|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
A Critical Review of the Sweeping Federal Civil Service ChangesThe Case of the Departments of Homeland Security and Defense
Jack Underhill
University of the District of Columbia and Webster University, gwaposr{at}cox.net
Ray Oman
University of the District of Columbia and Webster University, roman{at}udc.edu
This article critiques the proposed radical changes to the civil service system at the Departments of Homeland Security and Defense. It also summarizes the civil service problems and assesses whether the proposed changes would be likely to address those problems. It identifies the difficulties that one of the critical changes (merit pay or pay-for-performance) has encountered in the past. The article is critical of the proposed termination of the General Schedule system, which has served the civil service system so well in the past. It expresses concern about the proposed weakening of rights of employee appeals, protections, and meaningful union participation. The article argues that there are a number of problems facing the civil service, but that most of the changes do not address those problems. It lauds the major achievements of the federal service and cautions against radical changes that will have the effect of weakening it.
Key Words: civil service reform • Department of Defense • Department of Homeland Security • merit pay • pay-for-performance
References
- American Federation of Government Employees v. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense. Memorandum Opinion. 1:05-cv-02183, Document 29, pp. 1-17 (U. S. District Court for the District of Columbia February 27, 2006).
- Ballenstedt, B. (2007a, February 28). DHS scales back pay for performance. Government Executive. Retrieved May 1, 2007, from http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=36225&ref=rellink.
- Ballenstedt, B. (2007b, April 20). Housing panel probes latest DHS personnel overhaul. Government Executive. Retrieved May 1, 2007, from http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=36682&ref=rellink.
- Ballenstedt, B. (2007c, May 25). OPM pushes Homeland Security to move on pay for performance. Government Executive. Retrieved May 1, 2007, from http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=37032&ref=rellink.
- Ban, C. ( 2000). National public review as implicit evaluation of CSRA: Building on or overturning the legacy. In J. P. Pfiffner & D. A. Brook (Eds.), The future of merit: Twenty years after the Civil Service Reform Act (pp.57-80). Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.
- Barr, S. (2005a, March 13). Defense changes bred anxiety and opposition. The Washington Post, p. D2. Barr, S. (2005b, May 22). Doubts about leadership in survey. The Washington Post, p. B2.
- Barr, S. (2007, May 11). What's good for the military. The Washington Post, p. D4.
- Barzelay, M. (with Armagani, B. J.). (1992). Breaking through bureaucracy: A new vision of managing in government. Berkeley: University of California Press.
- Booze, Allen, & Hamilton. ( 2003, September). Department of Commerce personnel management demonstration project evaluation. Four year report. Final report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
- Bowman, J.S., & West, J.P. (2007). American public service: Radical reform and the merit system. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
- Brook, D.A., & King, C. (2007). Civil service reform as national security: The Homeland Security Act of 2002. Public Administration Review, 67(3), 399-423.[CrossRef]
- Brown, M., & Heywood, J. S. (Eds.). (2002). Paying for performance: An international comparison. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
- The countdown to completion: Implementing the new Department of Homeland Security personnel system: Hearings before the House Government Reform Committee Subcommittee on the Federal Workforce and Agency Organization, 110th Cong (2005) (testimony of Colleen Kelley).
- Craig, C. (2001). Career banding for employee development. Retrieved May 1, 2007, from the Baylights Compensation Consulting LLC Web site: http://www.baylights.com.articles/0201.html.
- Creating a government for the 21st century: From reorganization to recruitment: Hearings before the House Government Reform Committee, 108th Cong. (2003) (testimony of Paul Volcker).
- The crisis in human capital: Report to the president: Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, Restructuring, and District of Columbia of the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, 106th Cong (2000) (Report by George V. Voinovich).
- Davidson, D. (2005, May 2). The new government workplace: Broad civil service reforms give some hope, others trepidation. Federal Times, p. 20.
- Department of Homeland Security Human Resource Management System, Final Rule, 5 CFR, chap. XCVII and Part 9701, Fed. Reg. (Feb. 1, 2005).
- Edwards, C. (2006, August 13). Federal pay: Myth and realities. The Washington Post, p. B2.
- GAO personnel reform: Does it meet expectations? Hearings before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Postal Service and District of Columbia, 110th Cong. (2007) (statement of John Shimabukuro).
- Government using wrong methods to assess and select its employees. (2005, December). PA Times, 28(12), 1.
- Hatry, H., Greiner, J.D., & Ashford, B. (1994). Issues and case studies in teacher incentive plans. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
- Hays, S.W., Byrd, C., & Wilkins, S. (2006). South Carolina's human resource management system: The model for states with decentralized personnel systems. In E. Kellough & L. G. Nigro (Eds.), Civil service reforms in the states: Personnel policy and politics at the subnational level (pp. 171-210). Albany: State University of New York Press.
- Kellough, J. E., & Nigro, L. G. (Eds.). (2006). Civil service reforms in the states: Personnel policy and politics at the subnational level. Albany: State University of New York Press.
- Lane, L., & Wolfe, J.R. (1990). The human resource crisis in the public sector: Rebuilding the capacity to govern. New York: Quorum Books.
- Levine, C. (with Kleeman, R.). (1986). The quiet crisis of the civil service: The federal personnel system at the crossroad (Occasional paper). Washington, DC: National Academy of Public Administration.
- Light, P.C. (1997). The tides of reform: Making government work 1945-95. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
- Light, P.C. (1999). The true size of government. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
- Light, P.C. (2002). Government's greatest achievements. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
- Marsden, D., & French, S. (2002). Performance pay in the U.S.: The case of the Inland Revenue Service. In M. Brown & J. S. Heywood (Eds.), Paying for performance: An international comparison (pp. 115-147). Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
- Mihm, C. (2003, May). Post-hearing questions relating to pay for performance: Letter to the Subcommittee on Civil Service and Agency Organization (108th Cong. 1st sess.) ( GAO 02793 Pay for Performance). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Accountability Office.
- Milkovich, G., & Wigdor, A. (Eds.). (1991). Pay for performance: Evaluating performance appraisals and merit pay (Committee on Performance Appraisals and Pay. Commission on Behavior and Social Sciences and Education, National Research Council). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
- National Academy of Public Administration. ( 1991). Modernizing federal classification: An opportunity for excellence (Report of an Academy Panel). Washington, DC: Author.
- National Academy of Public Administration. ( 2004, May). Recommending performance-based pay. Washington, DC: Author.
- National Academy of Public Administration and the National Commission on the Public Service Implementation Initiative. (2004, January). Conversations on the public service: Performance-based pay in the federal government. Washington, DC: National Academy of Public Administration.
- National Commission on the Public Service (Volcker Commission). (2003, January). Urgent business for America: Revitalizing the federal government for the 21st century. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
- National Security Personnel System, Proposed Rule, 5 CFR, chap. XCIX and part 9901, Fed. Reg. (Feb. 14, 2005).
- Nigro, L.G., & Kellough, J.E. (2006). Civil service reform in Georgia: A view from the trenches. In J. E. Kellough & L. G. Nigro (Eds.), Civil service reforms in the states: Personnel policy and politics at the subnational level (pp. 117-143). Albany: State University of New York Press.
- Partnership for Public Service and Institute for the Study of Public Policy Implementation. (2005). The best places to work in the federal government. Washington, DC: Author.
- Partnership for Public Service and Institute for the Study of Public Policy Implementation. (2007). The best places to work in the federal government. Retrieved May 1, 2007, from http://bestplacestowork.org/BPTW/rankings/agency.php?code=TR.
- Rainey, H. (2006). Reform trends at the federal level with implications for the states: The pursuit of flexibility and human capital movement. In J. E. Kellough & L. G. Nigro (Eds.), Civil service reforms in the states: Personnel policy and politics at the subnational level (pp. 33-58). Albany: State University of New York Press.
- Rainey, H.G., & Kellough, J.E. (2000). Civil service reform and incentives in the public service. In J. P. Pfiffner & D. A. Brook (Eds.), The future of merit: Twenty years after the Civil Service Reform Act (pp. 127-145). Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.
- Relyea, H. (2005, January 3). Congressional Research Service report to Congress: Homeland Security: Department organization and management—Implementation phase. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.
- Rosenbaum, D.E. (2005, October 16). Study ranks Homeland Security Department lowest in morale. The New York Times, p. 17.
- Schay, B. (1993). Broad-banding in the federal government (U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Office of Systems Innovations). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
- Senior Executive Association and Avue Technologies Corporation. (2006). Survey of senior executive service pay and performance management system. Washington, DC: Author.
- Shields, J. (2002). Performance-related pay in Australia. In M. Brown & J. S. Heywood (Eds.), Paying for performance: An international comparison (pp. 159-209). Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
- Shorter, A., Burnkrant, S., Case, J.L., LaHuis, D.M., LaPolice, C., Miller, D., et al. (2002). O fice of Personnel Management summative evaluation 2002: DOD S & T reinvention: Laboratory demonstration program (submitted to the Directorate of the Defense Research and Engineering, Office of the Secretary of Defense). Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Personnel Resources and Development Center.
- Statement of Neil McPhie, Chairman of the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, before the Housing Government Reform Committee, Subcommittee on the Federal Work Force and Agency Organization, 109th Cong. (2005).
- Thompson, J.R. (2007). Federal labor-management relations under George W. Bush: Enlightened management or political retribution. In J. S. Bowman & J. P. West (Eds.), American public service: Radical reform and the merit system (pp. 233-250). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
- Torrado, M. (2005, March). Pay for performance at the FDIC: Thirteen lessons on changing culture. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Academy of Public Administration, Washington, DC.
- U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2003 a, May). Human capital: Opportunities to improve executive agencies' hiring process (GAO 03 450). Washington, DC: Author.
- U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2003 b, March). Results-oriented culture: Creating a clear linkage between individual performance and organizational success ( GAO 03 488). Washington, DC: Author.
- U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2005, April). Human capital: Preliminary observations on proposed regulations for DOD's national security personnel system. Statement of Derek B. Steward, Director of Defense Capabilities and Management ( GAO 05 559T). Washington, DC: Author.
- U.S. Government Accountability Office and the National Commission on the Public Service Implementation Initiative. (2004, December). Principles, criteria, and processes for government-wide federal human capital reform (GAO 05 69SP). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Accountability Office.
- U.S. Office of Personnel Management. (2001 ). Human resource flexibilities and lessons learned: Demonstration projects and alternative personnel systems. Retrieved October 17, 2005, from www.opm.gov/omsoe/hr-flex/alltogether.pdf.
- U.S. Office of Personnel Management. (2002, April). White paper: A fresh start for federal pay: The case for modernization. Washington, DC: Author.
- U.S. Office of Personnel Management. (2005 ). Federal human capital survey 2004. Retrieved October 17, 2005, from http://www.fhcs2004.opm.gov/FHCSreports/.
- Walters, J., & Thompson, C. (2005, July). Transformation of the Government Accountability O fice: Using human capital to drive change. Washington, DC: IBM Center for Business and Government.
- Zeller, S. (2005, June 5). Hard labor: The traditional federal labor relations system is being crushed under the weight of personnel reform. Government Executive, 37(10), p. 2.
Review of Public Personnel Administration, Vol. 27, No. 4,
401-420 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0734371X07307841
 CiteULike  Complore  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
K. Yang and A. Kassekert
Linking Management Reform with Employee Job Satisfaction: Evidence from Federal Agencies
J. Public Adm. Res. Theory.,
June 18, 2009;
(2009)
mup010v1.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
