U.S. Office of Personnel Management - Ensuring the Federal Government has an effective civilian workforce

STATEMENT OF NANCY H. KICHAK
ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR
U.S. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

Before the

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE AND AGENCY ORGANIZATION
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

On

ESTABLISHING A COMMISSION TO RECOMMEND IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES APPEALS PROCESSES

July 11, 2006

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:

I appreciate the opportunity to represent the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and Director Linda Springer here today to discuss the idea of establishing a Commission to study the challenges in the current Federal employee appeals process and the realm of possible solutions available to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the process.

While the dispute resolution and appeals process is only one aspect of OPM's interest in good government, it is an important one. Workplace disputes with employees, agency actions taken against employees, and the dispute resolution processes that follow have implications that can impact the morale and effectiveness of individual employees and their agencies. Central to any discussion of consolidating and streamlining dispute resolution processes should be the goal of making the Federal workforce more effective and efficient while retaining its fundamental underlying principle of merit.

Federal employees work hard, and expect to be treated like professionals. The vast majority of Federal employees will never be involved in the dispute resolution process. But they want to know that it is there and functioning effectively. They want to know that whatever dispute they bring to the process will be adjudicated in a timely, fair, and impartial manner.

The current system for adjudicating workplace disputes has been criticized as time-consuming, complex, and producing inconsistent decisions. The proposed legislation would create a Commission to study the current appeals processes and issue a report in 12 months with recommendations on a minimum of seven significant topics. We agree that this is an issue that deserves attention and we appreciate your leadership in exploring ways to address these longstanding criticisms and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the process.

We do have some concerns regarding the proposal to establish a commission to study and make recommendations. Our first concern involves the short period of time provided - 12 months after the Commission’s first meeting - to study four broad areas and make recommendations on at least seven distinct and substantial issues. We recommend that the period provided for the Commission's work be extended to at least 18 months after the Commission's first meeting.

We also believe that if a commission is established, the enabling legislation should encourage the Commission to consult with other Federal agencies and independent organizations, not reflected in the current draft bill, that have unique roles or expertise in the Federal employee appeals process.

Finally, the proposal would provide the Commission with a Director and staff. It does not however specify how the Director would be appointed. Since that official would presumably have a key role in the administration and the ultimate success of the Commission, we suggest that the legislation clearly describe how that individual is to be selected and who has the authority to make the appointment (perhaps a majority vote of the Commission would be required).

In sum, we agree there is room for improvement of the Federal employee appeals processes. We appreciate your leadership in this area and we look forward to continuing the dialogue on this and other important personnel issues. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you and the Subcommittee today. I am prepared to answer any questions you or other Members may have.