Off-Topic: GF

Lake Martin Topics

(Lake Martin Specific)

111,140 messages

Updated 4/24/2024 4:28:20 AM

Off-Topic

Lakes Online Forum

83,599 messages

Updated 4/24/2024 4:26:05 AM

Boat Maintenance

Lakes Online Forum

5,193 messages

Updated 4/3/2024 3:47:36 AM

Lake Martin Fishing

(Lake Martin Specific)

4,169 messages

Updated 4/16/2024 3:16:57 AM

Jokes

Lakes Online Forum

4,169 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 11:05:05 PM

Sports

Lakes Online Forum

4,260 messages

Updated 3/24/2024 9:24:45 AM

Grilling & Recipes

Lakes Online Forum

2,976 messages

Updated 3/20/2024 11:53:43 PM

Lake Martin SCUBA

(Lake Martin Specific)

169 messages

Updated 5/31/2023 1:39:35 PM

Tallapoosa River Topics

Lakes Online Forum

98 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM

Forum Usage Rules

Welcome, Guest

Select View Mode: [ classic | beta | recent ]

	Name:	Talullahhound -
	Subject:	GF
	Date:	12/11/2009 4:08:02 PM

Every one of your points is wrong despite your source.

Yes, Federal Employees do get steps -- but they don't get a step every year. The way it works is this: Step 1-3 happens every year. Step 4-7 is every 2 years; and Step 7-10 is every 3 years. These are not automatic - a supervisor has to sign off for each step increase and the employee has to receive at least a fully successful rating during the previous rating period.

Yes, Defense did implement NSPS, which did away with Steps and combined paygrades into a pay band. When they consolidated into pay bands, it did raise the ceiling slightly. While I was never a supporter of NSPS, it did allow managers the flexibility of hiring experienced people at the correct salary -- a huge help when one is trying to hire engineers, scientists and systems/computer people, as well as other hard to compete fields. However, NSPS was never fully implemented throughout Defense and now they are in the process of canning it.

Although it was "billed" as "pay for performance", the real reason Rummy pushed for it was as a way to keep career civil servants in line with the Administrations agenda. Political appointees have long complained that career people could slow roll the implementation of certain changes, and they didn't have a way to extract revenge. Under NSPS, if an employee was judged as not contributing to the success of a "mission" they could be more easily terminated (but not after the unions got the through with it); reduced in pay or they could be "rewarded".
While this sounds good on the surface, in practice, it was a scary proposition considering the agenda of some of the political appointees, and it would have provided a damn good way for managers to take revenge on their employees.

As far as the bonus pools, my friends that are under NSPS, have told me that their bonus' are about the same as they were prior to NSPS. In my agency, where the most of the employees were GS-14's and GS-15's, the average yearly performance bonus was about $2500. The Office Directors usually got between $5000-$6000.

Finally, I know of NO provision or rule that says employees salaries must be less than an agency Director's and I can imagine an instance where the employees salary might exceed the agency directors. Most Agency directors are going to be Political Appointees (ScheduleC) or Senior Executives. It is theoretically possible for a top step GS-15 to make more than a newly appointed SES. While it usually doesn't work this way, it could, and there is no law to prevent it.
The FAA may be different because of their Union.