Report - Government Executive
Report - Government Executive
Report - Government Executive
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
• Partisan politics could play an increasing role in the bureaucracy, which could have a<br />
potential impact on the “neutral competence” of the public service;<br />
• Giving managers additional flexibility to set pay can aggravate existing biases in the<br />
system;<br />
• The GS pay system can accomplish all of the goals of performance-based compensation<br />
without the disruption; and<br />
• Most (performance-based compensation) plans share two attributes: They absorb vast<br />
amounts of management time and resources, and they make everybody unhappy. 23<br />
On balance, both sides of the argument for and against performance-based compensation have<br />
merit. In any event, the Panel believes that a decision to implement such a system must be<br />
weighed very carefully, and a decision to move forward must be made in the context of what is<br />
most appropriate for the mission and environment of the agency.<br />
National Security Personnel System<br />
Attempts to implement performance-based personnel systems at the Department of Homeland<br />
Security, and more recently, at the DoD itself, have met with little success. At the time of<br />
writing, Congress had terminated DoD efforts to adopt a performance-based compensation<br />
system, the National Security Personnel System (NSPS), which would have applied to<br />
employees of non-intelligence components. 24 It is in this environment that DCIPS<br />
implementation is taking place, and as such, the Panel has examined the key similarities and<br />
differences between DCIPS and NSPS. Although these two systems share some features, they<br />
differ significantly, as discussed in Chapter 3.<br />
Congress provided authority for DoD to develop the system and implementation began in 2006;<br />
NSPS replaced the GS grade and step system with a pay band system intended to provide a more<br />
flexible, mission-based approach that linked individual performance to mission and<br />
organizational goals. NSPS created new policies for establishing pay levels, tenure, hiring,<br />
reassignment, promotion, collective bargaining, pay, performance measurement, and recognition.<br />
The 2003 legislation authorizing NSPS included highly controversial provisions dealing with<br />
labor management issues that resulted in federal litigation. The courts eventually decided in<br />
favor of DoD which, over unions’ objections, continued with its implementation plans.<br />
By 2009, some 211,000 DoD non-intelligence employees were covered under this new system.<br />
Union opposition remained strong, however, and Congress reversed the labor management<br />
decisions in 2008. By then, the relationship between DoD and its labor unions was characterized<br />
by one union official as follows:<br />
23 William Mercer, Leader to Leader, Winter 1997, p. 611.<br />
24 The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-84, section 1114, 2009.<br />
15