December 21, 2006
Bush issues order for 2.2 percent pay raise
Source: GovExec.com
By Karen Rutzick
President Bush issued an executive order Thursday morning officially granting white-collar federal employees a 2.2 percent pay raise in 2007.
Federal employees can expect the increase to be factored into their first paycheck of the new year, with the overall raise split between a 1.7 percent across-the-board raise and a 0.5 percent adjustment that will vary by locality.
For 2007, federal officials have changed the formula under which locality differentials are distributed, awarding more money to cities with larger pay gaps between the private and public sectors. Employees in the Washington area will receive a 2.64 percent raise. Those in New York will get 3.03 percent; in Boston, 2.53 percent; and in San Diego, 2.68 percent. In areas outside of major cities, employees will receive a 1.81 percent total raise.
The 2007 pay tables, including the locality pay differentials, can be found here.
Congress has not officially passed a civilian pay raise for 2007, so Bush's executive order could be supplanted by a move from lawmakers, prompting a retroactive additional pay hike. But since lawmakers already passed a 2.2 percent raise for the military, it is unlikely that civilians will see the 2.7 percent raise their unions and professional groups advocated.
Soon-to-be House Majority Leader Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., released a statement Thursday blaming the Republican Congress for letting the 2.2 percent raise slip through.
"The failure of the 109th Congress to pass all but two spending bills for fiscal year 2007 has given the administration the opportunity to mandate the lowest annual raise in almost 20 years," Hoyer said.
Still, even if Congress had finished its spending bills, it is not clear that a 2.7 percent raise would have been passed for civilians.
"We recognize that if the military is at 2.2 percent, it will be very, very difficult to have anything else enacted," said Colleen Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union. "We're going to do everything we can once the new Congress convenes."
This was also the first year that the president proposed an equal raise -- 2.2 percent -- for both the military and civilians. Federal employee groups and members of Congress have long advocated for pay parity between the two.
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 18, 2006
Unions Hope Democrats Will Counter GOP Policy Changes
As a member of the Democratic minority, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.) fought a Bush administration policy that increasingly opened up federal jobs to private contracting.
Although he and colleagues had some success, Van Hollen said that when the 110th Congress takes over next month and the Democrats are in the majority, he will have greater ability to combat the administration's policies on federal employees. "It's had a demoralizing effect on the federal workforce," he said. "I do think now we're in a better position to fix things."
For the past six years, unions that represent most federal employees have argued that the Bush administration has been hostile to the needs of workers -- keeping pay raises low, trying to prevent employees from organizing in the departments of Defense and Homeland Security, and outsourcing government jobs to the private sector.
Now, the change in control of Congress gives unions much more powerful allies in the legislative branch. Democratic lawmakers pledge to work on issues of central concern to the unions, but the administration outlines other priorities for the workforce and disputes any notion it has not pursued a course beneficial to workers.
The election of Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) as majority leader is seen as a boon for federal workers. Hoyer, who will be the House's second most powerful figure, represents Southern Maryland's 5th Congressional District, home to thousands of government employees.
Hoyer said he will work to create a "more cooperative relationship with the White House" to ensure pay raises and to contain rising health premiums. While he praised several Republican colleagues, such as Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (Va.), outgoing chairman of the Government Reform Committee, Hoyer said: "Republicans made it much harder to ensure federal employees received fair and competitive annual pay adjustments. . . . They also did virtually nothing to help resist the White House effort to outsource federal jobs to private contractors."
John Gage, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees, said that as soon as the Bush administration came to power in 2001, it wiped out "our partnerships with agencies, and since that time our ability to sit down with the agencies and work out problems and differences has really declined." AFGE is the largest union of government employees, representing 700,000 federal and D.C. government workers.
With the new Congress, Gage said, "we're hoping not only we'll have more access to committees and Congress, but that word will get down to the political appointees in the departments."
Labor unions were a major source of support to Democrats in the midterm elections. The AFL-CIO spent roughly $40 million on a get-out-the-vote operation, and union members contributed substantial sums to Democratic candidates. Hoyer was not in a competitive race but received more than $300,000 in money from labor-affiliated political action committees.
Clay Johnson III, deputy director for management at the Office of Management and Budget, called labor's criticisms of the administration "rhetoric."
"The idea that management would be hostile to employees is just foreign to me," Johnson said. "Everybody's focused on what we can do that's smart and professional and effective, to make sure we have the best and most effective workforce possible."
Johnson said the administration's goal in its final two years is to strengthen a management system that rewards employees who perform exceptionally. "I believe that employees want to be respected. They want to be challenged. They want to be held accountable. They want to grow professionally," he said.
According to the unions, federal workers have more pressing needs.
"We expect the Democratic Congress to support the federal employees with regard to wages, health insurance and retirement," said Beth Moten, AFGE's legislative and political director. "We expect them to support federal bargaining rights, and we expect them to work for reforms so that federal workers don't lose their jobs because of procedures or political influence."
No issue has been more divisive than "contracting out," the phrase critics use to describe the outsourcing of government jobs to private contractors. Unions have fought efforts to transfer jobs at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, the Internal Revenue Service and elsewhere. Colleen M. Kelley, national president of the National Treasury Employees Union, said one worrisome trend is the IRS's interest in using private debt-collection agencies. "There are going to be problems with taxpayer privacy," she said.
In 2003, the administration revised Circular A-76, which lays out the rules for job competitions, to direct agencies to evaluate whether more jobs could be privatized. The effort has faced stiff resistance on Capitol Hill. Democrats have argued that agencies are under pressure to privatize jobs that should be confined to government workers.
"I am not opposed to privatization, but if it occurs with federal jobs, then it must be legal and fair," said Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.), incoming chairman of the Appropriations subcommittee on commerce, justice and science, which will have authority over many of these issues. She also has many government employees as constituents.
The debate over privatization, among other disputes, is occurring against a backdrop of profound demographic change in the civil service. In the next 10 years, as much as 60 percent of the government's 1.8 million workers will become eligible to retire. "The long-term challenge for the federal government is to continue to attract the best and the brightest people. We've got to make sure we can replenish the federal workforce," Van Hollen said.
December 15, 2006
SSA bracing for furlough as funding is delayed
Federal Workers: Melissa Harris
Source: The Baltimore Sun
The Social Security Administration may still have to close offices nationwide for several days next year after the Republican-led Congress failed to act on nine of the 11 spending bills for 2007 and incoming Democratic leaders announced that they would hold spending at current levels until Oct. 1.
Agency spokesman Mark Lassiter said this week that extending 2006 spending levels through the entire 2007 fiscal year would "leave the agency open for the furlough."
When Congress returns in January, Lassiter said, one way to avoid sending workers home without pay would be to set Social Security spending at $9.29 billion, the amount approved by a House subcommittee for 2007 and $146 million more than what the agency is operating with now.
Outgoing Social Security Commissioner Jo Anne B. Barnhart said in an interview last week that once Congress dips below that figure, "there's no place left to give."
Barnhart has been warning of a potential furlough since September, which she characterized as the culmination of Congress allotting the agency less than the president requested for five straight years.
"Let me assure you, there is no strategy here," said Barnhart, a former congressional staffer. "As the person who's responsible for a program that delivers benefits to 48 million people, I think it's my responsibility to make sure Congress understands the consequences of its planned actions. If I had waited until after Congress signed off on appropriations bills and said, 'Gee, that's not enough money. We need to do a furlough.' I think they'd be a little annoyed with me."
Barnhart said that if Congress had supported the president's requests, people applying for disability benefits and challenging denials would not be faced with the long delays they are experiencing now.
Lassiter said Wednesday that the agency has instituted a hiring freeze until at least Feb. 15, almost a month after Barnhart's term expires. The agency had been hiring one employee for every three who left.
"The point is, there's a very direct correlation between service and getting the president's request and not getting the president's request," Barnhart said.
Until late last week, when the spending bills failed to get off the Senate floor, the agency's lobbying efforts had been gaining ground with 54 senators, including 12 Republicans, sending a letter to the chamber's leadership calling for enough money to avoid service disruptions.
"On the philosophical level, I certainly feel the agency is enjoying a victory, but on the practical side we're still piling on," Barnhart said. "We could absorb the House's proposal, but it's not going to be an ideal situation by any stretch of the imagination."
Richard Warsinskey, president of the National Council of Social Security Management Associations, said that agency budget officials estimate that for every $20 million the agency loses from the House's 2007 budget proposal, offices would shut down for one day.
"So if we stick with our current funding level, we're looking at a seven- or eight-day furlough," Warsinskey said. "It's not looking good."
December 12, 2006
GATES COMMITTED TO NSPS
Source: Fednews-online
A change in leadership at the Department of Defense will not lead to a departure from DoD's migration to a new personnel system.
Testimony released last week from recently-confirmed Defense Secretary Robert Gates reveals his stance on the contentious National Security Personnel System. (See SENATE APPROVES GATES at http://www.fednews-online.com/?publicationId=9830.)
"Reforming civil service rules to make our civilian workforce more adaptable, flexible and agile is critical to the future of the Department. I believe NSPS is integral to the Department's Human Capital Strategy of developing the right mix of people and skills across the Total Force. If confirmed, I will review the NSPS program to see if any further changes are required," wrote Gates.
Gates' response was directed at question from Sen. Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii, that concerned whether the ongoing lawsuit over the pay-for-performance system would affect its implementation.
Representatives from DoD and a coalition of unions were in court Monday appealing a February ruling that halted implementation of the NSPS's adverse actions, appeals and labor-management relations subparts. (See NSPS APPEAL BEGINS TODAY at http://www.fednews-online.com/?publicationId=9832.)
NSPS is a performance-based human capital system that would affect approximately 700,000 DoD civilian employees' pay and classification, performance management, hiring, workforce shaping, disciplinary matters, appeals procedures and labor-management relations.
Implemented in "Spirals", at least 11,000 DoD civilian employees are currently covered by the System. Spiral 1.2 will bring an additional 66,500 employees into the system by the end of next month.
December 11, 2006
VA plans pay-for-performance effort in ’07
By TIM KAUFFMAN
Source: FederalTimes.com
The Bush administration’s attempt to win congressional authority to expand pay reforms beyond the Defense and Homeland Security departments has stalled, but that hasn’t deterred some agencies from moving forward on their own.
Several agencies, including the Veterans Affairs Department, are developing plans to move some of their employees into performance-based pay systems using an existing authority that allows agencies to test alternative personnel approaches, said Doris Hausser, senior policy adviser to Office of Personnel Management Director Linda Springer.
VA hopes to move about 750 employees into a pay-for-performance system under a so-called demonstration project in 2007 and pay them performance-based raises beginning in 2008. Money ordinarily spent on annual pay raises, within-grade increases and quality step increases would be pooled to reward employees in the demo based on their performance ratings.
Hausser declined to name the other agencies that are working on demo projects, but said in the past year OPM has fielded an increasing number of queries from agencies interested in testing alternative pay systems for their workers.
Interest in the demonstration projects has surged and waned over the years, Hausser said. “Relatively speaking, right now we’re in a period where there’s a little higher level of interest,” she said.
Demonstration projects are a proven way of trying out different methods of paying and evaluating workers that can lead to permanent changes. The Defense Department parlayed its years of experience operating various demonstration projects into the National Security Personnel System, which ultimately could cover 650,000 civilian workers.
Congress has shown little interest in approving similar reforms for other agencies, however. That’s left proponents of performance-based pay systems searching for other ways to move forward with reforms, and demonstration projects fit the bill.
“It’s actually a scenario that some champions of change in the government actually describe as a good way to proceed,” Hausser said.
One of those proponents is Allen Pittman, VA’s assistant secretary for human resources and administration and chief human capital officer. Pittman spent 35 years in the private sector before joining VA two years ago.
He said moving to a performance-based pay system will be critical if the government expects to compete with the private sector for new hires.
“The merit system within the government is absolutely wonderful, needs to be supported and need not be changed. However, we have to move to the point where we have an environment that’s conducive to the recruiting of private-sector employees,” Pittman said. “Part of that is recognizing performance.”
VA’s project is patterned on the performance system already used for VA’s 300 senior executives. The project initially will cover nonbargaining unit GS employees in more than 35 occupations, mostly located in the Washington area, although Pittman said he hopes and expects some union workers to participate. About 80 percent of VA’s 240,000 employees are unionized.
VA intends to publish details of the demo project in the Federal Register by April 1, he said.
OPM has authority to approve demonstration projects for up to 10 agencies at a time. Currently, there are only two active demo projects: one at the Commerce Department that involves about 4,300 employees, and another covering more than 8,500 acquisition and support workers at Defense.
Hausser said interest in demonstration projects picked up after OPM released a report in October 2005 detailing ongoing demonstration projects and other alternative personnel systems. Higher interest won’t necessarily translate into more projects taking effect anytime soon, however. She said agencies frequently discover demonstration projects are more complex than they assumed.
“What often becomes clear is that they entail a level of effort that people don’t quite understand when they’re starting,” she said.
VA already has laid the groundwork for moving all employees to a performance-based personnel system. This year, for the first time, all employees will be evaluated under a five-tier appraisal system instead of the old pass-fail system. The new system will allow managers to differentiate between employees performing at different levels, rewarding high achievers with larger bonuses and more training and advancement opportunities, Pittman said.
VA has spent a lot of time preparing brochures, videos and training sessions to explain the new appraisal system to employees and supervisors. Employees are being instructed in how to appraise their own performance, how to establish measurable goals and how to communicate with their supervisors during their annual appraisals.
“It requires a tremendous amount of training and understanding, but that has to happen,” he said.
December 11, 2006
NSPS APPEAL BEGINS TODAY
Source: fednews-online.com
Representatives from the Department of Defense and a coalition of unions are in court today contesting DoD's pay-for-performance personnel system.
In February 2006, a federal judge ruled that various parts of DoD's National Security Personnel System violate the law that created the pay-for-performance based personnel system and ordered DoD to halt implementation of the system's adverse actions, appeals and labor-management relations subparts.
Judge Emmet Sullivan ruled in DoD's favor in two of the five contested issues: DoD satisfied its statutory obligation to collaborate with the unions and DoD legally departed from chapter 71 of the Federal Labor Relations Statute. Sullivan, however, found credence in three of AFGE's arguments:
* NSPS fails to ensure collective bargaining. DoD "eviscerated collective bargaining rights with regulations nearly identical to those invalidated by [NTEU v. Chertoff], despite virtually identical requirements by Congress that each human resources management system ensure collective bargaining," said Sullivan, whose opinion borrowed heavily from the recent case against the Department of Homeland Security's personnel system, MaxHR. (See COLLYER RETAINS JURISDICTION IN MAXHR CASE at http://www.fednews-online.com/?publicationId=9769.)
* The National Security Labor Relations Board does not meet Congress' requirement for "independent third party review" of labor relations decisions. Sullivan stated that although NSLRB decisions regarding unfair labor practices, artibtral awards and negotiability disputes are subject to Federal Labor Relations Authority' review, the Board, as currently constructed, does not have authority to decide negotiation impasses. "This is a crucial component of any third party's scope of review and Congress required that it be conducted by an independent third party," said Sullivan.
* The process for appealing adverse actions fails to provide employees with "fair treatment", as required by Congress. In its current form, NSPS would allow DoD to modify administrative judges' decisions, establish a "totally unwarranted" standard for appeal and impose guidelines on the Merit Systems Protection Board ability to issue penalties and establish "mandatory removal offenses" enforceable at the Defense Secretary's "discretion", among other stipulations. "Each of the regulations challenged by [AFGE] demonstrates that the appeals process is the antithesis of fairness," said Sullivan.
Sullivan argued that since the contested issues could not be severed from the subparts governing adverse actions and appeals, those subparts can not be implemented. He also stated that if DoD could strip the "offending provisions", from the labor-management relations subpart, the court would rehear the argument.
NSPS is a performance-based human capital system that would affect approximately 700,000 DoD civilian employees pay and classification, performance management, hiring, workforce shaping, disciplinary matters, appeals procedures and labor-management relations.
Implemented in "Spirals", at least 11,000 DoD civilian employees are currently covered by the System. Spiral 1.2 will bring an additional 66,500 employees into the system by January 2007.
December 1, 2006
Pay Raise Proposed by Bush Would Be Smallest in 18 Years
About 1.8 million federal employees would receive a 1.7 percent increase in their basic pay and a 0.5 percent average increase in their locality pay next year under a plan that President Bush sent to Congress yesterday, administration officials said.
Bush recommended a 2.2 percent average raise in his fiscal 2007 budget, released in February. Under a 1990 pay law, yesterday was the deadline for the president to authorize an alternative plan if Congress had not stipulated a raise.
If federal employees receive an average raise of 2.2 percent next year, it would be their lowest annual salary increase in 18 years, according to congressional aides.
House and Senate spending bills propose a 2.7 percent average raise for federal employees, but the bills seem unlikely to pass in the lame-duck session. Congress, meanwhile, has voted for a 2.2 percent raise for the military, raising the prospect that lawmakers will go along with the smaller increase for the civil service when they wrap up their budget bills.
The president's plan would give higher locality adjustments to the metropolitan areas with the largest "pay gaps," as determined by Labor Department surveys comparing federal jobs with their private-sector counterparts.
Under the formula in the president's plan, federal employees in the Washington-Baltimore area would receive a 2.64 percent pay raise next year, starting with the first full pay period in January, officials at the Office of Personnel Management said.
The highest adjustment would go to federal employees in the New York City area -- 3.02 percent. In contrast, the majority of federal employees, who work outside the big cities and are lumped in a "rest of U.S." category, would receive a raise of 1.81 percent.
Colleen M. Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union, objected to the pay formula at a meeting of the Federal Salary Council in October, saying she was concerned that most federal employees would receive a raise of less than 2 percent.
The council, an advisory group, pulled back from approving the pay plan, and Kelley yesterday called the decision to go ahead with the formula "inappropriate" and "very disappointing."
She said "an awful lot of unknowns" swirl around next year's federal pay raise because of disagreements on Capitol Hill over whether to keep the government open on short-term funding or to bundle spending bills into a year-long omnibus measure.
"As far as we are concerned, the 2.7 percent raise is in play and we are going to do all we can to keep that alive," Kelley said.
By sending Congress his pay plan yesterday, Bush avoided triggering a part of the 1990 law that would have provided federal employees with an overall pay raise of 8.6 percent, which would have met a congressional goal of narrowing differences in salaries between the government and the private sector. Bush said a raise of that size would have cost $8.8 billion, an outlay that he said would interfere with higher priorities, such as maintaining the war against terrorism.
Officials said the pay plan would not be effective until Bush issues an executive order, probably late this month.
