I’m reminded of the expression “the only constant is change.”
Developments this week demonstrate the phenomenon. Let’s do some juxtapositioning, shall we?
First, and most prominent, would be yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling that the Bush Administration’s approach to prosecuting prisoners (detainees – choose which term you prefer, it doesn’t really matter) at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, didn’t pass muster. Intriguingly, this ‘change’ of current practices dictated by the court is actually a call to return to the status quo. The change is no change.
Second is the Court’s decision regarding redistricting practices in the state of Texas, which were largely driven by the ever-lovable, yet now disgraced Tom DeLay. Here, change is good. The Court said, that merely because past state legislatures determined new and always politically-motivated and often bizarre-looking gerrymandered voting districts once a decade after U.S. Census results, that such practice need not be cast in stone. In this case, change is good.
Next, and dear to the hearts of many federal government employees, is the push to shape personnel rules in a fashion that results in workers being evaluated – and compensated – based on their work. That sounds so straightforward, and banal, that it’s hard to understand how the controversy has been raging so strong and for so long.
Does this mean that work results and pay have not been inexorably linked before? Yes, and no. People often feel that supervisors don’t appropriately appreciate, recognize, and reward their on-the-job efforts throughout the year. [But how do we change others’ perceptions to more closely match the wonderful one we have of ourselves?]
Yours truly, for example, many times felt that my worth was not adequately praised and that my paycheck didn’t match my value. So what else is new? I guess that few believe that their pay should be cut. Even if our work products aren’t up to snuff, we gotta pay bills. That takes money, and doesn’t that justify a paycheck? Of course not, but that’s part of the real-world equation for this issue. So, how does this fit with our change–no change schematic? Definitely, no change!
This whole matter about personnel systems over the past few years has been most perplexing to me, especially with recent court decisions stopping further movement due to concerns about collective bargaining abridgements. I can’t help thinking that this mess would have been behind us and a new generation of personnel rules upon us today had the Administration simply laid its position before the major federal unions and let negotiations take their course. I suspect that existing administrative adjudication processes would have mostly resolved it by now. Of course, as is often the case, hindsight is 20-20.
So, do you feel the winds of change? They are fickle. In some cases, new movement is being forged; in others, the status is quo. I’m excited to feel this phenomenon as it is unfolding. Too often, it seems, we awake one day, see a whole new world, and wonder: how did that happen? Now we know. It’s going on everyday.
What changes are you feeling? Are they for the better or worse?
++++
Fred W. Apelquist, III, M.Ed.
Approximately 520 words.
© June 30, 2006