This fall, it appears we will witness a new skirmish in the decades-long battle over whether and how to overhaul federal personnel rules.

Most experts (and many federal employees, for that matter) agree the government is abysmal at hiring, assigning, rating, compensating, training, developing, disciplining and firing employees. Still, unions continue to fight hard to fend off any changes to federal personnel rules and the General Schedule pay and classification system.

The latest effort comes from the Defense Department, which last month foreshadowed plans to push reforms in 18 areas, most of which would affect DoD civilians. These reform areas include: "Focus on Millennial recruiting," "hold low performers accountable," "increase pay flexibilities," "expand DoD Title 10 authority," and "employ big data to inform personnel decisions."

DoD leaders, who must manage a vast and diverse workforce that is constantly in flux, have long chafed at the inflexibility of federal personnel rules. But DoD's size, clout and national security mission has empowered it over the years to be on the vanguard of numerous personnel reforms — including the launch of some high-profile performance-based pay systems — with mixed results.

Predictably and unfortunately, the American Federation of Government Employees appears intent on playing the role of obstructionist with this latest effort, slamming it as "nothing more than a bad flashback," a reference to DoD's short-lived National Security Personnel System effort that was repealed by Congress in 2009.

The case for change is overwhelmingly strong: The professional makeup of the federal workforce today is radically different than it was more than 60 years ago when the federal personnel system was designed, and it now requires very different approaches and tools. Back then, the workforce was mostly clerical; the government's role in society was smaller and less complex. Today, the workforce is comprised mostly of highly educated people with specialized skills, and many of them are also highly prized in the commercial and nonprofit sectors. Federal agencies need far more authority and flexibility today to manage that diverse array of specialized talent.

Over the years, many agencies — due to the unique recruiting and retention challenges they face — have cut deals with Congress to receive special hiring authorities and higher pay rates not otherwise allowed under the rigid General Schedule pay and classification system. The result today is a mishmash of "haves" and "have nots" within government in which agencies not only compete with the private sector for top talent, but with each other.

Most of the specifics we have seen so far of the DoD reform proposals look intriguing. For example, expanding the recruitment of Millennials and college graduates is vital. So is creating more opportunities to bring in young people with STEM skills.

Raising caps on buyouts and retention incentive is needed to enable a more well-managed shaping of the workforce. And reductions-in-force priorities should be pegged to performance and not tenure. It is also a good idea to link supervisor performance ratings to the handling of poor performers while also creating a more streamlined approach to removing poor performers, as the DoD proposal calls for.

Converting the General Schedule into a handful of broad pay bands is sorely needed to provide greater pay flexibility where needed. Creating market-based compensation systems for select occupational categories is vital to attracting people with sought-after computer, science, engineering and other skills.  All of these ideas and more are embodied in the Pentagon reform plan.

Defense Secretary Ashton Carter deserves big credit for being willing to jump into the crucible of federal pay and personnel reform. But he has a very short window to make something happen; if history is any guide, his chances of success are slim.  Still, I applaud the fact that there continue to be federal leaders like Carter willing to take on this most challenging of federal problems. That there are is a testament to how critical the need is for reform.

As the Defense Department moves forward on this, we need to be mindful that the status quo is further jeopardizing the government's ability to attract and retain the best talent available.

Share:
In Other News
Load More