December 29, 2005
Pentagon postpones training on personnel system
By Karen Rutzick
Personnel reform at the Defense Department hit another bump last week when officials halted training on the new pay-for-performance system to allow more time to evaluate it and make changes.
In a Dec. 23 letter, a National Security Personnel System official told program managers to stop all content-specific NSPS training for January at least.
"We need more time to focus on simplifying the performance management design, getting performance objectives right, and ensuring the system is simple, clear and understandable," wrote Mary Lacey, program executive officer for NSPS.
The regulations governing the system restrict union bargaining rights, eliminate the decades-old General Schedule in favor of broad paybands and require pay raises to be based on rigorous performance evaluations.
A group of 10 unions filed a lawsuit soon after the regulations were published. That lawsuit focuses on union rights, rather than human resources. The two sides had agreed that the department could continue training its employees on NSPS in the run-up to court proceedings.
Lacey did not provide a specific reason for this latest delay. In preparing for the transition to the new system, the department "received much feedback ... that [led] us to conclude" more time was necessary, she wrote. A spokeswoman for the NSPS said she could not give any further details.
Information about any NSPS design changes will come in early January, Lacey said.
"We want to ensure that our employees, supervisors and leaders fully understand this system and have the tools to succeed in a results-focused, performance-based environment," she wrote.
Lacey encouraged program managers to continue training on soft skills such as communicating with employees about the changes. Earlier this month, the Air Force announced that it had awarded a $24.8 million contract to Centre Consulting of Vienna, Va., to help managers improve those skills.
December 22, 2005
COURT SETS CAP FOR MAXHR BRIEFS
Source: Fednews-online
December 22, 2005
After months of uncertainty, the fate of the Department of Homeland Security's MaxHR personnel system may soon be known.
Earlier this week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia set a Feb. 27 deadline for filing appeals in the ongoing case.
On Nov. 23, DHS filed a motion to expedite its appeal of U.S. District Court Judge Rosemary Collyer's ruling that barred the Department from implementing its proposed personnel system. Within days, the American Federation of Government Employees and the National Treasury Employees Union filed an opposition to the motion.
DHS had intended to begin implementing MaxHR's performance management components on Aug. 15, before Collyer deemed sections of the personnel system illegal.
The Department then filed a motion in late August to narrow Collyer's decision. NTEU and AFGE countered with a motion to block the DHS motion in early September.
On Sept. 9, DHS circulated an internal memo stating MaxHR's performance-based pay components would be delayed up to 12 months.
DHS was slated to move headquarters, Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection, Science and Technology, Emergency Preparedness and Response and Federal Law Enforcement Training Center employees into MaxHR's pay-for-performance system by January 2006, but will not do so until January 2007. MaxHR's initial pay changes have also been bumped from January 2007 to January 2008.
MaxHR's pay-for-performance components are separate from the performance management components.
For more information about the continuing legal saga, see DHS FILES NOTICE OF APPEAL RULING ON MAXHR, UNIONS ANNOUNCE THEIR CROSS APPEAL at
http://www.fednews-online.com/view_publication.aspx?publicationId=8607
December 22, 2005
Bush approves 3.1 percent pay raise
By Karen Rutzick
Source: GovExec.com
December 22, 2005
President Bush issued an executive order Thursday evening formally granting white-collar federal employees a 3.1 percent average pay raise in 2006.
The pay increase, which goes into effect in the first pay period of the new year, consists of a 2.1 percent across-the-board pay raise coupled with an average 1 percent adjustment varying by locality. In the Washington area, for example, employees will receive a total raise of 3.44 percent.
The locality pay rates issued in connection with the order follow recommendations issued by the Federal Salary Council earlier this year. To see the 2006 pay tables, including locality pay differentials, click here.
The 3.1 percent raise was included in the fiscal 2006 Transportation-Treasury appropriations measure (H.R. 3058), which Bush signed into law on Nov. 30.
The president had initially proposed a 2.3 percent civilian increase in his fiscal 2006 budget, but as in years past, acquiesced to a congressional push for pay parity between civilian federal workers and military service members.
In a policy statement issued this summer, the White House said it strongly opposed the 3.1 percent raise for civilians because it would cost almost $1 billion more than the president's proposal.
Locality-based raises became a fixture of federal pay in 1994, following implementation of the 1990 Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act. The act's proponents identified a gap between public and private sector salaries of about 30 percent. The act was designed to close the gap to about 5 percent, but raises under the law have never been fully funded.
December 20, 2005
DOD, UNIONS MEET TO DISCUSS NSPS
Source: Fednews-online.com
Representatives from the Department of Defense and a coalition of 36 unions have wrapped up a series of meetings in which they discussed the National Security Personnel System.
The two sides met in early December and again last week to discuss seven recently-released NSPS Implementing Issues.
"We feel the meetings were very informative, and we hope the unions did also," said Joyce Frank, spokeswoman for DoD. "We've identified some issues we need to clarify," said Frank, adding that the meetings "provided a lot of give and take."
Union representatives were not as upbeat about the meetings.
"From the beginning, DoD's concept of conferring with the unions has been to tell us it's either too early or too late to meet. Now they are trying to give us the worst of both worlds. After six months of dancing around all the details of the new NSPS, DoD has dropped four-hundred pages of technical rules and concepts on us and unilaterally mandated that we respond after the holidays. Truly, they give new meaning to the concept of bad faith," said Mark Roth, general counsel to the American Federation of Government Employees.
According to DoD, the unions have until the end of the year to submit questions and concerns about NSPS in writing. The Department extended the deadline for correspondence concerning Workforce Shaping, which discusses how DoD may realigned its civilian positions, until mid-January. Frank also said that DoD will be available for conference calls through the end of the year.
DoD released the long-awaited regulations in late October and published more details in November.
Two weeks ago, DoD posted a 25-page primer of the personnel system's proposed human capital components. The document defines key terms and the system's compensation structure, staffing flexibilities and performance management components.
DoD originally had wanted to begin implementing NSPS last month, but delayed the personnel system until Feb. 1, 2006, at the earliest. A coalition of federal unions, led by AFGE, has filed a lawsuit seeking to derail the personnel system. (See DoD DELAYS NSPS UNTIL FEBRUARY at
http://www.fednews-online.com/view_publication.aspx?publicationId=8618.)
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia will begin hearing the case Jan. 24, 2006.
More information about NSPS can be found at http://www.cpms.osd.mil/nsps/index.html
December 20, 2005
\Congress Clamps a Lid on Outsourcing of Government Work
Source: The Washington Post
By Stephen Barr
Congress, in an effort to protect federal jobs, has placed restrictions on the Bush administration's program that uses cost-comparison studies to determine whether "commercial" activities performed by the government should be turned over to contractors.
One of the more significant curbs was contained in the fiscal 2006 spending bill for the departments of Transportation, Treasury and Housing and Urban Development. The provision applies across the government -- except for the Defense Department and the Transportation Security Administration's airport screener operation -- and became law Nov. 30.
The fiscal 2006 defense spending bill, approved by the House yesterday and sent to the Senate, would place a similar limit on the Defense Department's conversion of federal jobs to contractor jobs.
The president's "competitive sourcing" initiative calls for studies to determine whether certain types of work performed by federal employees can be done by the private sector at less cost. In policy statements, the White House has pointed out that job competitions conducted in fiscal 2003 and 2004 are projected to produce five-year savings totaling $2.5 billion. Federal employees have won 90 percent of the job competitions, officials also point out.
But federal unions have lobbied against the job competitions, arguing that the rules are tilted against employees and that estimates of cost savings are overstated or cannot be proved. Industry groups contend that agencies should be able to outsource work if it helps them manage their budgets or better accomplish their goals.
The new law will allow 10 or more federal employees to set up a "most efficient organization" to bid against contractors for the government work. Previously, only groups representing at least 65 federal employees could compete.
The law also prohibits agencies from contracting out activities involving 10 or more federal jobs unless the contractor's bid comes in $10 million or 10 percent lower.
Although President Bush 's senior advisers had warned of a possible veto if the restrictions on outsourcing were adopted, a spokesman at the Office of Management and Budget said the administration "determined that these provisions do not significantly erode the president's management agenda."
Alex Conant , the OMB spokesman, said officials "will monitor the impact" of the limits on competitive sourcing and, if found too restrictive, will work with Congress "to fix them." Conant said OMB officials are drafting additional guidelines for agencies "to help them successfully compete work."
The spending bill for the Defense Department carries provisions similar to the Transportation-Treasury law. It goes a step further, however, by including a section that would not permit contractors to gain an advantage in their bids if they offer less generous health insurance benefits than those paid by the Defense Department on behalf of its civil service employees.
December 14, 2005,
AFGE Local 896 unanimously voted to merge with Local 1923.
Local 896 is located at the Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland. They have over 150 members with a bargaining unit of 500 civil service, wage grade, Naval District Washington, commissary and non-appropriated funded employees. There is also a large group of unorganized GS employees located at the Academy.
We would especially like to thank Local 896 President Edward Gough, all of the officers and members for their support.
We welcome Local 896 to our growing family of union activists. A celebration party is currently being planned shortly after the New Year.
December 14, 2005
A message from SSA Council 220 President, Witold Skwierczynski on Appropriations FY 06
AFGE Activists:
The Conference Committee for Labor, DHHS, Education and related Agencies voted on a conference committee report late Monday night. The vote was on party lines. The conference committee voted to cut $204 million from SSA administrative budget in FY 2006. Combined with the President's decision to cut over 2000 work years in FY06, the additional $294 million reduction could lead to another 2000 work year cut . Thus we face a budget with up to 4000 less employees and the task of administering a new Medicare Part D program. This is simply outrageous.
Dana Duggins and Deb Fredericksen have spent the last 2 days lobbying to try to prevent this disaster. I joined them yesterday. They will continue their work on the Hill today.
Sources are informing us that the Republican caucus will vote as a block to enact this appropriation. The Senate can still be swayed.
Please shift all lobbying efforts to the Senate and ask your Senators to oppose the conference committee report on the Labor, DHHS, Education and related agencies Appropriation. Tell them to reject the reduction in administrative expenses for SSA and to support, at minimum, the President's budget. Ask them to offer an amendment to restore the $204 million cut by the conference committee.
Witold Skwierczynski
December 14, 2005
Talks on Defense personnel system break down
By Karen Rutzick
Source: GovExec.com
A coalition of 36 Defense Department unions boycotted scheduled discussions over the Pentagon's new personnel system this week, citing insufficient time to prepare.
The no-show widened the rift between Pentagon officials and unions over the National Security Personnel System. This week's talks were the final opportunity for union contribution before the system's tentative February implementation.
The Pentagon scheduled the Dec. 13 and Dec. 14 meetings to gain union input on hundreds of pages of documents released in late November. The documents provide details on how the department plans to implement pay for performance and other aspects of the reforms.
But the union coalition said there was not enough time to read, analyze and prepare suggestions on the particulars of the personnel system, which replaces the General Schedule with broad salary ranges and eliminates annual raises in favor of performance- and market-based salary increases.
A number of unions in the coalition filed a lawsuit in November in which they accused the Pentagon of failing to seek adequate union input while creating NSPS.
The lawsuit also addressed the labor relations portion of the reforms, but it did not touch on the human resources details included in the documents, known as "implementing issuances."
After quietly releasing the issuances Nov. 23 on the NSPS Web site, the Pentagon briefed the unions on Dec. 1 and Dec. 2.
NSPS officials planned follow-up meetings for Dec. 13 and Dec. 14 "to provide employee representatives an opportunity to discuss their views and recommendations with DoD officials on the implementing issuances," a Dec. 7 letter from NSPS program executive officer Mary Lacey to union leader Byron Charlton stated.
At the initial NSPS briefing, union representatives had told Lacey that two weeks was not enough time to read and analyze the documents, especially because of the holidays, and had proposed meetings Jan. 9-11. But Lacey denied that request in her letter.
The Pentagon did arrange an additional teleconference for Dec. 22 and extended the deadline for submitting written comments on most of the documents from Dec. 23 to Dec. 30.
"We believe the schedule provides a fair and reasonable opportunity for views and recommendations to be submitted and considered," NSPS spokesperson Joyce Frank said.
Coalition leaders disagree.
"If the collaborative process is to be a participatory practice of all parties, we insist on consulting on schedules that accommodate the needs of management and the [coalition] alike," Charlton said. "Again, the Pentagon is displaying their disregard for the legitimate worker representatives."
David Walker, the head of the Government Accountability Office and a leader in federal personnel reforms, said a breakdown in employee involvement at this stage could be damaging to the overall success of NSPS.
"There's going to be controversy about whatever changes you're going to make," Walker said. "That's why it's all the more important to have a process that has integrity so at the end of the day whether people may or may not like the changes, at least they feel the process had integrity. That can make all the difference."
In her letter, Lacey disagreed with the unions' contention that the latest documents contain a lot of new material. Many of the concepts were previously discussed with unions at meetings last spring, she said.
Coalition spokesperson Matt Biggs said the unions still hope to find a mutually agreeable time to meet.
"What we're hoping for and expecting from their side is to truly collaborate with us and come to a mutual timeframe where we can meet," Biggs said. "It's just unreasonable [to] expect us to go over 400 pages of documents that of course they've been working on for years."
December 7, 2005
DOD HEADED BACK TO COURT
Source: FedNews Online
The Department of Defense will soon be defending the National Security Personnel System on a new front.
The Federal Education Association announced Tuesday it is suing DoD over the inclusion of approximately 8,000 teachers and educational support personnel who teach in DoD-operated schools on foreign and domestic military bases.
The suit, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, alleges the education personnel are "no more involved in national security operations than are the public school teachers who teach a majority of DoD dependents" and that including these employees in NSPS violates the Defense Department Overseas Teachers Pay and Personnel Practices Act.
The affected educational personnel are in either the Department of Defense Dependents Schools or the Department of Defense Domestic Dependent Elementary and Secondary Schools. Both groups are a part of the Department of Defense Education Activity and are not included in the general schedule. The schedule C employees are regulated by the Defense Department Overseas Teachers Pay and Personnel Practices Act.
As required by the Act, DoD teachers' salaries must be equal to teachers' average salaries in U.S. urban school districts.
According to a Government Accountability Office report released in December 2002, DoD teachers' compensation compared "favorably to that of U.S. teachers" and that compensation packages were adequate to recruit and retain necessary well-qualified teachers.
The GAO report can be found at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0319.pdf.
