Workforce subcommittee chair pushes pay reform, personnel flexibilities

Rep. Stephen Lynch, D-Mass., got his start as an ironworker and a union official, but he has detailed knowledge of working conditions in the federal government. A dozen of Lynch's relatives work for the U.S. Postal Service, and according to the congressman, now in his first year as chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Federal Workforce Subcommittee, they're not shy about letting him know what they think about agency management. As chairman, Lynch has investigated those management problems, but he's also dived headlong into issues affecting employees governmentwide. He pushed hard for House passage of the Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act (H.R. 626) in early June and for changes to the Thrift Savings Plan. In the third in an occasional series with lawmakers, Government Executive talked with Lynch in June on pay reform, postal management, and the relationship between Congress and the Obama administration. The interview has been edited for clarity and length.

GE: One of your earliest actions as chairman was to call for pay raise parity among civilian federal employees and members of the military. What do you think of the administration's stated goal of reforming the federal pay system? Is a governmentwide pay-for-performance feasible, or wise?

Lynch: It's a laudable goal, coming up with a new system. Most people think the pay-for-performance model, at least as implemented by the Bush administration, was fairly inconsistent from department to department. There should be rewards for those workers who really perform well. It was such a patchwork of approaches that it built up mistrust so the workers didn't feel like they would get the reward if they worked hard. The new Office of Personnel Management director, John Berry, is someone who I think understands the system. He's not learning. He's been involved with management in a number of different entities. He knows what's up.

GE: What has your relationship with the administration been like? What is the impact of having a more activist Office of Personnel Management?

Lynch: On telework, for instance, we passed that bill in the last session. But the president is very interested in this, and Director Berry is very interested in this in a positive way. So rather than run that bill back to committee, we have set aside some time for the director to have some input on this. We want his buy-in. It's been a two-way street. I've expressed a willingness to meet him halfway. I've tried not to surprise him. I've told him what I'm interested in moving, and what we're going to move. I've asked him for his priorities. I'm trying to make him look good. I'm trying to make the president look good, too.

GE: You have a large number of federal employees in your family -- what have you learned from them about the federal workforce?

Lynch: There's a disconnection between, say, for instance, the postal workers and policymakers at the post office and in government. The paradox within the Postal Service is if you ask the general public, if you gave them a list of agencies as to customer satisfaction, the post office scores very high on the satisfaction level expressed by the general public. People have good, positive relationships with their letter carrier, with their postal clerk. However, I think while they are appreciated by the public, there's a dichotomy there where they don't feel appreciated by leadership.

GE: You've been a strong backer of the Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act, and it must have been satisfying to see the bill pass the House. What do you think its prospects are in the Senate?

Lynch: I was very happy to see it pass, and I know it's languished for some time. I don't have special insight with the operations of the Senate, so I guess I'm hopeful they'll receive it warmly. I do know that the votes are much tighter over there. We're supposed to be pro-family here. It's easier to see the value in providing a more stable work-life balance by making that accommodation. By inducing employees, young parents, to stay in their federal jobs instead of quitting, I think we save on that retraining cost.