Application  |  Arbitral Review  |  Establishment  |  Incentive Pay/Awards
Negotiations  |  Notification/Participation  |  Performance–based Actions
Timeliness  |  Within–grade Increase  |  Miscellaneous

1. Applying the same performance standards to both job retention and within–grade increase. NTEU, 3 FLRA 769 [NN]
2. The application of performance standards to be “fair and equitable“ and consistent with classification standards. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 32, 3 FLRA 784 [N]
3. Management, in applying standards, to make allowances for factors beyond the employee’s control. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 3804, 7 FLRA 217, Proposal 2 [N]
4. Critical elements will be based on grade controlling factors and they will be weighted in proportion to their relative importance in grade determination. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 2192, 9 FLRA 716, Proposal 1 [NN]
5. Performance standards shall be uniformly applied for like duties in like circumstances. NTEU, 9 FLRA 983, Issue 5, Article 16, Section 8 (second sentence) [N]
6. Delay of 90 days before performance standards can be applied to employees transferred to a new position. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 2910, 15 FLRA 541 [N]
7. Performance standards, as well as their application, must be fair. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 32, 17 FLRA 790, Proposal 3 [NN]
8. Agency to make allowance for circumstances outside an employee’s control when setting performance standards. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 32, 19 FLRA 93, Proposals 1, 2 and 3 [NN]
9. Agency to make adjustments in performance standards under certain circumstances. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 1151, 19 FLRA 673 [NN]
10. Adjustments to performance standards as a result of the adverse impact on performance by a reduction in space. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 12, 21 FLRA 1124, Proposal 17 [NN]
11. Performance standards will be fair and equitable and attainable by average employees. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 1760, 25 FLRA 16, Proposal 3, Paragraph B [NN]
12. Managers to meet with employees and their representatives before the first audit each year to explain the standards. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 1760, 25 FLRA 16, Proposal 3, Paragraph A [N]
13. Performance standards consist of objective criteria related to the particular positions. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 1409, 28 FLRA 109, Provision 1 [N]
14. Mandating a performance rating of fully satisfactory during the first one hundred twenty days after reassignment. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 1760, 28 FLRA 160, Provision 7 (first sentence) [NN]
15. Prohibiting management from recording or making use of any audits of employee performance during the one hundred twenty days. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 1760, 28 FLRA 160, Provision 7 (second sentence) [NN]
16. Performance standards themselves will take into consideration the relative difficulty of the work subject to review. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 32, 28 FLRA 714, Proposal 10 [NN]
17. Standards will be fair, equitable and reasonable to permit the accurate evaluation of job performance. POPA, 29 FLRA 1389, Proposal 2 [NN]
18. Agency to delay implementation of performance objectives until its gets certain technology and gives employees access to the technology. NTEU, Chapter 250, 30 FLRA 672 [NN]
19. Establishing a joint labor–management advisory committee responsible for determining the merits of allegations that performance elements and standards established by management do not comply with applicable rules and regulations. NTEU, 31 FLRA 566, Proposal 27.24 [N]
20. The final decision as to an employee’s performance standards and elements rests with the employee’s supervisor. NAGE, AFL–CIO, Local R1–144, 35 FLRA 642 [NN]
21. Specifying what actions taken by employees will constitute a “count” of work under the agency’s performance standards. NTEU, 36 FLRA 606 [N]
22. Requiring that performance standards be fair and equitable. NAGE, AFL–CIO, Local R1–144, 38 FLRA 456, Proposal 3 [NN]
23. The percentage of work time spent on representational activities will be considered by the agency in determining an employee’s performance standards. NTEU, 40 FLRA 570, Proposal 1, Section B [N]
24. Concerning characteristics that performance must possess. NTEU, 42 FLRA 964, Provision 3 (first sentence) [NN]
25. Prohibiting changes to performance standards during a rating period that are based on an employee’s ability to meet or exceed the requirements. NFFE, Local 405, 42 FLRA 1112, Proposal 30 [NN]
26. Mandating that any presumptive rating will be at least equal to the employee’s last rating. NFFE, Local 405, 42 FLRA 1112, Proposal 32 [NN]
27. Requiring the agency to make every effort to limit the number of objectives within the work plan to five, but reserving to management the right to exceed that number. NAGE, AFL–CIO, Local R12–29, 43 FLRA 810, Proposal 2 [N]
28. The agency will apply performance standards fairly, equitably, objectively, and uniformly for like duties in like circumstances, and performance standards will be reasonably related to the duties set forth in position descriptions. United Power Trades Organization, 44 FLRA 1145, Proposal 2 [N]
29. Performance standards will be objective to the maximum extent feasible, and will provide incentives for superior performance. United Power Trades Organization, 44 FLRA 1145, Proposal 3 [N]
30. Critical elements and performance standards will be consistent with duties and responsibilities contained in employees’ position descriptions. NTEU, 46 FLRA 696, Provisions 20 and 21, Paragraph 1 [N]
31. Describing the contents of performance standards. NTEU, 46 FLRA 696, Provisions 21, Paragraphs 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8 [NN]
32. Requiring the agency to evaluate employee performance on the basis of records that can be verified as accurate. NFFE, Local 1974, 46 FLRA 1170, Proposal 5 [NN]. Upheld in Veterans Affairs v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 33 F.3d 1391 (D.C. Cir. 1994).
33. Entitling an employee who is rated under both new and old performance standards during a given year to the rating which is higher. NFFE, Local 1974, 46 FLRA 1170, Proposal 7 (second sentence) [NN]. Upheld in Veterans Affairs v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 33 F.3d 1391 (D.C. Cir. 1994).
34. Employees will be evaluated against performance standards established and provided to them in writing at the beginning of the rating period. POPA, 47 FLRA 10, Proposals 28 and 35 [N]
35. Requiring that, as they are applied to an employee, performance standards and elements will be fair and based upon objective criteria and job–relatedness. AFGE, Council of Prison Locals, 47FLRA 836, Provision 2 [N]
36. If employees do not have sufficient training or experience in an element of their position to allow supervisors to objectively rate their performance, those employees will not be evaluated on that element for that appraisal cycle. NFFE, Local 858, 48 FLRA 552, Proposal 1 [NN, (a)(2)(A) and (B)]
37. Performance elements relating to ethics and personal values will not be discussed or referenced in any manner or on any document concerning a bargaining unit employees’ evaluation. NFFE, Local 1214, 49 FLRA 215, Provision 1 [NN, (a)(2)(A) and (B)]
38. Delaying the implementation of the above proposal until the parties meet in 1995 to discuss the need to implement it and for the union to take certain actions concerning the implementation. NFFE, Local 1214, 49 FLRA 215, Provision 2 [NN, (a)(2)(A) and (B)]
39. A performance element affected by policy changes resulting from deficit reduction plans to be deemed non-critical for the entire year. National Association of Agriculture Employees, 49 FLRA 319, Proposal 2 [NN, (a)(2)(A) and (B)]
40. The performance standard for pharmacy technicians remains at filling 240 outpatient prescriptions for the evening shift. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 1687, 52 FLRA 521 [NN, (a)(2)(A) and (B)]
41. Requiring the agency to permit patent examiners to record as special examining time the time spent in work conditions outside the specified temperature range under the terms of the proposal when there is a disruption of normal workflow. POPA, 56 FLRA 69, Proposal 4 [N]
42. Allowing examiners to identify as special examining time the time spent reporting computer system problems. POPA, 56 FLRA 69, Proposal 17 [N, (b)(3)]
43. Allowing examiners to identify as special examining time the time spent working on first actions-on-the-merits, amended applications, automated system delays that disrupt the normal workflow, catastrophic failures of the automated system, work projects where the unit member receives a No Document Display or Page Not Available, and cases where a printer provides bad copies of documents. POPA, 56 FLRA 69, Proposal 44 [N, (b)(3)]
44. Allowing examiners to identify as special examining time the time spent checking a gene sequence. POPA, 56 FLRA 69, Proposal 58 [N, (b)(3)]
45. Requiring the agency to grant non–examining time to patent examiners when the temperature in the computer workstation area is outside the specified range, between 65 F and 80 F, for more than 2 continuous hours. POPA, 56 FLRA 69, Proposal 3 [NN, (a)(2)(A)]
46. Requiring the agency to grant non–examining time to examiners to file reports of problems with the computer system. POPA, 56 FLRA 69, Proposal 16 [N, (b)(3)]
47. Providing the agency with three alternatives when, in performing a search, an examiner requests printouts of documents, and the printouts need to be collated: section (a) provides that the documents would be delivered to the examiner already collated; section (b) provides that the examiner would receive separate examining time for the time spent collating the documents; and section (c) provides that the examiner would receive non–examining time for the time spent collating the documents. POPA, 56 FLRA 69, Proposal 24 [N]
48. Requiring the agency to provide all unit members with a specified amount of non examining time in order to become familiar with the operation of the automated system. POPA, 56 FLRA 69, Proposal 43 [NN, (a)(2)(A) and (B)]
49. Ensuring that portions of time spent performing all first–actions–on–the–merits as well as time spent as the result of computer problems, including system delays and catastrophic failures, would not be included in the total amount of time subject to appraisal for productivity purposes. POPA, 56 FLRA 69, Proposal 45 [NN, (a)(2)(A) and (B)]
50. Treating as non-examining time the time that examiners are required to spend checking a gene sequence in electronic form. POPA, 56 FLRA 69, Proposal 57 [NN, (a)(2)(A) and (B)]
51. Requiring management to negotiate the substance of the criteria that it uses to assess employees' performance of their duties. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 1709, 56 FLRA 549, Proposal 2 [NN, (a)(2)(A) and(B)]

Arbitral Review

1. Subjecting management’s identification of critical elements and establishment of performance standards to arbitral review. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 1968, 5 FLRA 70, Proposal 4, Sections 1 and 2 [NN]
2. An action taken as the result of the application of critical elements and performance standards established by management may be subjected to arbitral review. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 1968, 5 FLRA 70, Proposal 4, Section 4 [N]
3. Subjecting the establishment of performance standards by the agency to challenge through the negotiated grievance procedure. AFGE, AFL–CIO, National Council of CSA Locals, 5 FLRA 748 [NN]
4. Subjecting the identification of critical elements and the establishment of performance standards to arbitral review. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 3804, 7 FLRA 217, Proposal 7, Sections 1 and 2 [NN]
5. Establishing a general, non–quantitative requirement by which the application of performance standards established by management may subsequently be evaluated in a grievance alleging adverse affect by the application of the standards. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 3804, 7 FLRA 217, Proposal 7, Section 3 [N]
6. Extending the coverage of the negotiated grievance procedure to include direct challenges to agency’s identification of the critical elements and establishment of performance standards of a position. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 2849, 7 FLRA 571, Proposal 2 [NN]
7. Providing a general, non–quantitative requirement by which the application of performance standards established by management may subsequently be evaluated in a grievance. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 2849, 7 FLRA 571, Proposal 3 [N]
8. Subjecting critical elements and performance standards to arbitral review. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 1858, 7 FLRA 794, Proposal 3, Sections 1 and 2 [NN]
9. Allowing the application of performance standards to be grieved. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 1858, 7 FLRA 794 Proposal 3, Section 4 [N]
10. Subjecting disputes over the establishment of critical elements and performance standards to the negotiated grievance procedure. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 2192, 9 FLRA 716, Proposal 5, Sections 1 and 2 [NN]
11. Including within the negotiated grievance procedure certain actions resulting from the application of management-established critical elements and performance standards to an employee. Tidewater Virginia Federal Employees Metal Trades Council, 15 FLRA 343, Provision 2 [N]
12. All performance standards must be fair, equitable, objective, valid, reliable, and job related, thus establishing a general, non–quantitative requirement by which the application of established performance standards can be evaluated in a grievance. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 1940, 16 FLRA 816, Proposal 1 [N]
13. Arbitrator to determine whether performance standards are fair and reasonable by reviewing the criteria used by management in such standards to evaluate job performance. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 1603, 22 FLRA 567 [NN]
14. Disagreements over the fairness and equity of performance standards will be submitted to an arbitrator for resolution. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 1760, 25 FLRA 16, Proposal 3, Paragraph D [NN]
15. Permitting arbitral review of whether the performance standards themselves made the appropriate allowances for the situations described. AFGE, AFL–CIO, Local 32, 28 FLRA 714 [NN]
16. At a minimum an arbitrator can determine management had not properly applied the elements and standards it established. NTEU, 31 FLRA 566, Proposal 27.8 (1) [N]
17. Allowing an arbitrator to order that a grievant’s previous appraisal remain in effect until a proper reevaluation can be made by the agency. NTEU, 31 FLRA 566, Proposal 27.8 (2) [N]
18. All personnel actions involving an incorrect appraisal will be corrected based on the previous appraisal. NTEU, 31 FLRA 566, Proposal 27.8 (3) [N]
19. Allowing a retroactive correction of an evaluation so long as the correction of an evaluation is based on the application of properly established elements and standards. NTEU, 31 FLRA 566, Proposal 27.8 (4) [N]
20. Arbitrator can direct any legal remedy, including remedies available under the Back Pay Act. NTEU, 31 FLRA 566, Proposal 27.8 (5) [N]
21. Including the substance of critical elements and performance standards within the scope of the negotiated grievance procedure once they are applied. NTEU, 42 FLRA 964, Provision 9 [N]