Federal personnel reform should be uniform, panel says

A panel of civil service experts said Thursday that Congress should use the ongoing personnel changes at the Homeland Security and Defense departments as a model to spread personnel reform across the federal government.

The group warned that Congress must step in and control the reform process or be faced with a patchwork of personnel and payroll systems. The comments were made during a forum sponsored by Paul Volcker's National Commission on the Public Service and Government Executive.

Citing conflicts abroad and the war on terrorism at home, Congress approved legislation in 2003 to allow Homeland Security and Defense to reform their civilian personnel systems to make them more flexible. Officials at the two departments want to implement pay-for-performance systems and increase the power that managers have to move personnel around the country. The legislation does not apply to other agencies and even excludes some portions of DHS.

"Have we opened the door to each agency doing its own thing?" asked Leon Panetta, a former Office of Management and Budget chief in the Clinton administration. "What's going to happen, mark my words, everybody is going to go cut their own deal" with Congress.

Max Stier, the president of the Partnership for Public Service, said the federal government should adopt a "leave no agency behind" policy.

If the personnel reforms are successful for the military and DHS, the template could be useful for other agencies, said Chris Mihm, the managing director for Strategic Issues at the General Accounting Office.

"If it's good enough for two of the largest [departments], it ought to be good enough for everybody else," he said.

Labor unions have been the loudest opponents of the personnel reforms. National Treasury Employees Union President Colleen Kelley said that decentralized and unfocused reforms are more likely to endanger workers' rights. If the reforms are not standardized by Congress, she said, "We don't know what they are. Maybe those at the top know, but those who are affected by it do not know."

Some panel members said that Congress usually only steps in when the situation is dire.

"They only do oversight," Panetta said, "when something blows up. When something goes wrong."

Former senator Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., who served as chairman of the Governmental Affairs Committee, agreed with Panetta that lawmakers tend to focus on squeaky wheels.

"What does it take to get additional management flexibility? Well, do a bad job," he said.

Thompson added that Congress has "a new appreciation" for personnel policy reform issues after examining both high-performing and poorly performing agencies.

Mihm said agencies are beginning to make the case that good performance can be improved with personnel policy reform.