GovernmentExecutive.com

Seriously though, I was joking. Unfortunately, this is the way management (typically the older generation) can think sometimes.

Paul  | Thursday, February 14, 2008 |  11:54 AM

---

Sorry Bob. I couldn't work in a place like that! I'm graded on whether we get the mission accomplished. Even though I don't do the work, I still get lower scores if my "troops" don't perform well enough to make me look good!

Jim  | Thursday, February 14, 2008 |  08:39 AM

---

All "systems" have weaknesses from one perspective or another, and some more than others. There's nothing really new under the sun.

Ernst  | Thursday, February 14, 2008 |  08:06 AM

---

My agency is getting exactly what it deserves as most of my colleagues feel as I do. They even had to drop one of their performance benchmarks just so management could get their raise.

Bob  | Wednesday, February 13, 2008 |  08:22 PM

---

Paul, Mary likes you...No, really she does.

Dr. Ruth  | Wednesday, February 13, 2008 |  06:34 PM

---

Interesting there is not a DoD NSPS rep on any panel. But plenty of unions.

Rick  | Wednesday, February 13, 2008 |  11:57 AM

---

...pay banding does not and never has worked. Mangement deciding that 25% of employees are eligible for a pay band increase, every othe year; is not based on merit; it's an oxymoron and a horrrible system based on cronyism.

disgusted  | Wednesday, February 13, 2008 |  11:12 AM

---

Bite me Paul

Mary  | Wednesday, February 13, 2008 |  11:06 AM

---

As a supervisor within the VA, I have three methods available to use Pay-For-Performance:
1. I can deny step increases when an employee doesn'r deserve it.
2. I rate each employee on a 1-5 scale annually. If they earn a 3 (Fully Successful) or higher, I can award them with up to a 5% (of annual salary) performance award or a step increase.
3. If they get involved in additional projects/duties above and beyond their normal required duties, I can use Special Contribution Awards, which could be cash or time off.
I don't simply "pass" everyone just to make my job easier.
Bob's comment, he "could not care less about my agency's goals or performance." tells me that he should either look for another agency before he feels that way for life, or he is getting exactly what he deserves.

Jim  | Wednesday, February 13, 2008 |  10:44 AM

---

The conclusion is apparently already in the title-why bother with the meeting?

JLB  | Wednesday, February 13, 2008 |  10:15 AM

---

Paul, join the 21st century. Mary can't afford to stay home because she's a single parent and/or her income (primary or secondary) is necessary in order for her children to attend good schools, have decent clothing, and perhaps attend college some day!

Melinda  | Wednesday, February 13, 2008 |  09:09 AM

---

Paul, you must have been born prior to 1940.

Elaine  | Wednesday, February 13, 2008 |  09:01 AM

---

Marys so fine Paul don't know where the money went!

rooster  | Tuesday, February 12, 2008 |  05:05 PM

---

Why is Congress holding a hearing on how aging folk singers divvy up their royalties, anyway?

The answer, my friend, ...

Skepticus  | Tuesday, February 12, 2008 |  12:23 PM

---

Paul, are you serious?

Cindy  | Tuesday, February 12, 2008 |  10:47 AM

---

Performance Pay works great for employees that are not pay-capped. As a pay-capped federal worker I could not care less about my agency's goals or performance.

Bob  | Tuesday, February 12, 2008 |  10:25 AM

---

Mary's place is in the home, anyway.

Paul  | Tuesday, February 12, 2008 |  09:05 AM

---