YETMO

”The Year in Review, Part I” (Week of December 18-22, 2006)

As 2006 concludes, this is as good a time as any to assess where we’ve been and where we’ll likely to go.

This was the year of Policy, especially in the areas of Personnel and Procurement. Hardly a day went by without some mention of either or both of these.

We know about the hub-bub at Homeland Security and Defense over their proposed pay-for-performance personnel systems. Clearly the devil is in the details. NSPS became another four-letter word in our vernacular. It may be the acronym for National Security Personnel System, but for many people these letters simply spelled trouble.

Few people would dispute the philosophical – and practical – principle of receiving compensation for work relatively commensurate to its quality. Everyone expects to pay an appropriate price for goods and services in the marketplace. So, too, it is with paying for the efforts of Executive Branch executives, managers, and staff.

Beyond acceptance of that high-level principle, much division exists. Unions representing federal employees sued over what they felt were diminished collective bargaining rights. Homeland Security and Defense said that’s what Congress intended. Unions disagreed. Courts have now entered the fray and will pass judgment on the nature and structure of what inevitably will become a new approach to compensation practices.

You would expect a topic dealing with people’s salaries to be sensitive and controversial. In that regard, all the fuss and muss surrounding this issue is not only normal, but appropriate. All that we citizens, collectively, should hope for is that all aspects of these systems are exhaustively discussed and analyzed in good faith. We expect that agencies, unions, and employees themselves will hold differing views, and that’s OK. However, if these views are not presented and discussed in an open and honest manner, hidden agendas and hostile attitudes will poison any chance for meaningful change.

I wish the players well. I hope that they will bargain professionally, with the interests of all sides “equally” respected. I doubt the final result will be viewed “equally” by all stakeholders. In the end, one position must likely prevail over another. It won’t be 100% - 0%, but it will be at least 51% - 49%.

How will the new personnel rules look and work? Will they slightly (or mostly) favor the government (management) or the employees (unions)? Given that the government serves at the sufferance of its citizens, I suspect the employees/unions will achieve at best 49%.

Perhaps 2007 will reveal the end product. Or perhaps continuing legal battles will extend the end result to 2008 or 2009 or….