Unions do a good job in asking questions about equity and fair treatment. Still, I agree with your notion that unions need to start looking to the future. The government is in the "knowledge" game these days, and that does not lend itself to the old-time union remedies. Federal managers and political appointees also have a role to play here, and that is in finding forums to willingly accept feedback from unions.

Don't know the average union age, but the average fed is about 47 years old. And new hires average 33 in age. Where are those hip youngsters in government?

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: In response to the question about Veterans preference, I have to say that I fully support it. As others have noted, the veteran has to be qualified for the job; at that point the veteran's preference kicks in to make them more competitive. As the child of a Vietnam veteran who was severely disabled in combat, I can tell you that no one wanted to hire my dad in 1970 when he was looking for his first job in the private sector. He looked for a job forever. He finally applied for a job at DOD, and with the veteran's preference, he got the job. He proceeded to have a very successful career in government for the next twenty years. I still believe that we owe veterans this benefit. As long as they meet the minimum qualifications, I have no problem with them getting a job based on their veterans preference over an equally -- or even slightly better -- qualified candidate with no veterans preference. It seems only fair.

Stephen Barr: Thank you. A fine testimonial.

_______________________

Clifton, Va.: Excuse me Washington, you may be a in HR, but you really don't know what you are talking about. My agency has to spend countless hours justifying not hiring the vet because there were better-qualified non-vet applicants. So in many cases the vet isn't "qualified" but has the points to be at the top of list. If they are qualified, they should get an interview, but not the job. Let the agency interview the top three candidates and pick the best one. And yeah, my girlfriend will be a vet in another year, and my dad was.

Stephen Barr: A good observation about the incentives at play here. Thanks.

_______________________

Another Rockville, Md.: It never ceases to amaze me how the semantics change once someone is hired. First the government wants to hire the "best and the brightest", but once they have 'em they call them by much more derogatory names, malign their characters, question their integrity and work ethics. Geez, for that kind of abuse and low pay I could have become a school teacher!

Stephen Barr: Oh dear. Thanks.

_______________________

Washington: To the HR professional: I find it disturbing that this is your mind set. As an HR professional your obligation is to make sure the most qualified person is hired for the job, not to bring in personal preferences.

Stephen Barr: The HR person was reflecting the intent of Congress, I think.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: I'm a federal retiree and have been waiting patiently for legislation to allow federal retirees to pay for their health plans with pre-tax dollars. This benefit was accorded to federal employees some time ago -- is anything happening on this? With the cost of health plans skyrocketing, this is becoming a big-money item!

Stephen Barr: Bills are being re-introduced on this issue. But the price tag may be too steep for Congress. Stay tuned.

_______________________

Washington: I am a licensed attorney currently working as a policy analyst. I'd like to switch agencies and am seeking attorney positions. How should I address this in my applications? The truth is I took my current job because I wanted to get into the federal government. Thanks for any help you can provide!

Stephen Barr: I'd just make it clear that you've decided to get back to your original passion--practicing law. Try to find elements of your current job that gave you good experience and insights that you might not have gained as only an entry-level lawyer. Best of luck!

_______________________

Dale City, Va.: Stephen, one of the problems with "pay for performance" is the favoritism it generates. Often an employee in our agency will get an award and a big bonus for doing what they were actually supposed to do. Some of them spend a lot of time visiting the boss's office being friendly rather than at their desk getting things done. These often are the people who work 50 or 60 hour weeks because they don't have enough time left after socializing to get the work done.

10 years ago our agency used performance-based ratings, but they changed to pass/fail because of this very real problem. Now we have switched back to the unfair rewards system again -- it is very frustrating for those of us who get our job done in a timely fashion without putting our faces in the boss's mind each day.

Stephen Barr: Good point, Dale City. It is my sense that with NSPS and other performance-based systems, employees are going to have to keep track of their accomplishments and achievements, learn how to write them up, and make sure they tout their experience and know-how at the right times. In the modern workplace, it's not enough to just do your job in a competent fashion. You've got to show you are the one that deserves to be given more challenges and responsibilities, and that you're the person for the future. With this approach, you usually get rewarded.

_______________________

San Francisco: With all due respect to the burned-up HR professional, it's not always true that the veteran is equally qualified. Because veterans are given additional "points" in the ranking (5 for non-disabled and 10 for disabled), the points might push them into a higher group of qualified applicants than their resume would warrant. Also, disabled vets who receive compensation go to the top of the list regardless and they block other candidates from consideration. Not all these vets are returning from active duty -- some may have served in the military years ago. In my experience, many selecting officials have become jaded about veterans preference for these reasons.

Stephen Barr: A good point. Thanks, San Fran.

_______________________

Stafford, Va.: Mr. Barr, thanks for all that you do to keep everyone in the loop. This is just a short note to tell you that I served in the U.S. Military from 1980 to 1988 and do not qualify for any type of veterans preference. The USAJOBS Web site has a very useful tool that will help you determine if you are eligible. Not all veterans are given preference, just those who are in the military during times of conflict or qualifications. I am glad to see that veterans who served in conflict are given some type of preference. I am a happy fed by the way, no complaints except for skimpy pay raises, low promotion rates and crummy health insurance. I keep hearing about the "baby boomers" and am hoping that they open up vacancies in the upper ranks.

Stephen Barr: Thanks for that reminder. And thanks for your service during peace time!

_______________________

Bethesda, Md.: Sometimes I wonder how HR can profess to know qualifications better than hiring managers. Maybe in some areas, but not all. I'm in a very rare field that spans several possible educational backgrounds -- the job series description even clearly says so. I have a Ph.D in one branch of the field, but it took me three tries to get in, all because HR said I wasn't qualified. The final time I added one extra word to my resume -- unrelated to my degrees, my training or my experience, but I magically was qualified in HR's eyes. Five straight years of cash awards and/or QSIs later, I'd say my entire office thinks I am qualified.

Stephen Barr: Thank you. HR people are in the position of doing a lot of screening and compliance work, while the manager is looking for someone who will get the job done. Those don't always square up.

_______________________

Pennsylvania: Well folks, as an outsider from government, it sounds to me like you're facing the same problems that the private sector is facing -- Stagnant wages, rising prices for food, gas and housing, etc. There is one difference: You get good benefits -- many working in the private sector does not.

Stephen Barr: Yes, that is one of the last fundamental differences between the public and private sectors. Companies are dropping retiree health care and scaling back on pensions. Still, promises geared to retirement do not always help agencies deal with today's staffing problems. Many young people these days don't expect to put in a full career with one employer.

_______________________

Washington: I saw your reference to "performance turn" used by the Harvard professor, Mr. Kelman, to describe how agencies are headed toward performance management. After Katrina, Iraq war planning and now Walter Reed, isn't this an issue for the next White House to tackle? Thanks.

Stephen Barr: This is a complicated issue, and I'm running out of time here. Basically, I think we need more research on performance and how it is defined for the federal workplace. It could be that we find the issues really involve leadership, and that more attention needs to be put into developing good leaders inside agencies.

_______________________

Arlington, Virginia: To the person who asked about Federal Health Benefits covering infertility treatments -- there are several options available to federal employees that cover infertility treatments at 50 percent (actually tracking the Maryland statute). Aetna Open Access and MDIPA are two of them.

Stephen Barr: Thanks for that advice, Arlington.

_______________________

FEEA Scholarships: Hi Steve -- Robyn Kehoe from the Federal Employee Education and Assistance Fund, here, wanting to remind federal employees that FEEA scholarship applications are due by March 30 this year. The program is merit-based and open to civilian feds, their spouses and college-age children. More info and a downloadable application are available on FEEA's Web site. Thanks!

Stephen Barr: Robyn, thanks for writing in to remind us that scholarship season is upon us!

_______________________

Washington: I was the original poster of the Vet's Pref. question -- before everyone flames my question (I guess this is why I have had such problems finding out the story behind the policy), just know that I am repeating what I was told by the hiring manager. Yes, their views are subjective, but you know what? So are the ratings for KSAs, as I have been told by several government hiring managers! Whether or not veterans deserve jobs when they come home is not the issue here -- hiring the most qualified people for the jobs is.

Stephen Barr: Since you triggered a discussion today, we'll give you the last word. It is a difficult subject to parse in a forum like this, but a worthy issue to debate, nonetheless.

Once again, we've run out of time today. Thanks for your thoughts and insights, and we'll see you back here at noon next Wednesday!

_______________________

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. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.