Ticking Clock

Eight months isn't a lot of time, and Office of Personnel Management Director Linda Springer and Defense Department Chief Human Capital Officer David S.C. Chu seemed well aware of that when they shared a stage at Government Executive's Excellence in Government conference on Monday. Both Springer and Chu have faced tremendous challenges, such as the impact of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan on military recruiting and the anticipated retirement wave. They also have much to be proud of -- rebranding the armed forces and modernizing the federal retirement system.

But with only eight months left in the Bush administration, both Springer and Chu acknowledged that one goal they share -- overhauling the federal government's civilian pay and performance management system -- will not be completed on their watch.

"What we have is antiquated and we are ill-served," said Springer. The pay-for-performance effort, she noted, began even before the Bush administration took up the issue. "Will the effort to continue this reform go on? In my judgment it will, because if it doesn't, we will lose the battle of recruiting talent on this issue. You can have all the tradition of public service and pins and plaques and awards you want, but if you go to the grocery store and put your pins on the [check-out] belt, they'll probably call security."

Chu said the federal government has to learn how to balance its pitch to new employees, being careful not to overemphasize benefits that may no longer be a major draw.

"The Great Depression is a long time in the past," he said. "This generation has seen almost unbroken prosperity. They aren't afraid of changing jobs. They want to be fulfilled. Ironically, the most important job benefit the federal government offers is that you can come here and truly be fulfilled. But a corollary is we can't insult you when you apply by offering you a salary and compensation package that is unattractive."

So what is to be done? Neither Springer nor Chu offered a blanket prescription for the federal government's pay woes, but they agreed on two things: the changes that are under way are irreversible and reform should be governmentwide.

"The biggest problem that we will have going forward is a patchwork system," Springer said. "If we end up with a patchwork of different systems, that will create an inequity that will be another hiring challenge."

Chu insisted that despite the raft of objections to the Defense Department's new National Security Personnel System, it would remain in place in the next administration.

"I think the most important signal was given by [the newly Democratic] Congress last year," he said. "It could have decided to reverse NSPS. It did not. It did change the union bargaining system. That was a contentious point. But it did not change the underlying nature of the system itself."

Springer and Chu could have mentioned the need to find a way to get federal employee unions and advocacy groups on board with broad pay reforms, or the need to approach pay parity with the private sector in a serious and considered way. But that's a slippery slope: There are many, many challenges to identify and rectify in the federal pay system. Springer and Chu simply don't have enough time left to take on all of them. But they do have a message, and they broadcast it loud and clear on Monday: Pay reform needs to come just as soon as the government can muster the political will, do the necessary research and find common ground with employee representatives.