9:15 pm, July 11, 2014

FederalNewsRadio.com - Purpose of Comments statement Click to show

Hubbard Radio, LLC encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comment boards following articles, blog posts and other content can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior here. We encourage your thoughtful comments which:

  • Have a positive and constructive tone
  • Are on topic, clear and to-the-point
  • Are respectful toward others and their opinions

Hubbard Radio, LLC reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

  • 28
       

  • Its all smoke and mirrors
    Lisa Lisa
    PFP or any evaluation for that matter will always be flawed. PFP is even MORE flawed-in fact, the worst evaluation system hands down. PFP is the most damaging invention to workers and their morale and definately to productivity. Saving a buck is what drives the bell curve PFP rating system. I am so grateful I am no longer on that evaluation system-it was more crooked than any mafia family in NY. If I were to come across some starry-eyed-fresh-out-of-college kid looking for a fed job, I would most definately tell him/her to run..run like the wind. Its not worth being in the govt anymore. Add this PFP and bell curve evaluation systems, along with the non-stop nastiness from Repub candidates about how bad we fed employees are, and lets add to it the soon to be sad retirement for new people, no raises, increased healthcare costs, fewer people to get the job done..the fed employees have been downgraded to the equivalent of sewer rats. Its all smoke and mirrors that the public sees and what the public is told. There are but a few puppet masters pulling the strings of millions of fed employees yet when S hits the fan, they clip those strings and let the puppet collapse on stage for all the citizens to see
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Faked At Work
    Retired Fed LR
    MSPB once did a study that found that 69% of all federal employees consider themselves above average compared to their peers at work and another 30% considered themselves average. In other words, people's perceptions of their own performance places 99% of them in the top 50th percentile. Those are fun house mirror numbers. So were the OPM statustics that showed 78% of all federalo employees were rated at the top 2 levels of a 5 level rating system. Fully successful became the kiss of death. Based on that, even accurate performance ratings will not be popular with large numbers of employees. Unofficial quotas are not to hold down outstanding performers. Rather, in my experience of over 35 years in federal labor and employee relations, it is to try to deal with the inflated ratings of the past.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • You hit the nail on the head
    Cdub
    My wife recently transitioned from OPM to DOD HR. The amount of rating inflation and blatant disregard for the regulations governing ratings was fairly shocking to her. Far too many in the chain of command - and even in HR - don't really understand how the system is supposed to work, and have loudly complained when they are told they've been doing it wrong for X years, and will no longer be allowed to fudge numbers and game the system. At least of the complaints about "faking it" to save money may simply be managers and executives actually being held accountable and forced to use the system as it was designed, and passing the "blame" up to higher management. Everbody loves to hate on HQ when it makes them follow the rules.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Faked at work
    Svetlana01
    I'll agree. Last year my initial evaluation done by my immediate sutervisor was in pencil. Visible erasures were seen and and my evaluation was lowered by a "higher up" supervisor. This year my immediate supervisor did evaluations in conjunction with the "higher up" supervisor...no more visible erasures were noted, but again my eval was substantially lower than in the previous 8 years.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • The Performance Mgt Mirror has 2 Sides
    Fed Lifer
    In my experience, employees in our organization are routinely given “all 5’s” or “outstanding” because management will not rate them honestly. They’re either too timid, too lazy or have been thrown under the bus one too many times by labor relations bowing to the union. The union has successfully intimidated labor relations and managers into rating GS-14s as outstanding when they’re doing work that would rated as such at the GS-7 level. Upper level management and executives lose their spine, even when there’s a rock-solid case for the rating, and cave to the union’s ridiculous demands to avoid any modicum of conflict. Some employees feel that just by showing up they deserve (and demand) an outstanding rating. Before you respond with an anti-management rant, hear me out. I speak from both the employee and management perspectives, as I have served in both. We don’t need managers that rule with tyrannical iron fists; what we DO need is managers who will be professional, intellectually honest with employee performance, don’t avoid critical conversations, reward employees for a job well done, and document to defend their ratings if they’re slacking. In my 28 years for federal service, I have seen professionalism slide to an all time low. No one dresses for success anymore, few managers take the time to set the example for their staff and even fewer practice servant leadership. Couple that with the discouragement of highly productive workers as they see the unions protecting slackers receiving the same rating for doing next to nothing. Both employees and managers need to demonstrate that we are skilled professionals that care about our work products, our people, and that we’re good stewards of the taxpayer’s dollar.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Dress for success?
    contrarian
    Personally I think Khakis have been the best gift govt emps have ever received. 25 years ago I wore suits, but the dry cleaning bills would be oppressive these days. I still have them for weddings, funerals, church, graduations etc. But why should I destroy $250 suits in the office when I can wear $40 khakis? Frankly, wash and wear cotton is probably more hygienic than dry-clean wool that never gets cleaned.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • By Dressing for Success, I mean...
    Fed Lifer
    Don't wear your distressed jeans, running shoes or Dollar Store flip-flops. Yes, I agree, khaki's and Dockers are a wonderful addition indeed. Coming from the military to a civilian job was an eye-opener. What I was referring to was the accepted norm here of tattered jeans, T shirts, and the sad fact that our management has to remind our female employees to wear appropriate undergarments and halter tops/shorts in the warmer months.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • That should read...
    Fed Lifer
    NOT wear appropriate undergarments and halter tops..
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • There is the adage that says
    Skippy
    you should dress for the next job you want. I wear khakis and polo shirts and I'm way overdressed for my next career move.....retirement.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Dressing for success?
    Moderate
    I am really tired of hearing that phrase. I agree that shorts, tea shirts, flip flops, dungarees should not be worn into the office. I also agree that dress pants and a button down shirt are appropriate. However, suits and sport jackets are just not necessary. You should be recognized by your work and not by your expensive suit. An idiot in a suit is still an idiot. I went out on a visitation. The accountant was dressed in dungarees. However, he was very professional as far as the issues were concerned. He was also very pleasant and easy to work with. On the other hand I have seen many accountants and lawyers in suits who were incompetent and back stabbers. They earned no respect from me. Acting professional is more important to me than clothing.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • What are dugnarees?
    contrarian
    Does the Gap or Kohls sell them? Or did you mean jeans?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • What are dungarees
    Moderate
    An older term for jeans.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Agree with Fed Lifer
    ExHUD
    It's been my experience that ratings were never linked to performance. If my managers could give everyone an outstanding, they did. So the slackers got the same as the productive workers. So performance ratings never meant anything to me. As for dressing for success, that went out the window a long time ago!
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }