Click here to skip navigation Home  |  Subject Index  |  Important Links  |  Contact Us  |  Help

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

Advanced Search

Resource Center

Link to Resource Center Overview page
Job Aids
Link to Job Aids page
the Process

Link to Understanding the  Process page

Link to Sample Documents page
Frequently Asked

Link to Frequently Asked Questions page
Complete Booklet

Link to Download the Complete Booklet
Link to Site Map

Resource Center
for Addressing and Resolving Poor Performance

Comparison of Part 432 vs. Part 752

The table below compares the regulations to further clarify the differences between each authority.

  Part 432 Part 752
Types of Actions Actions: Demotion or Removal Actions: Suspension, Demotion, or Removal
Actions Taken For Actions taken for "unacceptable performance." Actions taken for "such cause as will promote the efficiency of the service."
Proof Actions must be proven by "substantial evidence" (lower standard than Part 752). Actions must be proven by a "preponderance of the evidence" (higher standard than Part 432).
Actions Based On Actions can only be based on an employee`s formal, established, communicated standards. Actions can be based on expectations or established/formal standards.
Opportunity Period Employee is entitled to an opportunity period. No requirement for an opportunity period.
Time Limits Time limited to performance "deficiencies" occurring within the 1 year prior to the proposal notice. No time limit for inclusion of "incident/charges" in Part 752.
Immediacy of Action Employee remains on the job throughout the opportunity period. Can take immediate action because no requirement for an opportunity period exists.
Mitigation Action may not be mitigated (action will either be sustained or reversed). Action may be mitigated (penalty reduced).

As you can see, there are distinct differences between these regulations. For example, Part 432 requires that you give the employee an opportunity to bring his or her performance up to an acceptable level, while Part 752 does not require such an opportunity period. With this difference in mind, you may question the reasoning behind providing an opportunity period if it is not required. Keep in mind that third parties (for example, arbitrators, judges) place a strong emphasis on a supervisor`s effort to communicate what is expected to the employee as well as the supervisor`s effort to assist the employee in improving his or her performance. An opportunity period addresses both of these concerns. While an opportunity period may not be required under Part 752, providing such an opportunity may assist the agency in developing a stronger case before a third party.

Another difference between the regulations is that Part 432 requires the use of established performance elements and standards. Under Part 752, employees can be held to ad hoc standards such as explicit instructions or work assignments or professional standards established for certain occupations such as physicians. In some cases, it may be more appropriate to hold employees to these ad hoc standards, as long as they are no more stringent than the established performance standards. As always, consult with your human resources staff to determine if the use of ad hoc standards or if a formal opportunity period is appropriate in your specific case. Also, talk with your human resources staff concerning any internal agency policies regarding the use of a formal opportunity period.

Addressing and Resolving Poor Performance Index   |   Employee Relations   |   Contact Us