[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 124 (Friday, June 27, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34876-34903]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-16850]
[[Page 34875]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part IV
Office of Personnel Management
_______________________________________________________________________
Science and Technology Reinvention Laboratory Personnel Demonstration
Project at the Missile Research, Development, and Engineering Center
(MRDEC); Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 124 / Friday, June 27, 1997 /
Notices
[[Page 34876]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
Science and Technology Reinvention Laboratory Personnel
Demonstration Project at the Missile Research, Development, and
Engineering Center (MRDEC)
AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management
ACTION: Notice of approval of Demonstration Project Final Plan.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1995
(P.L. 103-337) authorizes the Secretary of Defense, with Office of
Personnel Management (OPM) approval, to conduct a Personnel
Demonstration Project at Department of Defense (DoD) laboratories
designated as Science and Technology Reinvention Laboratories. The
legislation requires that most requirements of Section 4703 of Title 5
shall apply to the demonstration project. Section 4703 requires OPM to
publish the project plan in the Federal Register.
DATES: This demonstration project may be implemented by the MRDEC
September 28, 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MRDEC: Dr. William H. Leonard, Special
Assistant for Laboratory Management, Research, Development, and
Engineering Center, U.S. Army Missile Command, ATTN: AMSMI-RD, Redstone
Arsenal, Alabama 35898-5240, 205-876-1442. OPM: Fidelma A. Donahue,
U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E. Street, NW, Room 7460,
Washington, DC 20415, 202-606-1138.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Overview
Ninety letters and six e-mails were received, and six individuals
commented on the Federal Register notice at the public hearing. These
comments brought several new perspectives to the attention of those
responsible for implementing, overseeing, and evaluating the project.
The comments highlighted instances of miscommunication and
misunderstanding with the present system as well as the project
interventions. Further, they underscored the importance of providing
training to employees and supervisors on the Demonstration Project. The
substance of all comments received has been conveyed to the Center
Directors, the President of AFGE Local 1858, and the MICOM Civilian
Personnel Advisory Center in the event that local policies, processes
and training sessions may benefit from such perspectives. A summary of
all comments received, along with accompanied responses, is provided
below.
A. Step Increase Buy-In
Comments: There were 73 comments (one manager claimed to speak for
77 employees and 58 comments were identical) that expressed concern
over the method of conversion into the demonstration. Employees
preferred to have their accumulated time toward their next within-grade
increase added to their base pay instead of receiving a lump-sum cash
payment. Both employees and union recognized the proposed method does
not provide funds that can be added to employees' base pay, and have a
positive impact on their benefits such as retirement and thrift savings
plans.
Response: This issue has been the subject of negotiations with the
union since the initial development of the proposal. In the
demonstration there will no longer be step increases. The funds that
would have been expended for that purpose will form part of the
Performance Pay Pools for the payout of both performance pay increases
and/or performance bonuses. Each employee converted into the
demonstration will compete during the first performance assessment
period for those funds that would have been paid for step increases.
Thus the strategy developed by the demonstration development team was
to provide a lump sum cash incentive at the implementation of the
demonstration for the time credited to the employee toward what would
have been the employee's next within-grade (step) increase and to
maintain the Performance Pay Pool at the highest value (2%) which could
be supported by historical fiscal data. The MRDEC, in negotiations with
the union, has agreed to convert employees into the demonstration so
that their base pay will be adjusted effective the date of
implementation, by a prorated value based upon the number of weeks an
employee has completed toward the next higher step. Payment will equal
the current value of the employee's next within-grade increase times
the proportion of the waiting period completed at the time of
conversion. Both MRDEC Management and the union recognize that the
demonstration must be guided by the concept of in-house budget
neutrality. Therefore, the MRDEC will reexamine the Payout Factor (F)
at the end of the first assessment period to determine if a payout
factor of 2% was maintained by revised labor rates. If not, then the
factor F must be adjusted prior to the first year payout to compensate
for the early payment of step increases which would have been used to
form the full robust value of the payout factor. These changes are in
Sections III.B (Performance Pay Increases and/or Performance Bonuses)
and V (Conversion to the Demonstration Project).
B. Competitive Area
Comments: There were 73 comments (one manager claimed to speak for
77 employees and 58 comments were identical) that expressed concern
over the revised Reduction-in-Force (RIF) procedures that limit a
competitive area to occupational families in all geographic areas.
These comments came primarily from employees in the Business Management
and E&S Support Occupational Families. Their concerns were two fold:
(1) The inability to bump outside of occupational families and retreat
to a position during a RIF situation that had been previously held that
may be in a different occupational family than that occupied by the
employee, and (2) the reduced number of employees in a particular
occupational family will result in smaller competitive levels which may
lead to more separations from that family if a RIF occurs within the
MRDEC. Three comments recommended that the best solution would be to
put the Missile Command into the demonstration so as to widen the
competitive areas. There was one comment that suggested that
competitive areas be restricted to series rather than occupational
families and to restrict the competitive area to local geographic
areas.
Response: The project designers proposed this intervention as a
means of minimizing the severe turbulence that is normally caused
during a RIF. Since the MRDEC is predominately customer funded, its
vitality and future credibility depend upon a reasonably stable
workforce that is highly trained and motivated to the precepts of
customer service and quality products. This intervention would achieve
the desired goal of minimizing personnel turbulence, but at the same
time it may put some loyal and recently hired employees at an added
risk of separation. For this reason, this issue has been negotiated
with the union, and the project design will be changed to define the
competitive areas as the separate geographic areas of the MRDEC. This
change was made in full recognition that prior to any RIF action being
taken, action will be taken to place affected employees in other parts
of the parent organization and that the provisions of the DoD Stability
of
[[Page 34877]]
Employment Programs (Priority Placement Program) will be used to assist
affected employees. At this time the demonstration cannot be extended
to all of the Missile Command in that the demonstration can only be
conducted in a Science and Technology Reinvention Laboratory, which the
Missile Command is not. The suggestion to define competitive areas
along the lines of series was considered but rejected because the
comment may have reflected confusion between competitive areas and
competitive levels (competitive levels will continue to fall along
series lines). These changes are in Section III.F (Revised Reduction-
In-Force (RIF) Procedures).
C. Supervisory Pay Differentials
Comments: Seventy-one comments (one manager claimed to speak for 77
employees and 58 comments were identical) were received and all but
three requested that supervisory pay differentials be made available to
other than the engineers and scientists occupational family. One
comment questioned whether the differential was an award or a bonus,
one comment expressed concern about the impact of a supervisory
differential on employee pay pools, and one comment recommended
elimination of the supervisory differential.
Response: A supervisory differential is a cash incentive that is
paid on a pay period basis. It is not an award or a performance bonus.
The differential is not automatic and will range in value from 0% to
10% of the supervisor's basic rate of pay. Seven factors are provided
for the Director to consider in determining the value of a
differential. Supervisory differentials were designed to compensate
supervisors who supervise employees that are typically at the same
grade level or higher. This normally occurs at the higher bands in the
E&S Occupational Families. However, in recognition that restricting
supervisory differentials to just the E&S occupational families may be
perceived as an unfair application, the plan will be changed in Section
III.B (Supervisory Pay Differentials) to state that supervisory
differentials may be used, at the discretion of the MRDEC Director, to
incentivize and reward supervisors who are in Paybands III, IV or V in
any occupational family, except for employees in Payband V of the E&S
occupational family. Additionally, the plan is modified in Section
III.B (Supervisory Pay Differentials) to state that supervisory
differentials and supervisory adjustments will not be funded from the
performance pay pools.
D. Performance Evaluation System
Comments: Eleven comments (one manager claimed to speak for 77
employees) were received that raised questions and concerns about the
mechanics of implementing the performance evaluation system and also
about perceived shortcomings of the system. Concerns relating to the
mechanics of implementation include that (1) managers must be timely
with evaluations, (2) peer evaluations may not be useful, (3) three
performance elements need to be added, (4) rating levels be clearly
defined, and (5) the employee to supervisor ratio of about 15:1 should
be waived. With regard to perceived shortcomings, the new system is
very subjective, has no advantages over the existing system, does not
provide fairness, reduces cooperation and teamwork, and does not
provide simplification, according to some commenters. Additionally, one
commenter stated that TAPES could be made to work.
Response: The design team acknowledges that it is imperative for
managers and supervisors to be timely with their evaluations. Oversight
by the Performance Management Board and the use of a critical
supervision/EEO performance element that ``requires timely/appropriate
personnel actions'' will help ensure timeliness. Additionally,
supervisory training will emphasize the importance of timely
evaluations and the consequences of untimeliness on the payout process.
Peer evaluations are in the proposal as an option only, and their use
will be governed by the Personnel Management Board. The recommended
three additional performance elements (empowers his/her personnel,
acquisition streamlining initiatives, and support to the organization)
will not be added since they are considered to be embedded within the
five non-supervisory performance elements or the two supervisory or
management elements. Seven performance elements (five for non-managers)
are considered to be sufficient. No change will be made to the proposal
with regard to rating levels in that they are clearly defined in
Appendix D at four rating levels. The proposal contains no provisions
for changing supervisory ratios.
Like many Performance Evaluation Systems, the proposed intervention
makes appropriate provisions for supervisory judgment. The use of
benchmark performance standards as universal criteria for evaluating
all employees in the demonstration project on any element will lead to
greater fairness and reliability of evaluation, thus reducing the
potential for subjectivity in the evaluation process. These benchmark
performance standards define expected performance at the 100%, 70%, 50%
and unsatisfactory levels, thus assuring a clear definition of expected
performance levels. The use of a performance element which measures
``working relationships'' will assure that employees cooperate and that
teamwork continues and rises to higher levels. The performance
evaluation process is very critical to the pay-for-performance system,
and as such the TAPES process has not necessarily been simplified but
rather redesigned to make it supportive of the pay-for-performance
system. A simplification does exist in that the rating supervisor is
not required to write a justification for an assigned rating of record
other than unsatisfactory.
E. Pay-for-Performance System
Comments: Seventy-six comments (one manager claimed to speak for 77
employees and 58 comments were identical) were received in this area.
Comments included assertions that the 50% rule and the mid-point rule
violate merit system principles, is a prohibited personnel practice and
is arbitrary. Sixty-three comments expressed concern about the
composition and control of pay pools, the source of funds for pay
pools, and the effect of pay pool results on retirement and benefits;
and one comment equated the pay-for-performance system to the
discredited Performance Management Recognition System (PMRS). Two
comments reflected a misunderstanding about whether the general
increase was in the performance and bonus pay pools or not; two
comments stated a desire to keep step increases.
Response: As to the legality of the 50% rule and the mid-point
rule, the MRDEC Personnel Demonstration proposal was reviewed by the
MICOM Legal Office, DoD Office of General Counsel, and the OPM General
Counsel prior to publishing it in the Federal Register on 13 March
1997. The proposal was determined at that time to not violate any merit
system principles, to have clearly avoided any prohibited personnel
practices, and to not have been arbitrary in the design of proposed
personnel practices. The 50% rule and the mid-point rule are
consistently and fairly applied to all employees in the proposed
demonstration. Therefore, the rules meet the test of being fair and
equitable, and are in consonance with merit system principles. The 50%
rule is similar in purpose to the use of longer waiting periods at
higher steps in the General Schedule pay system. The 50%
[[Page 34878]]
rule is not solely a cost containment method, but is also an effort to
retain base pay as an incentive (i.e., to prevent reaching the top of a
band too soon).
Comments regarding the merit system principle of equal pay for work
of equal value (5 U.S.C. 2301(b)(3)) are flawed. The words ``equal pay
for work of equal value'' are intended to ensure that an employee's pay
range is based on an accurate and equitable evaluation of the level of
work for the employee's position. Employees performing at the same
level (as defined by a grade or band) should be paid in the same pay
range. Pay setting within a pay range can properly reflect factors such
as tenure, past performance, and current performance, while ensuring
equal treatment based on those factors. In fact, the latter part of the
equal pay for work of equal value principle (5 U.S.C. 2301(b)(3))
expressly allows for ``Appropriate incentives and recognition * * * for
excellence in performance.''
The proposed demonstration is consistent with the merit system
principles. Bands will be assigned based on employee's nature and level
of work. Pay progression within a band will be based on performance and
contributions over time. To provide enhanced incentives for excellence
in performance, employees will not be allowed to advance beyond the
mid-point of the pay range without an A or B rating. Also, employees
whose pay is beyond the midpoint (because of past performance) will not
be entitled to further base pay increases without an A or B rating. It
is true that the proposed demonstration places more emphasis on
performance than the General Schedule (by design), but that does not
violate merit system principles.
The demonstration proposal attributes clearly change the methods of
providing incentives to employees, including the provision of group or
individual incentive bonuses or pay. This is clearly an allowable
practice in accordance with Title 5 United State Code, chapter 47
Section 4703(a)(1-8). However, there is an assertion that, by changing
the basic rate of pay that an employee may receive, this in effect
changes the benefits defined in Chapter 63 or subpart G of Title 5, and
therefore must be a violation of 4703(c)(1). All parts of Chapter 63 or
subpart G of Title 5 are still intact, and have not been changed by
this proposed demonstration. Changing the method of determining base
pay increases does not change any provision of the retirement system or
any other benefit program.
The Personnel Management Board has been established, with permanent
union membership, with the requirement to define the pay pool structure
that will be used in the demonstration. This structure will be
communicated to employees through a Director's Newsletter prior to
implementation. At the minimum there could be two pay pools; one for
supervisors and one for non-supervisors. The designers of the pay-for-
performance system were well aware of the problems with the PMRS system
and benefited from the lessons learned. The PMRS system structure lent
itself to essentially the creation of a quota system for ratings. The
proposed pay-for-performance system was designed so that managers could
fairly evaluate and provide employee incentives without creating
artificial quota systems for ratings.
The proposal will be revised in Section III.B (Pay-for-Performance)
to clarify that the General Increase will be received by all covered
employees whose rating of record is greater than U. Additionally, the
proposal will be revised in Section III.B (Performance Pay Increases
and/or Performances Bonuses) to state that performance bonuses have no
impact on benefits such as retirement.
F. Paybands and Occupational Families
Comments: Eighty-two comments (three sets of identical comments:
58, 4, and 3) were received in this area. Sixty comments (fifty-eight
identical) recommended moving Budget Assistants (GS-561), Procurement
Clerks (GS-1106), and Management Assistants (GS-344) from the General
Support occupational family to the Business Management occupational
family; move Library Technicians (GS-1411) from the General Support
occupational family to the E&S Support occupational family; and
aligning all Miscellaneous Administrative and Program positions (GS-301
and GS-303) to the appropriate non-E&S occupational families depending
upon the closest alignment. A comment cited the need to include the
series Operations Research Analyst (Cost Analysis) (GS-1515) in the
Business Management occupational family. Four identical comments
expressed agreement with the use of benchmark position descriptions and
one comment liked the payband structure. Four identical comments
expressed concern that the creation of occupational families restricted
movement between occupational families for career development purposes.
Eight comments dealt with the width of Payband III in the E&S
occupational family, removing high grade controls, and the lack of
parity by not having all bands the same width. Two comments expressed
concern that E&S band V would result in job losses and seriously reduce
funds available for employee performance pay pools. One comment
questioned the use of the term ``specific course work'' as a
requirement for the E&S occupational family. One comment stated the
need for a management occupational family.
Response: The suggested occupational series changes are not
considered feasible because the Technical and Business Support paybands
are not compatible with the typical pay range and progression pattern
of those series identified in the comments. The demonstration will not
present barriers to employees who want to cross occupational family
lines for career development purposes. However, the proposal will
clarify in Section V (Personnel Administration) that this barrier does
not exist and that the benchmark position descriptions identify series,
specialty code, and function code. As a result of a Base Realignment
and Closure (BRAC) 95 decision, the proposal will be modified in
Appendix A to include Operations Research Analyst (Cost Analyst) (GS
1515) in the Technical and Business occupational family. The proposed
paybands for engineers and scientists were designed in conjunction with
the union and with consideration given to OPM design guidelines, the
developments of the Acquisition Corps and the definition of critical
Acquisition Corps positions (GS 14 and 15), the designs of the China
Lake experiment (banding of GS 14 and 15), and the job needs of the
MRDEC. A separate management occupational family was considered, but
rejected because the occupational families defined in the proposal
already provide for career progression of managers. High grade controls
are not an OPM or Title 5 authority; therefore, they cannot be affected
by a Title 5 demonstration project. The initial salary of a Payband V
employee comes from general operating budgets and does not adversely
impact allocation of funds to the performance pay pools.
The E&S Support and Business Management families are combined into
one occupational family titled ``Technical and Business Support.'' This
change is portrayed in Section III.A (Paybands) and also in Appendix A.
This proposal modification is a technical change, and is a natural
consequence of changing the MRDEC competitive areas from occupational
families to the separate geographic areas of MRDEC. The new
occupational family has one payband structure and benchmark position
descriptions have been developed for each payband.
[[Page 34879]]
G. Management Issues
Comments: Twenty comments (two identical sets of 4 and 3; and one
manager claimed to speak for 77 employees) were received in this area.
These comments generally addressed: (1) Permanent union membership in
the Personnel Management Board, (2) limited promotion opportunities for
GS-13 engineers and scientists, (3) the inability of the proposal to
solve stated personnel system problems, and (4) management's ability to
fairly implement the demonstration project.
Response: An extensive effort was made with the employees who
submitted comments to clarify their comments and concerns. Section II.H
(Personnel Management Board) is clarified to specify permanent union
membership in the Personnel Management Board.
In regard to promotions and solving personnel system problems,
management literature is replete with theories on what motivates
employees to higher standards of excellence. However, there have been
very few experiments to validate these theories in a large, dynamic
organizational environment over an extended period of time. This
demonstration is a very large scale experiment to assess such
interventions as sabbaticals, degree training for critical skills, a
simplified assignment process to enhance career development through job
rotations, performance pay and bonus increases in many cases without
the need for promotion actions, minimal classification issues, greater
ranges for promotions, and greater ranges for setting entrance
salaries. The evaluation process will endeavor to measure the stated
expected effects and determine improvements not only in personnel
practices, but also to determine if the MRDEC collectively as an
organization produces better science and technology. The demonstration
attributes do offer simplifications in classification, staffing,
compensation, and performance management. For example, hundreds of job
descriptions will be eliminated and replaced by as few as about 30
benchmark position descriptions. The need for promotion considerations
has been reduced by more that 50 percent. The personnel problems faced
by laboratory management are being addressed by both Title 5 changes
and parallel actions involving both Service changes to regulations and
to relief from issues managed by the Office of Management and Budget.
This proposed demonstration is not a total solution, but serves as a
significant building block to evolve to a better personnel system that
is more management and employee friendly.
A few comments questioned the ability of MRDEC supervisors to
competently and fairly implement this personnel experiment. This issue
has been discussed in negotiations with the union as an area of
concern. The negotiated solution to this concern is through training
and employee feedback. Prior to implementing the demonstration,
managers and supervisors will be trained in the added responsibilities
and accountabilities associated with the demonstration interventions.
Additionally, the union will be given an opportunity to describe their
role and function in the demonstration program. MRDEC management and
the union agree that employee feedback to supervisors (in a non-
threatening and not-for-attribution environment) is essential for the
success of this demonstration. Therefore, the proposal is changed in
Section III.B (Performance Scores) to provide an employee feedback
capability.
H. Miscellaneous Comments
Comments: There were ninety-one comments (four identical sets of
58, 4, 3, and 2; and one manager claimed to speak for 77 employees) in
this area. These comments include the following: (1) The proposal
limits employee ability to seek employment elsewhere; (2) the
demonstration supports E&S/E&S Support occupational family positions
only, therefore limit the demonstration to E&S occupational family; (3)
the proposal should extend E&S perks to all occupational families; (4)
the RIF retention points assignment process is unfair; and (5) clarify
the demonstration project purpose.
Response: Section V (Personnel Administration) is changed to
clarify that the proposal does not present barriers to applying for
external jobs and for movement between occupational families for career
development purposes. In the proposal, training for degrees was always
intended to apply to the entire workforce. The proposal will be changed
in Section III.E.2 (Training for Degrees) to clarify that training for
degrees is available for all occupational families. The Expanded
Developmental Opportunity Program (sabbaticals) has been extended in
Section III.E.1 (Expanded Developmental Opportunity Program) to all
occupational families except for the General Support occupational
family. Section III.B (Supervisory Pay Differentials) has been changed
to make supervisory differentials applicable to all occupational
families. The RIF retention point strategy proposed was designed to
reward performance. Sensitivity modeling has demonstrated that this
intervention will achieve the desired effect of retaining high
achievers who have a limited amount of career status. Therefore, this
intervention will be retained.
2. Demonstration Project System Changes
The following is a summary of changes and clarifications in the
project proposal that were of paramount interest to employees:
(1) In Section V (Conversion), the method of converting employees
into the demonstration is changed so that employees' base pay will be
adjusted effective the date of implementation by a prorated value based
upon the number of weeks an employee has completed toward the next
higher step. Payment will equal the value of the employee's next
within-grade increase times the proportion of the waiting period
completed at the time of conversion.
(2) Section III.B (Performance Pay Increases and/or Performance
Bonuses) is changed to reflect that both MRDEC Management and the Union
recognize that the demonstration must be guided by the concept of in-
house budget neutrality. Therefore, the MRDEC will reexamine the Payout
Factor (F) at the end of the first assessment period to determine if a
payout factor of 2% was maintained by revised labor rates.
(3) In Section III.F (Competitive Areas), the project design is
changed to redefine the competitive areas as separate geographic areas
of the MRDEC. Additionally, the method of bumping and retreating is
redefined as follows: ``In the Demonstration Project an employee can
bump to a position held by another employee in a lower subgroup or
tenure group; the position may be no lower than the equivalent of three
GS grades (or appropriate grade intervals) below the minimum GS grade
level of his/her current band. An employee can retreat to a position
held by another employee in the same subgroup who has a lower adjusted
RIF service computation date; the position may be no lower than the
equivalent of three GS grades (or appropriate grade intervals) below
the minimum GS grade level of his/her current band. A preference
eligible with a compensable service-connected disability of 30 percent
or more may retreat to a position equivalent to five GS grades below
the minimum grade level of his/her current band.''
(4) In Section III.A (Paybands) and Appendix A, the proposal is
changed to combine the E&S Support occupational family with the
Business Management
[[Page 34880]]
occupational family to form one occupational family called ``Technical
and Business Support.''
(5) Additionally, editorial and technical changes were made to
correct the final version of the Project.
James B. King,
Director.
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
II. Introduction
A. Purpose
B. Problems with the Present System
C. Changes Required/Expected Benefits
D. Participating Organization
E. Participating Employees
F. Labor Participation
G. Project Design
H. Personnel Management Board
III. Personnel System Changes
A. Broadbanding
B. Pay-for-Performance Management System
C. Classification
D. Hiring and Appointment Authorities
E. Employee Development
F. Revised Reduction-in-Force (RIF) Procedures
IV. Training
V. Conversion
VI. Project Duration
VII. Evaluation Plan
VIII. Demonstration Project Costs
IX. Required Waivers to Laws and Regulations
Appendix A: Occupational Series by Occupational Family
Appendix B: Project Evaluation and Oversight
Appendix C: Performance Elements
Appendix D: Benchmark Performance Standards
I. Executive Summary
This project was designed by the Department of the Army, with
participation of and review by the Department of Defense (DoD) and the
Office of Personnel Management (OPM). The purpose of the project is to
achieve the best workforce for the MRDEC mission, adjust the workforce
for change, and improve workforce quality. The MRDEC strives to exceed
the greatest expectations of its many customers. To achieve this, the
MRDEC must be able to balance customer requirements for near-term
technical and scientific products and information with the evolving
capabilities of the workforce. These purposes will be significantly
enhanced by interventions such as training for degrees in critical
skills areas, the contingent employee appointment authority, and the
Voluntary Emeritus Program.
The foundations of this project are based on the concept of linking
performance to pay for all covered positions; simplifying paperwork and
the processing of classification and other personnel actions;
emphasizing partnerships among management, employees, and unions
representing covered employees; and delegating classification and other
authorities to line managers. Additionally, the research intellect of
the MRDEC workforce will be revitalized through the use of expanded
opportunities for employee development. These opportunities will
reinvigorate the creative intellect of the research and development
community.
Development and execution of this project will be in-house budget
neutral, based on a baseline of September 1995 in-house costs and
consistent with the Department of the Army (DA) plan to downsize
laboratories. Army managers at the DoD S&T Reinvention Laboratory sites
will manage and control their personnel costs to remain within
established in-house budgets. An in-house budget is a compilation of
costs of the many diverse components required to fund the day-to-day
operations of a laboratory. These components generally include pay of
people (labor, benefits, overtime, awards), training, travel, supplies,
non-capital equipment, and other costs depending on the specific
function of the activity.
This project will be under the joint sponsorship of the Assistant
Secretary of the Army for Research, Development and Acquisition and the
Assistant Secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs. The
Commander, U.S. Army Materiel Command, will execute and manage the
project. Project oversight within the Army will be achieved by an
executive steering committee made up of top-level executives, co-
chaired by the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research and
Technology and the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civilian
Personnel Policy)/Director, Civilian Personnel. Oversight external to
the Army will be provided by the Department of Defense and the Office
of Personnel Management.
II. Introduction
A. Purpose
The purpose of the project is to demonstrate that the effectiveness
of Department of Defense (DoD) laboratories can be enhanced by allowing
greater managerial control over personnel functions and, at the same
time, expanding the opportunities available to employees through a more
responsive and flexible personnel system. The quality of DoD
laboratories, their people, and products has been under intense
scrutiny in recent years. This perceived deterioration of quality is
due, in substantial part, to the erosion of control which line managers
have over their human resources. This demonstration, in its entirety,
attempts to provide managers, at the lowest practical level, the
authority, control, and flexibility needed to achieve quality
laboratories and quality products.
B. Problems with the Present System
The MRDEC products contribute to the readiness of U.S. forces and
to the stability of the American economy. To do this, the MRDEC must
acquire and retain an enthusiastic, innovative, and highly educated and
trained workforce, particularly scientists and engineers. The MRDEC
must be able to compete with the private sector for the best talent and
be able to make job offers in a timely manner with the attendant
bonuses and incentives to attract high quality employees. Today,
industry laboratories can make an offer of employment to a promising
new hire before the government can prepare the paperwork necessary to
begin the recruitment process.
Currently, jobs are described using a classification system that is
overly complex and specialized. This hampers a manager's ability to
shape the workforce and match the positions while making best use of
employees. Managers must be given local control of positions and their
classification to move both their employees and vacancies within their
organization to other lines of the business activities to match the
life cycle needs of supported customers.
These issues work together to hamper supervisors in all areas of
human resource management. Hiring restrictions and overly complex job
classifications, coupled with poor tools for rewarding and motivating
employees and a system that does not assist managers in removing poor
performers builds stagnation in the workforce and wastes valuable time.
C. Changes Required/Expected Benefits
This project is expected to demonstrate that a human resource
system tailored to the mission and needs of the MRDEC will result in:
(a) Increased quality in the total workforce and the products they
produce; (b) increased timeliness of key personnel processes; (c)
increased retention of high quality employees and separation rates of
poor quality employees; and (d) increased customer satisfaction with
the MRDEC and its products by all customers it serves.
The MRDEC demonstration program builds on the successful features
of
[[Page 34881]]
demonstration projects at China Lake and the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST). These demonstration projects have
produced impressive statistics on the job satisfaction for their
employees versus that for the federal workforce in general. Therefore,
in addition to expected benefits mentioned above, the MRDEC
demonstration expects to find more satisfied employees on many aspects
of the demonstration including pay equity, classification decisions,
and career development opportunities. A full range of measures will be
collected during project evaluation (Section VII).
D. Participating Organization
MRDEC has approximately 1881 employees covered by the project.
Approximately 99 percent of the employees are located at Redstone
Arsenal, Alabama, with the remaining located at the following sites:
Andover, Massachusetts; Eglin AFB, Florida; Orlando, Florida; Dallas,
Texas; White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico; Camden, Arkansas; Los
Angeles, California; Washington, DC; Fort Benning, Georgia; Hampton,
Virginia; and Kwajalein Island.
E. Participating Employees
The demonstration project includes civilian appropriated funded
employees in the competitive and excepted service paid under the
General Schedule (GS) pay system. Scientific and Professional (ST)
employees and positions will be included for employee development,
performance appraisal, and award provisions only; their classification,
staffing, and compensation, however, will not change. Senior Executive
Service employees and positions, Federal Wage System employees, and
employees in the Quality Assurance Specialist (Ammunition Surveillance)
(QASAS) career program will not be covered in the demonstration
project. Additionally, DA interns will not be converted to the
demonstration until they complete their intern program. Personnel added
to the laboratory after implementation, in like positions covered by
the demonstration (either through appointment, promotion, reassignment,
change to a lower grade or where their functions and positions have
been transferred into the laboratory) will be converted to the
demonstration project. Successor organizations which may result from
actions associated with the 1995 Base Realignment and Closure
Commission (BRAC) or future Commissions will continue coverage in the
demonstration project.
F. Labor Participation
The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) represents
many GS employees at MRDEC. The MRDEC is continuing to fulfill its
obligations to consult and/or negotiate with the AFGE, in accordance
with 5 U.S.C. 4703(F) and 7117. The participation with the AFGE is
within the spirit and intent of Executive Order 12871.
The AFGE represents all professional and non-professional employees
except those who are supervisors or managers. AFGE Local 1858 has been
involved with and has participated in the development of the project
since its inception. The union is an integral part of this personnel
demonstration, and will be a full partner in arriving at major
decisions involving program implementation.
G. Project Design
An Integrated Process Team approach was used at the U.S. Army
Missile Command to develop the attributes of this personnel
demonstration proposal. The team was lead by MRDEC management, and team
members came from managers and associates from the MRDEC, AFGE Local
1858, the Civilian Personnel Office, and several other major functional
organizations within the Missile Command.
This personnel system design has been subjected to critical reviews
by Executive Steering Groups within the MRDEC and the Missile Command.
Additionally, negotiations with AFGE Local 1858 have influenced the
design in areas of significant concern to bargaining unit employees. A
survey, designed by AFGE Local 1858, was conducted to elicit MRDEC
employee opinions and preferences on key features of the proposal.
The design was preceded by an exhaustive study of broadbanding
systems currently practiced in the Federal sector. A first generation
design was briefed to the MRDEC workforce with the assistance of AFGE
Local 1858. During these briefing sessions, employees were provided a
copy of the first generation proposal, a set of anticipated questions
and answers, and a list of points of contact for concerns and
questions. Later design generations have evolved from critical reviews
by headquarters elements of the Department of the Army, Department of
Defense, and the Office of Personnel Management. Additionally,
consultation was provided by the designers of the broadbanding systems
practiced by the Navy China Lake experiment and the National Institute
of Standards and Technology.
H. Personnel Management Board
The MRDEC intends to establish an appropriate balance between the
personnel management authority and accountability of supervisors and of
the oversight responsibilities of a Personnel Management Board (PMB).
The Director will delegate management and oversight of the Project at
MRDEC to a Personnel Management Board whose members, Chairperson, and
staff (other than the union and Equal Employment Opportunity Office
members) will be appointed by the Director. The union and the Equal
Employment Opportunity Office will have permanent membership in the
PMB, and their representatives will be selected by the respective
organizations. The establishment of this Board shall not affect the
authority of any management official in the exercise of their
management rights set forth in 5 U.S.C. 7106(b)(1). The PMB will be
tasked with the following:
1. Overseeing the civilian pay budget,
2. Determining the composition of the pay-for-performance pay pools
in accordance with the guidelines of this proposal and internal
procedures,
3. Administering funds allocation to pay pool managers,
4. Reviewing operation of MRDEC pay pools,
5. Reviewing hiring and promotion salaries as well as exceptions to
pay-for-performance salary increases,
6. Providing guidance to pay pool managers,
7. Monitoring award pool distribution by organization or any other
special categorization,
8. Selecting participants for the Expanded Developmental
Opportunity Program, long term training, and any special developmental
assignments,
9. Managing promotions to stay within ``high grade'' controls,
10. Addressing in-house budget neutrality issues to include
tracking of average salaries,
11. Assessing the need for changes to demonstration procedures and
policies.
III. Personnel System Changes
A. Broadbanding
Occupational Families
Occupations at the MRDEC will be grouped into occupational
families. Occupations will be grouped according to similarities in type
of work, customary requirements for formal training or credentials, and
in consideration of the business practices at the MRDEC. The common
patterns of advancement within the occupations as
[[Page 34882]]
practiced at DoD Laboratories and in the private sector will also be
considered. The current occupations and grades have been examined, and
their characteristics and distribution have served as guidelines in the
development of the three occupational families described below:
1. Engineers and Scientists (E&S). This occupational family
includes all technical professional positions, such as engineers,
physicists, chemists, metallurgists, mathematicians, and computer
scientists. Predominantly, specific course work or educational degrees
are required for these occupations.
2. Technical and Business Support. This occupational family
contains positions that directly support the E&S mission: it includes
specialized functions in such fields as technical information
management, librarians, equipment specialists, quality assurance,
engineering and electronics technicians, finance, accounting,
administrative computing, and management analysis.
Employees in these jobs may or may not require college course work.
Analytical ability and specialized knowledge in administrative fields
are required. Knowledge of and training in the various electrical,
mechanical, chemical, or computer principles, methods, and techniques
are also generally required.
3. General Support. This occupational family is composed of
positions for which minimal formal education is needed, but for which
special skills, such as office automation or shorthand, are usually
required. Clerical work usually involves the processing and maintenance
of records. Assistant work requires knowledge of methods and procedures
within a specific administrative area. Other support functions include
the work of secretaries, guards, and mail clerks.
Paybands
Each occupational family will be composed of discrete paybands
(levels) corresponding to recognized advancement within the
occupations. These paybands will replace grades. They will not be the
same for all occupational families. Each occupational family will be
divided into four to five paybands; each payband covering the same pay
range now covered by one or more grades. A salary overlap, similar to
the current overlap between GS grades, will be maintained.
Ordinarily an individual will be hired at the lowest salary in a
payband. Exceptional qualifications, specific organizational
requirements, or other compelling reasons may lead to a higher entrance
level within a band.
The proposed paybands for the occupational families and how they
relate to the current GS grades are shown in Figure 1. Application of
the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) within each payband is also shown
in Figure 1. This payband concept has the following advantages:
1. It may reduce the number of classification decisions required
during an employee's career.
2. It simplifies the classification decision-making process and
paperwork. A payband covers a larger scope of work than a grade, and
will be defined in shorter and simpler language.
3. It supports delegation of classification authority to line
managers.
4. It provides a broader range of performance-related pay for
each level. In many cases, employees whose pay would have been
frozen at the top step of a grade will now have more potential for
upward movement in the broader payband.
5. It prevents the progression of low performers through a
payband by mere longevity, since job performance serves as the basis
for determining pay.
The MRDEC paybanding plan expands the paybanding concept used at
China Lake and NIST by creating Payband V of the Engineers and
Scientists occupational family. This payband is designed for Senior
Scientific Technical Managers.
Current legal definitions of Senior Executive Service (SES) and
Scientific and Professional (ST) positions do not fully meet the needs
of MRDEC. The SES designation is appropriate for executive level
managerial positions whose classification exceeds the GS-15 grade
level. The primary knowledges and abilities of SES positions relate to
supervisory and managerial responsibilities. Positions classified as ST
are reserved for bench research scientists and engineers; these
positions require a very high level of technical expertise and they
have little or no supervisory responsibility.
MRDEC currently has several positions, typically directorate/office
chiefs, that have characteristics of both SES and ST classifications.
Most directorate/office chiefs in MRDEC are responsible for supervising
other GS-15 positions, including function chiefs, non-supervisory
research engineers and scientists and, in some cases, ST positions.
Most directorate/office chief positions are classified at the GS-15
level, although their technical expertise warrants classification
beyond GS-15. Because of their management responsibilities, these
individuals are excluded from the ST system. Because of management
considerations, they cannot be placed in the SES. Management considers
the primary requirement for directorate/office chiefs to be knowledge
of, and expertise in, the specific scientific and technology areas
related to the mission of their directorates/offices. Historically,
incumbents of these positions have been recognized within the community
as scientific and engineering leaders, who possess primarily
scientific/engineering credentials and are considered experts in their
field. However, they must also possess strong managerial and
supervisory abilities. Therefore, although some of these employees have
scientific credentials that might compare favorably with ST criteria,
classification of these positions as STs is not an option, because the
managerial and supervisory responsibilities inherent in the positions
cannot be ignored.
The purpose of Payband V (which will reinforce the equal pay for
equal work principle) is to solve a critical classification problem. It
will also contribute to an SES ``corporate culture'' by excluding from
the SES positions for which technical expertise is paramount. Payband V
proposes to overcome the difficulties identified above by creating a
new category of positions, the Senior Scientific Technical Manager,
which has both scientific/technical expertise and full managerial and
supervisory authority.
Current GS-15 directorate/office chiefs will convert into the
demonstration project at Payband IV. After conversion they will be
reviewed against established criteria to determine if they should be
reclassified to Payband V. Other positions possibly meeting criteria
for classification to Payband V will be reviewed on a case by case
basis. The proposed salary range is a minimum of 120% of the minimum
rate of basic pay for GS-15 with a maximum rate of basic pay
established at the rate of basic pay (excluding locality pay) for SES
level 4 (ES-4). Vacant positions in Payband V will be competitively
filled to ensure that selectees are preeminent researchers and
technical leaders in the specialty fields who also possess substantial
managerial and supervisory abilities. MRDEC will capitalize on the
efficiencies that can accrue from central recruiting by continuing to
use the expertise of the Army Materiel Command SES Office as the
recruitment agent.
Panels will be created to assist in filling Payband V positions.
Panel members will be selected from a pool of current MRDEC SES
members, ST employees, and later those in Payband V, and an equal
number of individuals
[[Page 34883]]
of equivalent stature from outside the laboratory to ensure
impartiality, breadth of technical expertise, and a rigorous and
demanding review. The panel will apply criteria developed largely from
the current OPM Research Grade Evaluation Guide for positions exceeding
the GS-15 level.
DoD will test the establishment of Payband V for a five-year
period. Positions established in Payband V will be subject to
limitations imposed by OPM and DoD. Payband V positions will be
established only in an S&T Reinvention Laboratory which employs
scientists, engineers, or both. Incumbents of Payband V positions will
work primarily in their professional capacity on basic or applied
research and secondarily perform managerial or supervisory duties. The
number of Payband V positions within the Department of Defense will not
exceed 40. These 40 positions will be allocated by ASD (FMP), DoD, and
administered by the respective Services. The number of Payband V
positions will be reviewed periodically to determine appropriate
position requirements. Payband V position allocations will be managed
separately from SES, ST, and SL positions. An evaluation of the Payband
V concept will be performed during the fifth year of the demonstration
project.
The final component of Payband V is the management of all Payband V
assets. Specifically, this authority will be exercised at the DA level,
and includes the following: authority to classify, create, or abolish
positions within the limitations imposed by OPM and DoD; recruit and
reassign employees in this payband; set pay and to have their
performance appraised under this project's Pay for Performance System.
The laboratory wants to demonstrate increased effectiveness by gaining
greater managerial control and authority, consistent with merit,
affirmative action, and equal employment opportunity principles.
BILLLING CODE 6325-01-U
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN97.009
BILLING CODE 6325-01-C
Fair Labor Standards Act
Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) exemption and nonexemption
determinations will be made consistent with criteria found in 5 CFR
part 551. There are six paybands (see Figure 1) where employees can be
either exempt or nonexempt from overtime provisions. For these six
paybands supervisors with classification authority will make the
determinations on a case-by-case basis by comparing the duties and
responsibilities assigned, the classification standards for each
payband, and the FLSA criteria under 5 CFR part 551. Additionally, the
advice and assistance of the Civilian Personnel Advisory Center/
Civilian Personnel Operations Center (CPAC/CPOC) will be obtained in
making determinations as part of the performance review process. The
benchmark position descriptions will not be the sole basis for the
determination. Basis for exemption will be documented and attached to
each description. Exemption criteria will be narrowly construed and
applied only to those employees who clearly meet the spirit of the
exemption. Changes will be documented and provided to the CPAC/CPOC, as
appropriate.
Simplified Assignment Process
Today's environment of downsizing and workforce transition mandates
that the MRDEC have increased flexibility to assign individuals.
Broadbanding can be used to address this need. As a result of the
assignment to a particular level descriptor, the organization will have
increased flexibility to assign an employee, without pay change, within
broad descriptions consistent with the needs of the organization, and
the individual's qualifications and rank or level. Subsequent
assignments to projects, tasks, or functions anywhere within the
organization requiring the same level and area of expertise, and
qualifications would not constitute an assignment outside the scope or
coverage of the current level descriptor.
Such assignments within the coverage of the generic descriptors are
accomplished without the need to process a personnel action. For
instance,
[[Page 34884]]
a technical expert can be assigned to any project, task, or function
requiring similar technical expertise. Likewise, a manager could be
assigned to manage any similar function or organization consistent with
that individual's qualifications. This flexibility allows a broader
latitude in assignments and further streamlines the administrative
process and system.
Promotion
A promotion is a move of an employee to (1) a higher payband in the
same occupational family or (2) a payband in another occupational
family in combination with an increase in the employee's salary.
Positions with known promotion potential to a specific band within an
occupational family will be identified when they are filled. Not all
positions in an occupational family will have promotion potential to
the same band. Movement from one occupational family to another will
depend upon individual knowledge, skills, and abilities, and needs of
the organization.
Promotions will be processed under competitive procedures in
accordance with merit principles and requirements and the local merit
promotion plan. The following actions are excepted from competitive
procedures:
(a) Re-promotion to a position which is in the same payband and
occupational family as the employee previously held on a permanent
basis within the competitive service.
(b) Promotion, reassignment, demotion, transfer or reinstatement to
a position having promotion potential no greater than the potential of
a position an employee currently holds or previously held on a
permanent basis in the competitive service.
(c) A position change permitted by reduction in force procedures.
(d) Promotion without current competition when the employee was
appointed through competitive procedures to a position with a
documented career ladder.
(e) A temporary promotion, or detail to a position in a higher
payband, of 180 days or less.
(f) Reclassification to include impact of person on-the-job
promotions.
(g) A promotion resulting from the correction of an initial
classification error or the issuance of a new classification standard.
(h) Consideration of a candidate not given proper consideration in
a competitive promotion action.
(i) Impact of person on the job and Factor IV process (application
of the Research Grade Evaluation Guide, Equipment Development Grade
Evaluation Guide, Part III, or similar guides) promotions.
Link Between Promotion and Performance
Career ladder promotions and promotions resulting from the addition
of duties and responsibilities are examples of promotions that can be
made noncompetitively. Promotions can be made noncompetitively when
contributions and achievements are such that a higher payband is
achieved when comparing the overall position to the Equipment
Development Grade Evaluation Guide, Part III or the Research Grade
Evaluation Guide. To be promoted noncompetitively from one band to the
next, an employee must meet the minimum qualifications for the job and
have a current performance rating of B or better (see Performance
Evaluation) or equivalent under a different performance management
system. Selection of employees through competitive procedures will
require a current performance rating of B or better.
B. Pay-for-Performance Management System
Performance Evaluation
Introduction
The performance evaluation system will link compensation to
performance through annual performance appraisals and performance
scores. The performance evaluation system will allow optional use of
peer evaluation and/or input from subordinates as determined
appropriate by the Personnel Management Board. The system will have the
flexibility to be modified, if necessary, as more experience is gained
under the project.
Performance Objectives
Performance objectives are statements of job responsibilities based
on the work unit's mission, goals and supplemental benchmark position
descriptions. Employees and supervisors will jointly develop
performance objectives which will reflect the types of duties and
responsibilities expected at the respective pay level. In case of
disagreements, the decision of the supervisor will prevail. Performance
objectives deal with outputs and outcomes of a particular job. The
performance objectives, representing joint efforts of employees and
their rating chains, should be in place within 30 days from the
beginning of each rating period.
Performance Elements
Performance elements are generic attributes of job performance,
such as technical competence, that an employee exhibits in performing
job responsibilities and associated performance objectives. New
performance elements and rating forms will be designed to implement a
new scoring and rating system. The new performance evaluation system
will be based on critical and non-critical performance elements defined
in Appendix C. Each performance element is assigned a weight between a
specified range. The total weight of all elements is 100 points. The
supervisor assigns each element some portion of the 100 points in
accordance with its importance for mission attainment. As a general
rule, essentially identical positions will have the same critical
elements and the same weight. These weights will be developed along
with employee performance objectives.
Mid-Year Review
A mid-year review between a supervisor and employee will be held to
determine whether objectives are being met and whether ratings on
performance elements are above an unsatisfactory level. Performance
objectives should be modified as necessary to reflect changes in
planning, workload, and resource allocation. The weights assigned to
performance elements may be changed if necessary. Additional reviews
may be held as deemed necessary by the supervisor or requested by the
employee. The supervisor will provide periodic feedback to the employee
on their level of performance. If the supervisor determines that the
employee is not performing at an acceptable level on one or more
elements, the supervisor must alert the employee and document the
problem(s). This feedback will be provided at any time during the
rating cycle.
Employee Feedback to Supervisors
Employee feedback to supervisors (in a non-threatening and not-for-
attribution environment) is considered essential for the success of
this demonstration. A feedback process will be developed and
implemented within six months after implementation of the
demonstration. The employee feedback will be for the supervisors'
information only, and will not be a factor in determining annual
ratings of record. Additionally, the individual supervisor ratings will
be aggregated into a summary for the Director's use (with copies
furnished to the union) in assessing the quality of supervision
[[Page 34885]]
provided and to take whatever steps are needed in supervisory training
and development.
Performance Appraisal
A performance appraisal will be scheduled for the final weeks of
the annual performance cycle, although an individual performance
appraisal may be conducted at any time after the minimum appraisal
period of 120 days is met. The performance appraisal process brings
supervisors and employees together for formal discussions on
performance and results in (1) written appraisals, (2) performance
ratings, (3) performance scores, and (4) other individual performance-
related actions as appropriate. A performance appraisal shall consist
of two meetings held between employee and supervisor: the performance
review meeting and the evaluation feedback meeting.
Performance Review Meeting Between Employee and Supervisor
The review meeting is to discuss job performance and
accomplishments. Supervisors will not assign performance scores or
performance ratings at this meeting. The supervisor notifies the
employee of the review meeting in time to allow the employee to prepare
a list of accomplishments. Employees will be given an opportunity at
the meeting to give a personal performance assessment and describe
accomplishments. The supervisor and employee will discuss job
performance and accomplishments in relation to performance elements and
performance objectives.
Evaluation Feedback Meeting Between Employee and Supervisor
In this second meeting between employee and supervisor, the
supervisor informs the employee of management's appraisal of the
employee's performance on performance objectives, and the employee's
performance score and rating on performance elements. During this
second meeting, the supervisor and employee will discuss and document
performance objectives for the next rating period.
Performance Scores
The overall score is the sum of individual performance element
scores. Employees will receive an academic-type rating of A, B, C, or U
depending upon the score attained. These summary ratings are
representative of pattern E (a 4 level system) in summary level chart
in 5 CFR 430.208(d)(1). This rating will become the rating of record,
and only those employees rated C or higher will receive general
increases, performance pay increases (i.e., basic pay increases), and/
or performance bonuses. A rating of A will be assigned for scores from
85 to 100 points, B for scores from 70 to 84, C for scores from 50 to
69, and U for scores from 0 to 49 or a failure to achieve at the 50%
level of any critical element. The academic-type ratings will be used
to determine performance payouts and to award additional RIF retention
years as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RIF
Rating Compensation retention
yrs added
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A................................... 4 shares + c *......... 10
B................................... 2 shares + c *......... 7
C................................... 1 share + c *.......... 3
U................................... 0...................... 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* c = GS General Increase (Title 5, Section 5303). Pay increases for
employees receiving retained rates will be determined in accordance
with 5 U.S.C. 5363 except that those with a U rating will receive no
pay increase.
Selection of the weighted points to assign to an employee's
performance on performance elements is assisted by use of benchmark
performance standards (Appendix D). These benchmark performance
standards are modified versions of the performance standards used by
the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), National
Bureau of Standards. Each benchmark performance standard describes the
level of performance associated with a particular point on a rating
scale. Supervisors may add supplemental standards for employees they
supervise to further elaborate the benchmark performance standards.
Performance-Based Actions
MRDEC will implement a process to deal with poor performers. This
process may lead to involuntary separations, with grievance or appeal
rights. The process may start at any time during the rating period, not
necessarily at the end of an appraisal period. This process begins when
the supervisor identifies a deficiency(ies) which causes the level of
performance to be at the U (unsatisfactory) level based on a composite
score that is less than 50 for all elements or a score on any critical
element of less than 50 percent.
When the employee's performance is determined to be unsatisfactory
at the close of the annual rating period, the Unsatisfactory (U) rating
will become the rating of record for all matters relating to pay or
Reduction-in-Force (RIF).
There are two processes to deal with poor performers:
1. Change in Assignment--Because it is recognized that employees
may be assigned to a position for which they are not suited, an attempt
will be made to place poor performers in a position better suited to
their skills and capabilities. The offer of change in assignment will
be contingent upon the employee's concurrence and will be either within
the same band or in the next lower payband. If reassigned, the employee
will receive written notification that they will be given a reasonable
opportunity period of no less than thirty (30) calendar days in length,
to demonstrate performance at a level that is at least equal to that of
a summary level C rating. The period of time considered to be
reasonable will be determined, in part, by whether the employee's
reassignment is to a substantially similar or the same position under a
different supervisor, or in a different office, or in a substantially
different position. Essential training and mentoring will be provided
as appropriate during this opportunity period. Failure to achieve a
level of performance that is at least equal to that of a summary level
C rating (following the above-referenced opportunity period) will place
the employees in Step 3 of this process. There will be no further
opportunity period.
2. Performance Improvement Plan (PIP)--If the employee does not
accept an offer of change in assignment, or if there is no appropriate,
available position to assign an employee, the supervisor will develop a
PIP that will be monitored for a reasonable period of time (no less
than 30 calendar days). When an employee is placed in a PIP, the
employee will be informed in writing, that unless their level of
performance improves to, and is sustained at a level at least equal to
that of a summary level C rating, the employee may be removed from the
position (change in assignment, reduction in pay, or removal from the
Federal service).
If, during or at the conclusion of the PIP, the employee's level of
performance improves to a level at least equal to that of a summary
level C rating and is again determined to deteriorate to below level C
in any area during one year from the beginning of the PIP, the MRDEC
may initiate action to remove the employee from the position with no
additional opportunity to improve. An employee whose level of
performance improves to a level at least equal to that of a summary
level C rating for one year from the beginning of the PIP, and then
deteriorates to below level C again, in any area, during succeeding
rating periods, will be placed in a second PIP before initiating action
to remove the employee from the position.
[[Page 34886]]
If and when performance improves during the period in which the
employee is otherwise ineligible for the general increase, then the
general increase shall be restored. Such restoration is not retroactive
and is separate and apart from incentive pay.
3. Removal--If the employee fails to demonstrate a level of
performance at least equal to that of a summary level C rating after
completing either Step 1 or Step 2, the employee will be given a
written notice of proposed removal from the position. The notice period
will be a minimum of 30 calendar days and the employee will have a
reasonable period of time in which to reply. The employee will be given
a written notice of decision to include all applicable grievance and
appeal rights.
Note: Performance-based adverse actions may be taken under 5
U.S.C. Chapter 75, rather than Chapter 43.
A decision to remove an employee for poor performance may be based
only on those instances of poor performance that occurred during the
opportunity period (Step 1) or during the one-year period ending on the
date of proposed removal (Step 2). The notice of decision will specify
the instances of poor performance on which the action is based and will
be given to the employee at or before the time the action will be
effective.
The MRDEC will preserve all relevant documentation concerning an
action taken for poor performance and make it available to review by
the affected employee or designated representative. At a minimum, the
record will consist of a copy of the notice of proposed action; the
employee's written reply, if provided, or a summary if the employee
makes an oral reply. Additionally, the record will contain the written
notice of decision and the reasons therefore, along with any supporting
material including documentation regarding the opportunity afforded the
employee to demonstrate improved performance. An employee who sustains
their performance at a level at least equal to a summary level C rating
for one year, will have all relevant documentation removed from their
record.
Employee Relations
Employees covered by the project will be evaluated under a
performance evaluation system that affords grievance or appeal rights
comparable to those provided currently.
Senior Executive Service and 5 U.S.C. 3104 (ST) Employees
Members of the SES will remain under the current SES performance
appraisal system. Title 5 U.S.C. 3104 (ST) employees will be included
in the project performance evaluation system, but will not be in the
project pay-for-performance system.
Awards
The MRDEC currently has an extensive awards program consisting of
both internal and external awards. On-the-spot, special act (which are
both performance related and nonperformance related), and other
internal awards (both monetary and nonmonetary) will continue under the
project, and may be modified or expanded as appropriate. MACOM, DA, and
DoD awards and other honorary noncash awards will be retained.
Teams may distribute an award pool among themselves where
appropriate. Thus, a team leader or supervisor may allocate a sum of
money to a team for outstanding completion of a special task, and the
team may decide the individual distribution of the total dollars among
themselves.
The MRDEC Director will have the authority to grant awards to
covered employees of up to $10,000 for a special act. The scale of the
award will be determined using criteria in AR 5-17. AFGE Local 1858
will be notified and provided an opportunity to comment on proposed
special act awards for bargaining unit employees before the effective
date of the award. The name of proposed special act awardees will not
be released to the union for privacy act purposes.
Members of the SES will remain under their current awards system
and will not participate in the project performance recognition bonus
awards program. Title 5 U.S.C. 3104 (ST) employees will be eligible for
cash awards.
Pay Administration
Introduction
The objective is to establish a pay system that will improve the
ability of the MRDEC to attract and retain quality employees. The new
system will be a pay-for-performance system and, when implemented, will
result in a redistribution of pay resources based upon individual
performance. The first performance payout will be made effective with
the first full pay period of FY 1999 (October 1998). Future pay
adjustments will be effective at the beginning of the first full pay
period of subsequent fiscal years. General increase payouts in January
1998 will be provided to all covered employees regardless of their
rating of record or current performance status.
Pay-for-Performance
MRDEC will use a simplified performance appraisal system that will
permit both the supervisor and the employee to focus on quality of the
work. The proposed system will permit the manager/supervisor to base
incentive pay increases entirely on performance or value added to the
goals of the organization. This system will allow managers to withhold
pay increases from nonperformers, thereby giving the nonperformer the
incentive to improve performance or leave government service. For
example, employees with ratings of U will receive no performance pay
increase, general increase, or performance bonus. This action may
result in the employee's pay falling below the minimum rate of their
current payband because the minimum rate is increased by the general
increase (5 U.S.C. 5303). Under these transitory conditions, the
employee's payband designator will remain the same. Since there is no
reduction in band level or pay, there is no adverse action.
Pay for performance has two components: performance pay increases
and/or performance bonuses. The basic rates of pay used in computing
the pay pool and performance payouts exclude locality pay. All covered
employees will be given the full amount of locality pay adjustments
when they occur regardless of performance. Additionally, all covered
employees who have a rating of record above U will receive a full
general increase, except that employees receiving retained rates will
receive a pay increase in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 5363. The funding
for performance pay increases and/or performance bonuses is composed of
money previously available for within-grade increases, quality step
increases, promotions from one grade to another where both grades are
now in the same payband, and for some performance awards. Additionally,
funds will be obtained from performance pay increases withheld for poor
performance (see Performance Evaluation ).
Performance Pay Pool
The performance pay pool is composed of a base pay fund and a bonus
pay fund. The payouts made to employees from the performance pay pool
will be a mix of base pay increases and bonus payments, subject to the
amounts available in the respective funds.
The funding for the base pay fund is composed of money previously
available for within-grade increases, quality step increases, and
promotions between grades that are banded under
[[Page 34887]]
the demonstration project. The bonus pay fund is separately funded
within the constraints of the organization's overall performance award
budget. Some portion of the performance award budget will be reserved
for special ad hoc awards--e.g., suggestion awards or special act
awards--and will not be included as part of the performance pay pool.
The MRDEC Center Support Office, in consultation with AFGE Local
1858 and supporting personnelists, will calculate the total performance
pay pool funds and allocate pay pools prior to implementation to Major
Organizational Units or teams as appropriate.
Performance Pay Increases and/or Performance Bonuses
A pay pool manager is accountable for staying within pay pool
limits. The pay pool manager assigns performance pay increases and/or
performance bonuses to individuals on the basis of an academic-type
rating, the value of the performance pay pool resources available, and
the individual's current basic rate of pay within a given payband. A
pay pool manager may request approval from the Personnel Management
Board (PMB) or its designee to grant a performance pay increase to an
employee that is higher than the compensation formula for that employee
to recognize extraordinary achievement or to provide accelerated
compensation for local interns.
Performance payouts will be calculated for each individual based
upon a performance pay pool value that will be initially 3 percent
(e.g., 2.0% performance pay + 1.0% performance bonus) of the combined
basic rates of pay of the assigned employees.
This percentage, a payout factor, will be adjusted as necessary to
compensate for changing employee demographics which impact the elements
used in the GS system, such as the amount of step raises, quality step
increases, and promotions. The MRDEC will reexamine the payout factor
(F) at the end of the first assessment period to determine if a payout
factor of 2% was maintained by revised labor rates. If not, then the
factor F must be adjusted prior to the first year payments to
compensate for the early payment of step increases which would have
been used to form the full robust value of this factor. Performance
payouts will be calculated so that a pay pool manager will not exceed
the resources that are available in the pay pool. An employee's
performance payout is computed as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN97.010
Where: Pool Value=F * SUM (SALk); k=1 to n
n=Number of employees in pay pool
N=Number of shares earned by an employee based on their performance
rating (0 to 4)
SAL=An individual's basic rate of pay
SUM=The summation of the entities in parenthesis over the range
indicated
F=Payout Factor
Once the individual performance payout amounts have been
determined, the next step is to determine what portion of each payout
will be in the form of a base pay increase as opposed to a bonus
payment. A base pay share factor is derived by dividing the amount of
the base pay fund by the amount of the total performance pay pool. This
factor is multiplied by the individual performance payout amounts to
derive each individual's projected base pay increase. Certain employees
will not be able to receive the projected base pay increase due to base
pay caps. Base pay is capped when an employee reaches the maximum rate
of pay in an assigned payband, when the midpoint principle applies (see
below), and when the 50 percent rule applies (see below). Also, for
employees receiving retained rates above the applicable payband
maximum, the entire performance payout will be in the form of a bonus
payment.
If the organization determines it is appropriate, it may reallocate
a portion (up to the maximum possible amount) of the unexpended base
pay funds for capped employees to uncapped employees. This reallocation
must be made on a proportional basis so that all uncapped employees
receive the same percentage increase in their base pay share (unless
the reallocation adjustment is limited by a pay cap). Any dollar
increase in an employee's projected base pay increase will be offset,
dollar for dollar, by an accompanying reduction in the employee's
projected bonus payment. Thus, the employee's total performance payout
is unchanged.
A midpoint principle will be used to determine performance pay
increases. This principle requires that employees in all paybands must
receive a B rating or higher to advance their basic rate of pay beyond
the midpoint dollar threshold of their respective paybands. If the
performance payout formula yields a basic pay increase for a C-rated
employee that would increase their basic rate of pay beyond the
midpoint dollar threshold, then their basic rate of pay will be
adjusted to the midpoint dollar threshold and the balance converted to
a performance bonus. Once an employee has progressed beyond the
midpoint dollar threshold, future performance pay increases will
require a B rating or greater. If an employee attains a C rating and is
beyond the midpoint dollar threshold, incentive pay increases will be
restricted to performance bonuses only.
Annual performance pay increases will be limited to (1) 50 percent
of the difference between the particular maximum band rate and the
employee's current basic rate of pay, or (2) the projected performance
pay increase, whichever is less, with the balance converted to a
performance bonus. This rule will not apply when an employee's current
basic rate of pay is within $100 of the maximum band rate. This means
that employees whose pay has reached the upper limits of a particular
payband will receive most performance incentives as a performance
bonus. Performance bonuses are cash payments and are not part of the
basic pay for any purpose (e.g., lump sum payments of annual leave on
separation, life insurance, and retirement).
Supervisory Pay Adjustments
Supervisory pay adjustments may be used at the discretion of the
MRDEC Director, to compensate employees assuming positions entailing
supervisory responsibilities. Supervisory pay adjustments are increases
to the supervisor's basic rate of pay, ranging up to 10 percent of that
pay rate, subject to the constraint that the adjustment may not cause
the employee's basic rate of pay to exceed the payband maximum rate.
Only employees in supervisory positions with formal supervisory
authority meeting that required for coverage under the OPM GS
Supervisory Guide may be considered for the supervisory pay adjustment.
Criteria to be considered in determining the pay increase percentage
include the following organizational
[[Page 34888]]
and individual employee factors: (1) Needs of the organization to
attract, retain, and motivate high quality supervisors; (2) budgetary
constraints; (3) years of supervisory experience; (4) amount of
supervisory training received; (5) performance appraisals and
experience as a group or team leader; (6) their organizational level of
supervision; and (7) managerial impact on the organization. The
supervisory pay adjustment will not apply to 5 U.S.C. 3104 (ST)
positions or to employees in Payband V of the E&S occupational family.
Conditions, after the date of conversion into the demonstration
project, under which the application of a supervisory pay adjustment
may be considered are as follows:
(1) New hires into supervisory positions will have their initial
rate of basic pay set at the supervisor's discretion within the pay
range of the applicable payband. This rate of pay may include a
supervisory pay adjustment determined using the ranges and criteria
outlined above.
(2) A career employee selected for a supervisory position that is
within the employee's current payband may also be considered for a
supervisory pay adjustment. If a supervisor is already authorized a
supervisory pay adjustment and is subsequently selected for another
supervisory position, within the same payband, then the supervisory pay
adjustment will be redetermined.
Within the demonstration project rating system, the performance
element ``Supervision/EEO'' is identified as a critical element.
Changes in the rating value for this element awarded to a supervisor
with a supervisory pay adjustment may generate a review of the
adjustment and may result in an increase or decrease to that
adjustment. Decrease to a supervisory pay adjustment is not an adverse
action if this action results from changes in supervisory duties or
supervisory ratings.
Supervisors, upon initial conversion into the demonstration project
into the same, or substantially similar position, will be converted at
their existing basic rate of pay and will not be offered a supervisory
pay adjustment. Supervisory adjustments will not be funded from
performance pay pools.
The initial dollar amount of the adjustment will be removed when
the employee voluntarily leaves the supervisory position. The
cancellation of the adjustment under these circumstances is not an
adverse action and is not appealable. If an employee is removed from a
supervisory position for personal cause (performance or conduct), the
adjustment will be removed under adverse action procedures. However, if
an employee is removed from a non-probationary supervisory position for
conditions other than voluntary or for personal cause, then the pay
retention provisions of 5 CFR part 536 will prevail.
Supervisory Pay Differentials
Supervisory differentials may be used, at the discretion of the
MRDEC Director, to incentivize and reward supervisors who are in
Paybands III, IV, and V of any occupational family in supervisory
positions with formal supervisory authority meeting that required for
coverage under the OPM GS Supervisory Guide (excluding Payband V of the
E&S occupational family). A supervisory pay differential is a cash
incentive that may range up to 10 percent of the supervisor's basic
rate of pay. It is paid on a pay period basis and is not included as
part of the supervisor's basic rate of pay. Criteria to be considered
in determining the amount of this supervisory pay differential includes
those identified for Supervisory Pay Adjustments.
The supervisory pay differential may be considered, either during
conversion into or after initiation of the demonstration project, if
the supervisor has subordinate employees in the same payband. The
differential must be terminated if the employee is removed from a
supervisory position, regardless of cause, or no longer meets
established eligibility criteria. Supervisory differentials will not be
funded from performance pay pools.
As specified in Supervisory Pay Adjustments, after initiation of
the demonstration project, all personnel actions involving a
supervisory differential will require a statement signed by the
employee acknowledging that the differential may be terminated or
reduced at the MRDEC Director's discretion. The termination or
reduction of the differential is not an adverse action and is not
subject to appeal.
Pay and Compensation Ceilings
An employee's total monetary compensation paid in a calendar year
may not exceed the basic rate of pay paid in level I of the Executive
Schedule consistent with 5 U.S.C. 5307 and 5 CFR part 530, subpart B.
In addition, each payband will have its own pay ceiling, just as
grades do in the current system. Pay rates for the various paybands
will be directly keyed to the GS rates. Except for retained rates,
basic pay will be limited to the maximum rates payable for each
payband.
Pay Setting for Promotion
Upon promotion to a higher payband, an employee will be entitled to
a 6% pay increase or the lowest level in the payband to which promoted,
whichever is greater. Highest previous rate also may be considered in
setting pay upon promotion, under rules similar to the highest previous
rate rules in 5 CFR 531.203 (c) and (d).
Grade and Pay Retention
Except where waived or modified in the waivers section of this
plan, grade and pay retention will follow current law and regulations.
C. Classification
Introduction
The objectives of the new classification system are to simplify the
classification process, make the process more serviceable and
understandable, and place more decision-making authority and
accountability with line managers. All positions listed in Appendix A
will be in the classification structure. Provisions will be made for
including other occupations as employment requirements change in
response to changing technical programs.
Occupational Series
The present GS classification system has over 400 occupations (also
called series), which are divided into 22 groups. The occupational
series will be maintained. New series, established by OPM, may be added
as needed to reflect new occupations in the workforce. Appendix A lists
the occupational series currently represented at the MRDEC by
occupational family.
Classification Standards
MRDEC will use a classification system that is a modification of
the system now in use at the U.S. Navy, Naval Command, Control and
Ocean Surveillance Center, San Diego, California. The present
classification standards will be used to create local benchmark
position descriptions for each payband, reflecting duties and
responsibilities comparable to those described in present
classification standards for the span of grades represented by each
payband. There will be at least one benchmark position description for
each payband. A supervisory benchmark position description may be added
to those paybands that include supervisory employees. Present titles
and series will continue to be used in order to recognize the types of
work being performed and educational backgrounds
[[Page 34889]]
and requirements of incumbents. Locally developed specialty codes and
OPM functional codes will be used to facilitate titling, making
qualification determinations, and assigning competitive levels to
determine retention status.
Position Descriptions and Classification Process
The MRDEC Director will have delegated classification authority and
may redelegate this authority to subordinate managers. New benchmark
position descriptions will be developed to assist managers in
exercising delegated position classification authority. Managers will
identify the occupational family, job series, the functional code, the
specialty code, payband level, and the appropriate acquisition codes.
The manager will document these decisions on a cover sheet similar to
the present DA Form 374.
Specialty codes will be developed by Subject Matter Experts (SMEs)
to identify the special nature of work performed. Functional codes are
those currently found in the OPM Introduction to the Classification
Standards which define certain kinds of activities, e.g., Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, etc., and covers Engineers &
Scientists.
Classification Appeals
An employee may appeal the occupational family, occupational
series, or payband level of his or her position at any time. An
employee must formally raise the areas of concern to the supervisors in
the immediate chain of command, either verbally or in writing. If an
employee is not satisfied with the supervisory response, he or she may
then appeal to the DoD appellate level. If an employee is not satisfied
with the DoD response, he or she may then appeal to the Office of
Personnel Management, only after DoD has rendered a decision under the
provisions of this demonstration project. Appellate decisions from OPM
are final and binding on all administrative, certifying, payroll,
disbursing, and accounting officials of the Government. Time periods
for case processing under Title 5 apply.
An employee may not appeal the accuracy of the position
description, the demonstration project classification criteria, or the
pay-setting criteria; the assignment of occupational series to an
occupational family; the title of a position; the propriety of a salary
schedule; or matters grievable under an administrative or negotiated
grievance procedure or an alternative dispute resolution procedure.
The evaluation of a classification appeal under this demonstration
project are based upon the demonstration project classification
criteria. Case files will be forwarded for adjudication through the
Civilian Personnel Advisory Center/Civilian Personnel Operations Center
(CPAC/CPOC) providing personnel service and will include copies of
appropriate demonstration project criteria.
D. Hiring and Appointment Authorities
1. Hiring Authority
A candidate's basic eligibility will be determined using Office of
Personnel Management's (OPM) Qualification Standards Handbook for
General Schedule Positions. Candidates must meet the minimum standards
for entry into the payband. For example, if the payband includes
positions in grades GS-5 and GS-7, the candidate must meet the
qualifications for positions at GS-5 level. Specific experience/
education required will be determined based on whether a position to be
filled is at the lower or higher end of the band. Selective placement
factors can be established in accordance with the OPM Qualification
Handbook, when judged to be critical to successful job performance.
These factors will be communicated to all candidates for particular
position vacancies and must be met for basic eligibility. Under the
demonstration authority, the MRDEC will modify qualification standards
only as authorized in the General Policies and instructions (paragraph
8) of the Qualification Standard Handbook.
2. Appointment Authority
Under the demonstration project, there will continue to be career
and career conditional appointments and temporary appointments not to
exceed one year. These appointments will use existing authorities and
entitlements. Non-permanent positions (exceeding one year) needed to
meet fluctuating or uncertain workload requirements will be filled
using a Contingent Employee appointment authority.
Employees hired for more than one year, under the contingent
employee appointment authority, are given term appointments in the
competitive service for no longer than five years. The MRDEC Director
is authorized to extend a contingent appointment one additional year.
These employees are entitled to the same rights and benefits as term
employees and will serve a one year trial period. The Pay-for-
Performance Management System described in III.B applies to contingent
employees.
Appointments will be made under the same appointment authorities
and processes as regular term appointments, but recruitment bulletins
must indicate that there is a potential for conversion to permanent
employment.
Employees hired under the contingent employee authority may be
eligible for conversion to career-conditional appointments. To be
converted, the employee must (1) have been selected for the term
position under competitive procedures, with the announcement
specifically stating that the individual(s) selected for the term
position(s) may be eligible for conversion to career-conditional
appointment at a later date; (2) served two years of substantially
continuous service in the term position; (3) be selected under merit
promotion procedures for the permanent position; and (4) have a current
rating of B or better.
Employees serving under regular term appointments at the time of
conversion to the Demonstration Project will be converted to the new
contingent employee appointments provided they were hired for their
current positions under competitive procedures. These employees will be
eligible for conversion to career-conditional appointment if they have
a current rating of B or better (or one of the top two ratings on the
current evaluation system), and are selected under merit promotion
procedures for their permanent position after having completed two
years of continuous service. Time served in term positions prior to
conversion to the contingent employee appointment is creditable to the
requirement for two years of continuous service stated above, provided
the service was continuous.
3. Extended Probationary Period
The current one year probationary period will be extended to two
years for all newly hired employees in the Engineers and Scientists and
Technical and Business Support occupational families. The purpose of
extending the probationary period is to allow supervisors an adequate
period of time to fully evaluate an employee's ability to complete a
cycle of work (such as research, program development and execution, and
technology transfer) and to fully evaluate an employee's contribution
and conduct. Employees in the General Support occupational family will
serve a one year probationary period.
Aside from extending the time period, all other features of the
current probationary period are retained
[[Page 34890]]
including the potential to remove an employee without providing the
full substantive and procedural rights afforded a non-probationary
employee. Any employee appointed prior to the implementation date will
not be affected. The two year probation will apply to new hires or
those who do not have reemployment rights or reinstatement privileges.
Probationary employees will be terminated when the employee fails
to demonstrate proper conduct, technical competency, and/or adequate
contribution for continued employment. When the MRDEC decides to
terminate an employee serving a probationary period because his/her
work performance or conduct during this period fails to demonstrate
their fitness or qualifications for continued employment, it shall
terminate his/her services by written notification of the reasons for
separation and the effective date of the action. The information in the
notice as to why the employee is being terminated shall, as a minimum,
consists of the manager's conclusions as to the inadequacies of their
performance or conduct.
4. Supervisory Probationary Periods
Supervisory probationary periods will be made consistent with 5 CFR
315, Subchapter 315.901. Employees that have successfully completed the
initial probationary period will be required to complete an additional
one year probationary period for the initial appointment to a
supervisory position. If, during the probationary period, the decision
is made to return the employee to a nonsupervisory position for reasons
solely related to supervisory performance, the employee will be
returned to a comparable position of no lower payband and pay than the
position from which they were promoted.
5. Voluntary Emeritus Program
Under the demonstration project, the MRDEC Director will have the
authority to offer retired or separated individuals (engineers and
scientists) voluntary assignments in the MRDEC. This authority will
include individuals who have retired or separated from Federal service.
Voluntary Emeritus Program assignments are not considered
``employment'' by the Federal government (except for purposes of injury
compensation). Thus, such assignments do not affect an employee's
entitlement to buyouts or severance payments based on an earlier
separation from Federal service. The Voluntary Emeritus Program will
ensure continued quality research while reducing the overall salary
line by allowing higher paid individuals to accept retirement
incentives with the opportunity to retain a presence in the scientific
community. The program will be of most benefit during manpower
reductions as senior S&Es could accept retirement and return to provide
valuable on-the-job training or mentoring to less experienced
employees. Voluntary service will not be used to replace any employee,
or interfere with career opportunities of employees.
To be accepted into the emeritus program, a volunteer must be
recommended by MRDEC managers to the MRDEC Director. Everyone who
applies is not entitled to a voluntary assignment. The MRDEC Director
must clearly document the decision process for each applicant (whether
accepted or rejected) and retain the documentation throughout the
assignment. Documentation of rejections will be maintained for two
years.
To ensure success and encourage participation, the volunteer's
federal retirement pay (whether military or civilian) will not be
affected while serving in a voluntary capacity. Retired or separated
federal employees may accept an emeritus position without a break or
mandatory waiting period.
Volunteers will not be permitted to monitor contracts on behalf of
the government or to participate on any contracts or solicitations
where a conflict of interest exists. The same rules that currently
apply to source selection members will apply to volunteers.
An agreement will be established between the volunteer, the MRDEC
Director and the CPAC/CPOC Director. The agreement will be reviewed by
the local Legal Office for ethics determinations under the Joint Ethics
Regulation. The agreement must be finalized before the assumption of
duties and shall include:
(a) a statement that the voluntary assignment does not constitute
an appointment in the civil service and is without compensation, and
any and all claims against the Government (because of the voluntary
assignment) are waived by the volunteer,
(b) a statement that the volunteer will be considered a federal
employee for the purpose of injury compensation,
(c) volunteer's work schedule,
(d) length of agreement (defined by length of project or time
defined by weeks, months, or years),
(e) support provided by the MRDEC (travel, administrative, office
space, supplies),
(f) a one page Statement of Duties and Experience,
(g) a provision that states no additional time will be added to a
volunteer's service credit for such purposes as retirement, severance
pay, and leave as a result of being a member of the Voluntary Emeritus
Program,
(h) a provision allowing either party to void the agreement with 10
working days written notice, and
(i) the level of security access required (any security clearance
required by the assignment will be managed by the MRDEC while the
volunteer is a member of the Voluntary Emeritus Program).
E. Employee Development
1. Expanded Developmental Opportunity Program
The MRDEC Expanded Developmental Opportunity Program will be funded
by the MRDEC, and it will cover all demonstration project employees in
the Engineers and Scientists and the Technical and Business Support
occupational families. An expanded developmental opportunity
complements existing developmental opportunities such as (1) long term
training, (2) one year work experiences in an industrial setting via
the Relations With Industry Program, (3) one year work experiences in
laboratories of allied nations via the Science and Engineer Exchange
Program, (4) rotational job assignments within the MRDEC, (5) up to one
year developmental assignments in higher headquarters within the Army
and Department of Defense, and (6) self directed study via
correspondence courses and local colleges and universities.
Each developmental opportunity period should benefit the MRDEC, as
well as increase the employee's individual effectiveness. Various
learning or uncompensated developmental work experiences may be
considered, such as advanced academic teaching or research, or on-the-
job work experience with public or non-profit organizations. Employees
will be eligible after completion of seven years of Federal service.
Final approval authority will rest with the MRDEC Director, and
selection of an employee to be granted an expanded developmental
opportunity will be on a competitive basis. An expanded developmental
opportunity period will not result in loss of (or reduction in) basic
pay, leave to which the employee is otherwise entitled, or credit for
time or service. Employees accepting an expanded developmental
opportunity
[[Page 34891]]
do not have to sign a continued service agreement cited in 5 U.S.C.
4108(a)(1) (Supplement 1995).
The opportunity to participate in the Expanded Developmental
Opportunity Program will be announced annually. Instructions for
application and the selection criteria will be included in the
announcement. Final selection for participation in the program will be
made by the Personnel Management Board. The position of employees on an
expanded developmental opportunity may be backfilled with employees
temporarily promoted or contingent employees or employees assigned via
the simplified assignment process in III.A. However, that position or
its equivalent must be made available to the employee returning from
the expanded developmental opportunity.
2. Training for Degrees
Degree training is an essential component of an organization that
requires continuous acquisition of advanced and specialized knowledge.
Degree training in the academic environment of laboratories is also a
critical tool for recruiting and retaining employees with or requiring
critical skills. Constraints under current law and regulation limit
degree payment to shortage occupations. In addition, current government
wide regulations authorize payment for degrees based only on
recruitment or retention needs. Degree payment is not permitted
currently for non-shortage occupations involving critical skills.
The MRDEC proposes to expand the authority to provide degree
payment to employees in all occupational families for purposes of
meeting critical skill requirements, to ensure continuous acquisition
of advanced and specialized knowledge essential to the organization,
and to recruit and retain personnel critical to the present and future
requirements of the organization. Degree payment may not be authorized
where it would result in a tax liability for the employee without the
employee's express and written consent. It is expected that the degree
payment authority will be used primarily and largely for advanced
degrees, except where an undergraduate program is necessary to the
attainment of an advanced degree or credits. Any variance from this
policy must be rigorously determined and documented.
The MRDEC will develop guidelines to ensure competitive approval of
degree payment and that such decisions are fully documented.
F. Revised Reduction-in-Force (RIF) Procedures
Introduction
Modifications include limiting competitive area, as defined below,
and increasing the emphasis on performance in the RIF Process.
Retention criteria are in the following order; tenure, veterans'
preference, service credit adjusted by a sum of the last three
performance ratings. Current reduction in force regulations/procedures
have been adjusted in the context of the occupational family and the
payband classification system.
Competitive Areas
All positions included in the Demonstration Project at a specific
geographic location will be considered a separate competitive area.
Bumps and retreats will occur only within the competitive area and only
to positions for which the employee is qualified. Competitive levels
will be established based on the payband, classification series, and
where responsibilities are similar enough in duties, qualification
requirements, pay schedules, and working conditions so that an employee
may be reassigned to any of the other positions within the level
without requiring significant training or causing undue interruption.
Separate competitive levels will be established for positions in the
competitive and excepted service; for positions filled on a full-time,
part-time, intermittent, seasonal, or on-call basis; and separate
levels will be established for positions filled by an employee in a
formally designated trainee or developmental program.
Retention
Competing employees are listed on a retention register in the order
shown below. Each tenure group has three subgroups (30% or higher
compensable veterans, other veterans, and non-veterans) and employees
appear on the retention register in that order. Within each subgroup,
employees are in order of years of service adjusted to include
performance credit.
Tenure I (Career employees)
Tenure II (Career-Conditional employees)
Tenure III (Contingent employees)
In the demonstration project, an employee can bump to a position
held by another employee in a lower subgroup or tenure group; the
position may be no lower than the equivalent of three GS grades (or
appropriate grade intervals) below the minimum GS grade level of his/
her current band in accordance with Section V (Conversion or Movement
from a Project Position to a General Schedule Position, a. Grade-
Setting Provision). An employee can retreat to a position held by
another employee in the same subgroup who has a lower adjusted RIF
service computation date; the position may be no lower than the
equivalent of three GS grades (or appropriate grade intervals) below
the minimum GS grade level of his/her current band, in accordance with
Section V (Conversion or Movement from a Project Position to a General
Schedule Position, a Grade Setting Provision). A preference eligible
with a compensable service-connected disability of 30 percent or more
may retreat to a position equivalent to five GS grades (or appropriate
grade intervals) below the minimum grade level of his/her current band.
An employee with a current annual performance rating of U has
assignment rights only to a position held by another employee who has a
U rating. An employee who has been given a written decision of removal
because of unacceptable performance will be placed at the bottom of the
retention register for his/her competitive level.
Link Between Performance and Retention
An employee will have additional years of service added to the
service computation date for retention purposes. The credit is applied
for each of the last three annual performance ratings of record,
received over the last four years, for a potential credit of 30 years.
If an employee has less than three annual performance ratings of
record, then for each missing rating, an average of the ratings
received for the past four years will be used. Ratings given under non-
demo systems will be converted to the demo rating scheme and provided
the equivalent rating credit.
Rating A adds 10 years
Rating B adds 7 years
Rating C adds 3 years
Rating U adds no credit for retention
IV. Training
Introduction
The key to the success or failure of the proposed demonstration
project will be the training provided for all involved. This training
will not only provide the necessary knowledge and skills to carry out
the proposed changes, but will also lead to program commitment on the
part of participants.
Training before the beginning of implementation and throughout the
demonstration will be provided to supervisors, employees, and the
administrative staff responsible for
[[Page 34892]]
assisting managers in effecting the changeover and operation of the new
system.
The elements to be covered in the orientation portion of this
training will include: (1) A description of the personnel system, (2)
how employees are converted into and out of the system, (3) the pay
adjustment and/or bonus process, (4) familiarization with the new
position descriptions and performance objectives, (5) the performance
evaluation management system, (6) the reconsideration process, and (7)
the demonstration project administrative and formal evaluation process.
AFGE Local 1858 will be given an opportunity to describe their role and
function in the demonstration program.
Supervisors
The focus of this project on management-centered personnel
administration, with increased supervisory and managerial personnel
management authority and accountability, demands thorough training of
supervisors and managers in the knowledge and skills that will prepare
them for their new responsibilities. Training will include detailed
information on the policies and procedures of the demonstration
project, skills training in using the classification system, position
description preparation, performance evaluation, and interaction with
AFGE Local 1858 as a partner. Additional training may focus on
nonproject procedural techniques such as interpersonal and
communication skills.
Administrative Staff
The administrative staff, generally personnel specialists,
technicians, and administrative officers, will play a key role in
advising, training, and coaching supervisors and employees in
implementing the demonstration project. This staff will need training
in the procedural and technical aspects of the project.
Employees
The MRDEC, in conjunction with the AFGE Local 1858 and education
and development assets of the CPAC/CPOC will train employees covered
under the demonstration project. In the months leading up to the
implementation date, meetings will be held for employees to fully
inform them of all project decisions, procedures, and processes.
V. Conversion
Conversion to the Demonstration Project
a. Initial entry into the demonstration project will be
accomplished through a full employee protection approach that ensures
each employee an initial place in the appropriate payband without loss
of pay. Employees serving under regular term appointments at the time
of the implementation of the demonstration project will be converted to
the contingent employee appointment. Position announcement, etc. will
not be required for these contingent employee appointments. An
automatic conversion from current GS/GM grade and pay into the new
broadband system will be accomplished. Each employee's initial total
salary under the demonstration project will equal the total salary
received immediately before conversion. Employees who enter the
demonstration project later by lateral reassignment or transfer will be
subject to parallel pay conversion rules. If conversion into the
demonstration project is accompanied by a geographic move, the
employee's GS pay entitlements in the new geographic area must be
determined before performing the pay conversion.
b. Employees who are on temporary promotions at the time of
conversion will be converted to a payband commensurate with the grade
of the position to which promoted. At the conclusion of the temporary
promotion, the employee will revert to the payband which corresponds to
the grade of record. When a temporary promotion is terminated, the
employee's pay entitlements will be determined based on the employee's
position of record, with appropriate adjustments to reflect pay events
during the temporary promotion, subject to the specific policies and
rules established by the MRDEC. In no case may those adjustments
increase the pay for the position or record beyond the applicable pay
range maximum rate. The only exception will be if the original
competitive promotion announcement stipulated that the promotion could
be made permanent; in these cases actions to make the temporary
promotion permanent will be considered, and if implemented, will be
subject to all existing priority placement programs.
c. Employees who are covered by special salary rates, prior to the
demonstration project, will no longer be considered a special rate
employee under the Demonstration Project. These employees will,
therefore, be eligible for full locality pay. The adjusted salaries of
these employees will not change. Rather, the employees will receive a
new basic pay rate computed by dividing their adjusted basic pay
(higher of special rate or locality rate) by the locality pay factor
for their area. A full locality adjustment will then be added to the
new basic pay rate. Adverse action and pay retention provisions will
not apply to the conversion process as there will be no change in total
salary.
d. During the first 12 months following conversion, employees will
receive pay increases for non-competitive promotion equivalents when
the grade level of the promotion is encompassed within the same
broadband, the employee's performance warrants the promotion and
promotions would have otherwise occurred during that period. Employees
who receive an in-level promotion at the time of conversion will not
receive a prorated step increase equivalent as defined below.
e. Under the current pay structure, employees progress through
their assigned grade in step increments. Since this system is being
replaced under the demonstration project, employees (including those
added to the MRDEC by BRAC 95 actions) will be awarded that portion of
the next higher step based upon the portion of the waiting period they
have completed prior to the date of implementation. As under the
current system, supervisors will be able to withhold these partial step
increases if the employee's performance falls below fully successful.
Rules governing Within-Grade Increases (WGI) under the current Army
performance plan will continue in effect until the implementation date.
Adjustments to the employee's base salary for WGI equity will be
computed effective the date of implementation to coincide with the
beginning of the first formal PFP assessment cycle. WGI equity will be
acknowledged by increasing base salaries by a prorated share based upon
the number of weeks an employee has completed toward the next higher
step. Payment will equal the current value of the employee's next WGI
times the proportion of the waiting period completed (weeks completed
in waiting period/weeks in the waiting period) at the time of
conversion. Employees at step 10, or receiving retained rates, on the
date of implementation will not be eligible for WGI equity adjustments
since they are already at or above the top of the step scale.
Conversion or Movement From a Project Position to a General Schedule
Position
If a demonstration project employee is moving to a General Schedule
(GS) position not under the demonstration project, or if the project
ends and each project employee must be converted back to the GS system,
the following procedures will be used to convert the employee's project
payband to a GS-equivalent grade and the employee's project rate of pay
to GS equivalent rate of pay. The converted GS grade and GS
[[Page 34893]]
rate of pay must be determined before movement or conversion out of the
demonstration project and any accompanying geographic movement,
promotion, or other simultaneous action. For conversions upon
termination of the project and for lateral reassignments, the converted
GS grade and rate will become the employee's actual GS grade and rate
after leaving the demonstration project (before any other action). For
transfers, promotions, and other actions, the converted GS grade and
rate will be used in applying any GS pay administration rules
applicable in connection with the employee's movement out of the
project (e.g., promotion rules, highest previous rate rules, pay
retention rules), as if the GS converted grade and rate were actually
in effect immediately before the employee left the demonstration
project.
a. Grade-Setting Provisions: An employee in a payband corresponding
to a single GS grade is converted to that grade. An employee in a
payband corresponding to two or more grades is converted to one of
those grades according to the following rules:
(1) The employee's adjusted rate of basic pay under the
demonstration project (including any locality payment) is compared with
step 4 rates in the highest applicable GS rate range. (For this
purpose, a ``GS rate range'' includes a rate in (1) the GS base
schedule, (2) the locality rate schedule for the locality pay area in
which the position is located, or (3) the appropriate special rate
schedule for the employee's occupational series, as applicable.) If the
series is a two-grade interval series, only odd-numbered grades are
considered below GS-11.
(2) If the employee's adjusted project rate equals or exceeds the
applicable step 4 rate of the highest GS grade in the band, the
employee is converted to that grade.
(3) If the employee's adjusted project rate is lower than the
applicable step 4 rate of the highest grade, the adjusted rate is
compared with the step 4 rate of the second highest grade in the
employee's payband. If the employee's adjusted rate equals or exceeds
step 4 rate of the second highest grade, the employee is converted to
that grade.
(4) This process is repeated for each successively lower grade in
the band until a grade is found in which the employee's adjusted
project rate equals or exceeds the applicable step 4 rate of the grade.
The employee is then converted at that grade. If the employee's
adjusted rate is below the step 4 rate of the lowest grade in the band,
the employee is converted to the lowest grade.
(5) Exception: If the employee's adjusted project rate exceeds the
maximum rate of the grade assigned under the above-described ``step 4''
rule but fits in the rate range for the next higher applicable grade
(i.e., between step 1 and step 4), then the employee shall be converted
to that next higher applicable grade.
(6) Exception: An employee will not be converted to a lower grade
than the grade held by the employee immediately preceding a conversion,
lateral reassignment, or lateral transfer into the project, unless
since that time the employee has undergone a reduction in band.
b. Pay-Setting Provisions: An employee's pay within the converted
GS grade is set by converting the employee's demonstration project rate
of pay to GS rate of pay in accordance with the following rules:
(1) The pay conversion is done before any geographic movement or
other pay-related action that coincides with the employee's movement or
conversion out of the demonstration project.
(2) An employee's adjusted rate of basic pay under the project
(including any locality payment) is converted to a GS adjusted rate on
the highest applicable rate range for the converted GS grade. (For this
purpose, a ``GS rate range'' includes a rate range in (1) the GS base
schedule, (2) an applicable locality rate schedule, or (3) an
applicable special rate schedule.)
(3) If the highest applicable GS rate range is a locality pay rate
range, the employee's adjusted project rate is converted to a GS
locality rate of pay. If this rate falls between two steps in the
locality-adjusted schedule, the rate must be set at the higher step.
The converted GS unadjusted rate of basic pay would be the GS base rate
corresponding to the converted GS locality rate (i.e., same step
position). (If this employee is also covered by a special rate schedule
as a GS employee, the converted special rate will be determined based
on the GS step position. This underlying special rate will be basic pay
for certain purposes for which the employee's higher locality rate is
not basic pay.)
(4) If the highest applicable GS rate range is a special rate
range, the employee's adjusted project rate is converted to a special
rate. If this rate falls between two steps in the special rate
schedule, the rates must be set at the higher step. The converted GS
unadjusted rate of basic pay will be the GS rate corresponding to the
converted special rate (i.e., same step position).
c. E&S Payband V Employees: An employee in Payband V of the E&S
Occupational family will convert out of the demonstration project at
the GS-15 level. The MRDEC, in consultation with the MICOM CPAC, will
develop a procedure to ensure that employees entering Payband V
understand that if they leave the demonstration project and their
adjusted pay exceeds the GS-15, step 10 rate, there is no entitlement
to retained pay; their GS-equivalent rate will be deemed to be the rate
for GS-15, step 10. For those Payband V employees paid below the
adjusted GS-15, step 10 rate, the converted rates will be set in
accordance with paragraph b.
d. Employees with Band or Pay Retention: (1) If an employee is
retaining a band level under the demonstration project, apply the
procedures in paragraphs a and b, above, using the grades encompassed
in the employee's retained band to determine the employee's GS-
equivalent retained grade and pay rate. The time in a retained band
under the demonstration project counts toward the 2-year limit on grade
retention in 5 U.S.C. 5382.
(2) If an employee is retaining rate under the demonstration
project, the employee's GS-equivalent grade is the highest grade
encompassed in his or her band level. MRDEC will coordinate with OPM to
prescribe a procedure for determining the GS-equivalent pay rate for an
employee retaining a rate under the demonstration project.
e. Within-Grade Increase--Equivalent Increase Determinations:
Service under the demonstration project is creditable for within-grade
increase purposes upon conversion back to the GS pay system.
Performance pay increases (including a zero increase) under the
demonstration project are equivalent increases for the purpose of
determining the commencement of a within-grade increase waiting period
under 5 CFR 531.405(b).
Personnel Administration
All personnel laws, regulations, and guidelines not waived by this
plan will remain in effect. Basic employee rights will be safeguarded
and merit principles will be maintained. Supporting personnel
specialists will continue to process personnel-related actions and
provide consultative and other appropriate services.
Use of benchmark position descriptions is not anticipated to
adversely impact an employee's ability to seek employment outside of
MRDEC. MRDEC employees participating in the project will have short
generic benchmark position descriptions which describe the general type
of work performed, and the range of complexity and supervisory
controls. The
[[Page 34894]]
benchmark position description cover sheet lists the OPM occupational
series, e.g., 855 for Electronics Engineer, to which the employee is
assigned, and, where additional specificity is needed, lists a
specialty code, which ties the employee's benchmark description to a
particular technology or functional area. The OPM occupational code
will serve as ready identification Government-wide of the basic
qualifications and experience that the employee possesses. In addition,
virtually all federal employment systems, including the Office of
Personnel Management's, rely on employee-generated resumes which allow
the applicants to summarize or describe the details of their experience
and training. Any pertinent information regarding the MRDEC employees'
knowledge, skills or abilities not contained in the benchmark position
description can be conveyed to potential employers through their
resume.
Automation
The MRDEC will continue to use the Defense Civilian Personnel Data
System (DCPDS) for the processing of personnel-related data. Payroll
servicing will continue from the respective payroll offices.
Local automated systems will be developed to support computation of
performance related pay increases and awards and other personnel
processes and systems associated with this project.
Experimentation and Revision
Many aspects of a demonstration project are experimental. Upon
written request by Management or the union to the other party,
modifications may be negotiated at any time as experience is gained,
results are analyzed, and conclusions are reached on how the system is
working. The MRDEC will make minor modifications, such as changes in
the occupational series in an occupational family without further
notice. Major changes, such as a change in the number of occupational
families, will be negotiated with the union and published in the
Federal Register. See 5 CFR part 470.
VI. Project Duration
Public Law 103-337 removed any mandatory expiration date for this
demonstration. The project evaluation plan adequately addresses how
each intervention will be comprehensively evaluated for at least the
first 5 years of the demonstration. Major changes and modifications to
the interventions can be made through announcement in the Federal
Register and would be made if formative evaluation data warranted. At
the 5 year point, the entire demonstration will be reexamined for
either: (a) Permanent implementation, (b) change and another 3-5 year
test period, or (c) expiration.
VII. Evaluation Plan
Chapter 47 (Title 5 U.S.C.) requires that an evaluation system be
implemented to measure the effectiveness of the proposed personnel
management interventions. An evaluation plan for the entire laboratory
demonstration program covering 24 DoD labs was developed by a joint
OPM/DoD Evaluation Committee. A Comprehensive evaluation plan was
submitted to the Office of Defense Research & Engineering in 1995 and
subsequently approved (Proposed Plan for Evaluation of the Department
of Defense S&T Laboratory Demonstration Program, Office of Merit
Systems Oversight & Effectiveness, June 1995). The overall evaluation
effort will be coordinated and conducted by OPM's Personnel Resources
and Development Center (PRDC). The primary focus of the evaluation is
to determine whether the waivers granted result in a more effective
personnel system than the current as well as an assessment of the costs
associated with the new system.
The present personnel system with its many rigid rules and
regulations is generally perceived as an impediment to mission
accomplishment. The Demonstration Project is intended to remove some of
those barriers and therefore, is expected to contribute to improved
organizational performance. While it is not possible to prove a direct
causal link between intermediate and ultimate outcomes (improved
personnel system performance and improved organizational
effectiveness), such a linkage is hypothesized and data will be
collected and tracked for both types of outcome variables.
An intervention impact model (Appendix B) will be used to measure
the effectiveness of the various personnel system changes or
interventions. Additional measures will be developed as new
interventions are introduced or existing interventions modified
consistent with expected effects. Measures may also be deleted when
appropriate. Activity specific measures may also be developed to
accommodate specific needs or interests which are locally unique.
The evaluation model for the Demonstration Project identifies
elements critical to an evaluation of the effectiveness of the
interventions. The overall evaluation approach will also include
consideration of context variables that are likely to have an impact on
project outcomes: e.g., HRM regionalization, downsizing, cross-service
integration, and the general state of the economy. However, the main
focus of the evaluation will be on intermediate outcomes, i.e., the
results of specific personnel system changes which are expected to
improve human resources management. The ultimate outcomes are defined
as improved organizational effectiveness, mission accomplishment, and
customer satisfaction.
Data from a variety of different sources will be used in the
evaluation. Information from existing management information systems
supplemented with perceptual data will be used to assess variables
related to effectiveness. Multiple methods provide more than one
perspective on how the demonstration project is working. Information
gathered through one method will be used to validate information
gathered through another. Confidence in the findings will increase as
they are substantiated by the different collection methods. The
following types of data will be collected as part of the evaluation:
(1) Workforce data; (2) personnel office data; (3) employee attitudes
and feedback using surveys, structured interviews, and focus groups;
(4) local activity histories; and, (5) core measures of laboratory
effectiveness.
VIII. Demonstration Project Costs
Costs associated with the development of the personnel
demonstration system include software automation, training, and project
evaluation. All funding will be provided through the MICOM/MRDEC
budget. The projected annual expenses for each area is summarized in
Table 1.
Table 1.--Projected Developmental Costs (Then Year Dollars)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 96 FY 97 FY 98 FY 99 FY 00 FY 01
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Training......................... $6K $99K $12K
Project Evaluation............... $25K $60K $60K $60K $60K $60K
[[Page 34895]]
Automation....................... $80K $10K
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals..................... $111K $169K $72K $60K $60K $60K
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IX. Required Waivers to Law and Regulation
Public Law 103-337 gave the DoD the authority to experiment with
several personnel management innovations. In addition to the
authorities granted by the law, the following are the waivers of law
and regulation that will be necessary for implementation of the
Demonstration Project. In due course, additional laws and regulations
may be identified for waiver request.
1. Title 5, U.S. Code
Chapter 31, Section 3111: Acceptance of Volunteer Service--To the
extent that the acceptance of retired or separated engineers and
scientists are included as volunteers under current statute.
Chapter 31, Section 3132: The Senior Executive Service; Definitions
and exclusions.
Chapter 33, Section 3324: Appointment to positions classified above
GS-15.
Chapter 41, Section 4107: Pay for Degrees.
Chapter 41, Section 4108: Employee Agreements; Service after
Training--To the extent that employees who accept an expanded
developmental opportunity (sabbatical) do not have to sign a continued
service agreement.
Chapter 43, Sections 4301(3): Definitions
Chapter 43, Section 4302: Establishment of Performance Appraisal
Systems.
Chapter 43, Section 4303(a), (b), and (c): Actions based on
Unacceptable Performance.
Chapter 51, Sections 5101-5111: Related to classification standards
and grading; to the extent that white collar employees will be covered
by broadbanding. Pay category determination criteria for federal wage
system positions remain unchanged.
Chapter 53, Sections 5301, 5302 (8) and (9), 5303 and 5304:
Sections 5301, 5302, and 5304 are waived only to the extent necessary
to allow demonstration project employees to be treated as General
Schedule employees and to allow basic rates of pay under the
demonstration project to be treated as scheduled rates of pay. This
waiver does not apply to ST employees who continue to be covered by
these provisions, as appropriate. Employees in Payband V of the E&S
occupational family are treated as ST employees for the purposes of
these provisions.
Chapter 53, Section 5305: Special Rates
Chapter 53, Sections 5331-5336: General Schedule pay rates.
Chapter 53, Sections 5361-5366: Grade and pay retention--This
waiver applies only to the extent necessary to (1) replace ``grade''
with ``payband'; (2) allow demonstration project employees to be
treated as General Schedule employees; (3) provide that pay retention
provisions do not apply to conversions from General Schedule special
rates to demonstration project pay, as long as total pay is not
reduced, and to reductions in pay due solely to the removal of a
supervisory pay adjustment upon voluntarily leaving a supervisory
position; (4) provide that an employee on pay retention whose
performance rating is ``U'' is not entitled to 50 percent of the amount
of the increase in the maximum rate of basic pay payable for the
payband of the employee's position; and, (5) ensure that for employees
of Payband V of the E&S occupational family, payband retention is not
applicable and pay retention provisions are modified so that no rate
established under these provisions may exceed the rate of basic pay for
GS-15, step 10 (i.e., there is no entitlement to retained rate). This
waiver does not apply to ST employees unless they move to a GS-
equivalent position under the demonstration project under conditions
that trigger entitlement to pay retention.
Chapter 55, Section 5545(d): Hazardous duty differential--This
waiver applies only to the extent necessary to allow demonstration
project employees to be treated as General Schedule employees. This
waiver does not apply to ST employees or employees in Payband V of the
E&S occupational family.
Chapter 57, Section 5753, 5754, and 5755: Recruitment and
Relocation Bonuses, Retention Allowances and Supervisory
Differentials--This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to
allow employees and positions under the demonstration project to be
treated as employees and positions under the General Schedule. This
waiver does not apply to ST employees who continue to be covered by
these provisions, as appropriate. Employees in Payband V of the E&S
occupational family are treated as ST employees for the purposes of
these provisions.
Chapter 75, Section 7512(3): Adverse actions--This waiver applies
only to the extent necessary to replace ``grade'' with ``payband''.
Chapter 75, Section 7512(4): Adverse actions--This waiver applies
only to the extent necessary to provide that adverse action provisions
do not apply to (1) conversions from General Schedule special rates to
demonstration project pay, as long as total pay is not reduced and (2)
reductions in pay due to the removal of a supervisory pay adjustment
upon voluntary movement to a nonsupervisory position.
2. Title 5, Code of Federal Regulations:
Part 300.601-605: Time-in-Grade requirements--Restrictions
eliminated under the demonstration.
Part 308.101 through 308.103: Volunteer Service--To the extent that
retired engineers/scientists can perform voluntary services.
Part 315.801 and 315.802: Probationary Period--Demonstration
project employees in some occupational families will have extended
probationary period.
Part 316.301: Term Appointments--Adding years to exceed 4.
Part 316.303: Tenure of Term Employees--Demonstration allows for
conversion.
Part 316.305: Eligibility for Within-Grade Increases.
Part 351.402(b): Competitive Areas--Demonstration establishes each
separate geographic location of the MRDEC as a separate competitive
area.
Part 351.403: Competitive level--To the extent that payband is
substituted for grade.
Part 351.504: Credit for Performance--As it relates to years of
credit.
Part 351.701: Assignment Involving Displacement--To the extent that
employees bump and retreat rights will be limited to one payband except
in the case of 30% preference eligibles which is a position equivalent
to five GS grades below the minimum grade level of his/her payband.
Part 430 subpart B, Performance Appraisal for General Schedule,
[[Page 34896]]
Prevailing Rate, and Certain Other Employees: Employees under the
demonstration project will not be subject to the requirements of this
subpart.
Part 432: Modified to the extent that an employee may be removed,
reduced in band level with a reduction in pay, reduced in pay without a
reduction in band level and reduced in band level without a reduction
in pay based on unacceptable performance. Also modified to delete
reference to critical element. For employees who are reduced in band
level without a reduction in pay, Sections 432.105 and 432.106(a) do
not apply.
Part 432, Sections 104 and 105: Proposing and Taking Action Based
on Unacceptable Performance.
Part 511: Classification Under the General Schedule--To the extent
that grades are changed to paybands, and that white collar positions
are covered by paybanding.
Part 530, subpart C: Special salary rates.
Part 531, subparts B, D, and E: Determining rate of basic pay,
within-grade increases, and quality step increases.
Part 531, subpart F: Locality pay--This waiver applies only to the
extent necessary to allow demonstration project employees to be treated
as General Schedule employees, and basic rates of pay under the
demonstration project to be treated as scheduled annual rates of pay.
This waiver does not apply to ST employees who continue to be covered
by these provisions, as appropriate. Employees in Payband V of the E&S
occupational family are treated as ST employees for the purposes of
these provisions.
Part 536: Grade and pay retention--This waiver applies only to the
extent necessary to (1) replace ``grade'' with ``payband'; (2) provide
that pay retention provisions do not apply to conversions from General
Schedule special rates to demonstration project pay, as long as total
pay is not reduced, and to reductions in pay due solely to the removal
of a supervisory pay adjustment upon voluntarily leaving a supervisory
position; (3) provide that an employee on pay retention whose
performance rating is ``U'' is not entitled to 50 percent of the amount
of the increase in the maximum rate of basic pay payable for the
payband of the employee's position; and, (4) ensure that for employees
of Payband V of the E&S occupational family, payband retention is not
applicable and pay retention provisions are modified so that no rate
established under these provisions may exceed the rate of basic pay for
GS-15, step 10 (i.e., there is no entitlement to retained rate). This
waiver does not apply to ST employees unless they move to a GS-
equivalent position under the demonstration project under conditions
that trigger entitlement to pay retention.
Part 550.703: Severance Pay--This waiver applies only to the extent
necessary to modify the definition of ``reasonable offer'' by replacing
``two grade or pay levels'' with ``one band level'' and ``grade or pay
level'' with ``band level'.
Part 550.902: Hazardous Duty Differential--This waiver applies only
to the extent necessary to allow demonstration project employees to be
treated as General Schedule employees. This waiver does not apply to ST
employees or employees in Payband V of the E&S occupational family.
Part 575, subparts A, B, C, and D: Recruitment Bonuses, Relocation
Bonuses, Retention Allowances and Supervisory Differentials--This
waiver applies only to the extent necessary to allow employees and
positions under the demonstration project covered by paybanding to be
treated as employees and positions under the General Schedule. This
waiver does not apply to ST employees who continue to be covered by
these provisions, as appropriate. Employees in Payband V of the E&S
occupational family are treated as ST employees for the purposes of
these provisions.
Part 752.401 (a)(3): Adverse Actions--This waiver applies only to
the extent necessary to replace ``grade'' with ``payband.''
Part 752.401(a)(4): Adverse Actions--This waiver applies only to
the extent necessary to provide that adverse action provisions do not
apply to (1) conversions from General Schedule special rates to
demonstration project pay, as long as total pay is not reduced and (2)
reductions in pay due to the removal of a supervisory pay adjustment
upon voluntary movement to a nonsupervisory position.
Appendix A: Occupational Series by Occupational Family
I. Engineers & Scientists
0801 General Engineer
0806 Materials Engineer
0808 Architecture
0810 Civil Engineer
0819 Environmental Engineer
0830 Mechanical Engineer
0850 Electrical Engineer
0854 Computer Engineer
0855 Electronics Engineer
0861 Aerospace Engineer
0892 Ceramics Engineer
0893 Chemical Engineer
0896 Industrial Engineer
0899 Student Trainee (Engr)
1301 Physical Scientist
1310 Physicist
1320 Chemist
1321 Metallurgist
1515 Operations Research Analyst
1520 Mathematician
1529 Mathematician Stat
1550 Computer Scientist
II. Technical and Business Support
0028 Environ Protec Specialist
0301 Data & Configuration Management, Standardization
0301 Misc Admin & Program
0334 Computer Specialist
0340 Program Manager
0341 Administrative Officer
0342 Support Services Spec
0343 Mgmt/Prog Analyst
0346 Log Mgt Spec
0391 Telecommunications
0560 Budget Analyst
0802 Engineering Technician
0809 Construction Rep
0856 Electronics Technician
1001 General Arts & Information
1040 Language Specialist
1082 Technical Information Writer
1083 Technical Writer/Editor
1102 Contract Specialist
1150 Industrial Specialist
1176 Building Manager
1311 Physical Sciences Tech
1410 Librarian (Phy Sci & Engr)
1412 Technical Information Spec
1499 Student Trainee
1515 Operations Research Analyst (Cost)
1521 Mathematics Technician
1670 Equipment Specialist
1910 Quality Assurance Specialist 42001 General Supply Spec
III. General Support
0085 Guard
0302 Messenger
0303 Misc Clerk and Asst
0305 Mail Clerk
0312 Clerk-Stenographer
0318 Secretary
0326 Ofc Automation Clerk
0344 Management Assistant
0561 Budget Assistant
1106 Procurement Clerk
1411 Library Technician
2005 Supply Technician
BILLING CODE 6325-01-U
[[Page 34897]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN97.011
[[Page 34898]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN97.012
[[Page 34899]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN97.013
[[Page 34900]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN97.014
[[Page 34901]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN97.015
BILLING CODE 6325-01-C
Appendix C--Performance Elements
All employees will be rated against at least the five generic
performance elements listed through ``e'' below. Technical competence
is a mandatory critical element. Other elements may be identified as
critical by agreement between the rater and the employee. In case of
disagreements, the decision of the supervisor will prevail. Generally,
any performance element weighted 25 or higher should be critical.
However, only those employees whose duties require manager/leader
responsibilities will be rated on element ``f.'' Supervisors will be
rated against an additional critical performance element, listed at
``g'' below:
a. Technical Competence. Exhibits and maintains current technical
knowledge, skills, and abilities to produce timely and quality work
with the appropriate level of supervision. Makes prompt, technically
sound decisions and recommendations that add value to mission
priorities and needs. For appropriate occupational families, seeks and
accepts developmental and/or special assignments. Adaptive to
technological change. (Weight range: 15 to 50)
b. Working Relationships. Accepts personal responsibility for
assigned tasks. Considerate of others' views and open to compromise on
areas of difference, if allowed by technology, scope, budget, or
direction. Exercises tact and diplomacy and maintains effective
relationships, particularly in immediate work environment and teaming
situations. Always willing to give assistance. Shows appropriate
respect and courtesy. (Weight Range: 5 to 15)
c. Communications. Provides or exchanges oral/written ideas and
information in a manner that is timely, accurate and cogent. Listens
effectively so that resultant actions show understanding of what was
said. Coordinates so that all relevant individuals and functions are
included in, and informed of, decisions and actions. (Weight Range: 5
to 15)
d. Resource Management. Meets schedules and deadlines, and
accomplishes work in order of priority; generates and accepts new ideas
and methods for increasing work efficiency; effectively utilizes and
properly controls available resources; supports organization's resource
development and conservation goals. (Weight Range: 15 to 50)
e. Customer Relations. Demonstrates care for customers through
respectful, courteous, reliable and conscientious actions. Seeks out
and develops solid working relationships with customers to identify
their needs, quantifies those needs, and develops practical solutions.
Keeps customer informed and prevents surprises. Within the scope of job
responsibility, seeks out and develops new programs and/or reimbursable
customer work. (Weight Range: 10 to 50)
f. Management/Leadership. Actively furthers the mission of the
organization. As appropriate, participates in the development and
implementation of strategic and operational plans of the organization.
Develops and implements tactical plans. Exercises leadership skills
within the environment. Mentors junior personnel in career development,
technical competence, and interpersonal skills. Exercises due
responsibility of technical/acquisition/organizational positions
assigned to them. (Weight Range: 0 to 50)
g. Supervision/EEO. Works toward recruiting, developing,
motivating, and retaining quality team members; takes timely/
appropriate personnel actions, applies EEO/merit principles;
communicates mission and organizational goals; by example, creates a
positive, safe, and challenging work environment; distributes work and
empowers team members. (Weight Range: 15 to 50)
BILLING CODE 6325-01-U
[[Page 34902]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN97.016
[[Page 34903]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27JN97.017
[FR Doc. 97-16850 Filed 6-26-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-01-C
