<DOC>
[110th Congress House Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:44913.wais]
MANAGING DIVERSITY OF SENIOR LEADERSHIP IN THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE AND
POSTAL SERVICE
=======================================================================
JOINT HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON FEDERAL WORKFORCE,
POSTAL SERVICE, AND THE DISTRICT
OF COLUMBIA
of the
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
and the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT OF
GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT, THE
FEDERAL WORKFORCE, AND THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
of the
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
APRIL 3, 2008
__________
Serial No. 110-82
__________
Printed for the use of the Committees on Oversight and Government
Reform and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/
index.html
http://www.house.gov/reform
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
44-913 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512ÿ091800
Fax: (202) 512ÿ092104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402ÿ090001
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
HENRY A. WAXMAN, California, Chairman
EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York TOM DAVIS, Virginia
PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania DAN BURTON, Indiana
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut
ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland JOHN M. McHUGH, New York
DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio JOHN L. MICA, Florida
DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana
JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania
WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri CHRIS CANNON, Utah
DIANE E. WATSON, California JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio
BRIAN HIGGINS, New York DARRELL E. ISSA, California
JOHN A. YARMUTH, Kentucky KENNY MARCHANT, Texas
BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia
ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina
Columbia VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina
BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California
JIM COOPER, Tennessee BILL SALI, Idaho
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland JIM JORDAN, Ohio
PAUL W. HODES, New Hampshire
CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut
JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland
PETER WELCH, Vermont
------ ------
Phil Schiliro, Chief of Staff
Phil Barnett, Staff Director
Earley Green, Chief Clerk
Lawrence Halloran, Minority Staff Director
Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Postal Service, and the District of
Columbia
DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of KENNY MARCHANT, Texas
Columbia JOHN M. McHUGH, New York
JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland JOHN L. MICA, Florida
ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland DARRELL E. ISSA, California
DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio, Chairman JIM JORDAN, Ohio
WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
Tania Shand, Staff Director
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman
CARL LEVIN, Michigan SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii TED STEVENS, Alaska
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana TOM COBURN, Oklahoma
BARACK OBAMA, Illinois PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri JOHN WARNER, Virginia
JON TESTER, Montana JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire
Michael L. Alexander, Staff Director
Brandon L. Milhorn, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Trina Driessnack Tyrer, Chief Clerk
OVERSIGHT OF GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT, THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE, AND THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SUBCOMMITTEE
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii, Chairman
CARL LEVIN, Michigan GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware TED STEVENS, Alaska
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas TOM COBURN, Oklahoma
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana JOHN WARNER, Virginia
Richard J. Kessler, Staff Director
Thomas Richards, Professional Staff Member
Jennifer A. Hemingway. Minority Staff Director
Theresa Manthripragada, Minority Professional Staff Member
Jessica Nagasako, Chief Clerk
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on April 3, 2008.................................... 1
Statement of:
Bransford, William, general counsel, Senior Executives
Association; William Brown, president, African American
Federal Executives Association; Rhonda Trent, president,
Federally Employed Women; Carson Eoyang, executive
director, Asian American Government Executives Network;
Jose Osegueda, president, National Association of Hispanic
Federal Executives; and Darlene Young, president, Blacks in
Government................................................. 143
Bransford, William....................................... 143
Brown, William........................................... 152
Eoyang, Carson........................................... 165
Osegueda, Jose........................................... 172
Trent, Rhonda............................................ 158
Young, Darlene........................................... 173
Kichak, Nancy, Associate Director, Strategic Human Resources
Policy Division, Office of Personnel Management; and Susan
LaChance, vice president of employee development and
diversity, U.S. Postal Service............................. 25
Kichak, Nancy............................................ 25
LaChance, Susan.......................................... 31
Stalcup, George H., Director, Strategic Issues, Government
Accountability Office; and Katherine Siggerud, Director,
Physical Infrastructure, Government Accountability Office.. 53
Siggerud, Katherine...................................... 108
Stalcup, George H........................................ 53
Williams, Steven W., secretary and chief administrative
officer, Postal Regulatory Commission; Ronald Stith,
assistant inspector general for mission support, U.S.
Postal Service, Office of the Inspector General; Nicole A.
Johnson, assistant chief inspector investigations and
security support, U.S. Postal Inspection Service; Bray
Barnes, Acting Chief Human Capital Officer, Department of
Homeland Security; and Carmen Walker, Deputy Officer,
Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Department of
Homeland Security.......................................... 116
Barnes, Bray............................................. 132
Johnson, Nicole A........................................ 124
Stith, Ronald............................................ 118
Williams, Steven W....................................... 116
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Akaka, Senator Daniel K., a Representative in Congress from
the State of Hawaii, prepared statement of................. 11
Barnes, Bray, Acting Chief Human Capital Officer, Department
of Homeland Security, prepared statement of................ 134
Bransford, William, general counsel, Senior Executives
Association, prepared statement of......................... 145
Brown, William, president, African American Federal
Executives Association, prepared statement of.............. 154
Cummings, Hon. Elijah E., a Representative in Congress from
the State of Maryland, prepared statement of............... 23
Davis, Hon. Danny K., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Illinois, prepared statement of................... 4
Eoyang, Carson, executive director, Asian American Government
Executives Network, prepared statement of.................. 167
Gonzalez, Hon. Charles A., a Representative in Congress from
the State of Texas, prepared statement of.................. 19
Johnson, Nicole A., assistant chief inspector investigations
and security support, U.S. Postal Inspection Service,
prepared statement of...................................... 126
Kichak, Nancy, Associate Director, Strategic Human Resources
Policy Division, Office of Personnel Management:
Letter dated May 15, 2008................................ 46
Prepared statement of.................................... 27
LaChance, Susan, vice president of employee development and
diversity, U.S. Postal Service, prepared statement of...... 33
Marchant, Hon. Kenny, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Texas, prepared statement of...................... 7
Stalcup, George H., Director, Strategic Issues, Government
Accountability Office, prepared statement of............... 55
Stith, Ronald, assistant inspector general for mission
support, U.S. Postal Service, Office of the Inspector
General, prepared statement of............................. 120
Trent, Rhonda, president, Federally Employed Women, prepared
statement of............................................... 160
MANAGING DIVERSITY OF SENIOR LEADERSHIP IN THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE AND
POSTAL SERVICE
----------
THURSDAY, APRIL 3, 2008
Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Postal Service,
and the District of Columbia, Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform, House of
Representatives, joint with the Subommittee on
Oversight of Government Management, the Federal
Workforce, and the District of Columbia,
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittees met, pursuant to notice, at 2 p.m. in
room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Danny K. Davis
(chairman of the House Subcommittee on Federal Workforce,
Postal Service, and the District of Columbia) presiding.
Present from the House Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform, Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Postal
Service, and the District of Columbia: Representatives Davis of
Illinois, Cummings, Kucinich, Clay, Norton, and Marchant.
Present from the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs, Subcommittee on Oversight of Government
Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of
Columbia: Senators Akaka and Carper.
Also present: Representative Charles Gonzalez.
Staff present from the House Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform and the Subcommittee on Federal Workforce,
Postal Service, and the District of Columbia: Tania Shand,
staff director; Lori Hayman, counsel; William Miles,
professional staff member; Marcus A. Williams, clerk; Earley
Green, chief clerk, Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform; Jim Moore, minority counsel; and Alex Cooper, minority
professional staff member.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. The subcommittees will come to
order.
Welcome, Ranking Member Marchant, Senator Akaka, Mr.
Chairman and members of both subcommittees, hearing witnesses,
and all of those in attendance, welcome to the House
Subcommittee on the Federal Workforce, Postal Service, and the
District of Columbia and the Senate Subcommittee on Oversight
of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the
District of Columbia joint hearing on managing diversity of
senior leadership, Postal Service and the District of Columbia.
The purpose of the hearing is to continue the
subcommittee's oversight of diversity at the highest levels of
the Federal Government and the U.S. Postal Service.
Hearing no objection, the Chair will ask unanimous consent
to allow Representative Charles Gonzalez to give an opening
statement and ask questions. And also the ranking member and
the subcommittee members will each have 5 minutes to make
opening statements, and all Members will have 3 days to submit
statements for the record.
Hearing no objection, it is certainly indeed a pleasure to
be joined with Senator Akaka and his staff and any other
Members of the Senate who come over to this side of the Capitol
and jointly participate with us.
I will begin with an opening statement.
Senator Akaka, Ranking Member Marchant, members of the
subcommittee, and hearing witnesses, welcome to the
subcommittee's hearing on managing diversity of senior
leadership in the Federal work force and Postal Service.
I would also like to welcome Representative Charles
Gonzalez, Second Vice Chair of the Hispanic Congressional
Caucus. I ask unanimous consent that Representative Gonzalez be
permitted to give an opening statement and ask questions during
the hearing.
Hearing no objection, so is the order.
He has worked tirelessly to ensure that Hispanics are
included in the diversification of the Federal work force.
Today's hearing is to examine H.R. 3774 and its Senate
companion, S. 2148, the Senior Executive Service Diversity
Assurance Act of 2007.
H.R. 3774 is the culmination of several Government
Accountability Office [GAO], reports I have requested on
diversity in the Senior Executive Service [SES], and three
previous hearings I have held or requested on the subject.
GAO is expected to testify that, while doing research for
the most recent diversity report, a report that I and Senator
Akaka requested, it found that between 2000 and 2007 there was
a decrease in African American men in the SES. I believe that
H.R. 3774 is the first step in tackling several of the issues
that have come to light regarding the lack of diversity in the
SES. It should be enacted as soon as possible to prevent any
further deterioration of minorities in the Senior Executive
Service.
The subcommittee has taken its first steps in researching
diversity issues in postal-related agencies. Today the postal
community and GAO will testify as to how diverse the senior
levels of postal management are or not, and why. When its
research is complete, the subcommittee will determine whether
legislative action is necessary to address diversity in the
postal work force.
The Department of Homeland Security [DHS], has been asked
to testify because last month the Committee on Homeland
Security issued a report entitled, ``The Department of Homeland
Security: Minority and Gender Diversity in the Workforce and
Career Senior Executive Service.'' The report stated that DHS
had lower proportions of racial minorities, Hispanics, and
women in its overall work force than there are in the overall
executive branch work force, but the DHS career SES was even
less diverse than the overall DHS work force, suggesting that
relatively few members of minority groups and woman rise in the
DHS career SES leadership ranks.
Diversity in the Federal and postal work forces is a
priority for me and for this subcommittee. When agencies are
called upon, they should be prepared to come before this
subcommittee and testify on its diversity numbers and
objectives.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Danny K. Davis follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.002
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Now I will go to Ranking Member
Marchant.
Mr. Marchant. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding the
hearing today, Managing Diversity of Senior Leadership in the
Federal Workforce and Postal Service. I commend your efforts to
improve the operations of the Federal Government, as well as
your vigorous promotion of increased diversity in the
workplace. I look forward to this and continued discussions of
how we can make the Federal Government a better place to work.
Obviously, the American business landscape is changing much
faster than Federal agencies. In a sense, this creates a giant
laboratory for policymakers to observe and learn what is
working in the private sector and what might not be best for
the Government setting. If done correctly, this oversight
process can improve the workings of the Federal Government and
make it an even better place to work. However, implementing
policy changes without full consideration of the consequences,
both intended and unintended, could end up adding additional
bureaucracy to a system already beleaguered by low application
numbers and relatively uncompetitive compensation packages.
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for giving us a chance to
study this issue. I look forward to the testimony from our
witnesses before the subcommittee.
I hope we can all work together to determine the best ways
to reach our diversity goals, while avoiding creating a
bureaucratic morass where everyone is unsatisfied.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Kenny Marchant follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.004
Mr. Marchant. Mr. Chairman, I need to offer my apologies to
the witnesses and you today. The largest city in my district
has decided that this afternoon they are going to visit me, so
shortly I will have to excuse myself and go and take care of
some of my constituents. My apologies for that, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. How large is that city?
Mr. Marchant. It is Dallas.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. That is a pretty large city. Well,
thank you very much, Mr. Marchant. We certainly understand, and
we certainly want to thank you for your statement and hope to
have you with us as long as you can stay.
It is now my pleasure to yield for an opening statement to
the distinguished Senator from Hawaii, Senator Akaka.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It is
great to be here with you, and always great working with you,
Chairman Davis. I want to thank you for leading this joint
hearing on diversity in the Senior Executive Service, and I
want to commend you for your leadership in this area, not only
now but in years before this.
I am pleased to partner with Chairman Davis, both on this
hearing and in legislation to improve diversity in the senior
ranks of the Federal Government.
I also want to thank him for joining me even yesterday to
introduce a resolution honoring all public servants during
Public Service Recognition Week this year.
Diversity of race, gender, heritage, and experience
provides any organization with a valuable range of perspectives
and ideas that can improve effectiveness. That is our belief.
When an agency is developing new policies and initiatives,
a diverse work force helps ensure a cultural understanding that
can lead to new creative directions or avert unintended
problems before they arise. Unfortunately, the number of
minorities and women in the SES across the Federal Government
has not reflected the diversity of the Nation, nor the
diversity of the Federal work force as a whole.
In 2003, the Government Accountability Office evaluated
data from 2000 on diversity in the SES. At that time, the
report showed 67 percent of senior executives were White males,
19 percent were White females, and about 14 percent were
minority males and females. According to GAO's testimony last
year, using 2006 data there were small improvements made in the
overall representation of women and minorities over the past 6
years, but gains were inconsistent among the 25 Federal
agencies analyzed, and offset by losses of women and minorities
at 9 of those agencies.
The door to diversity seems to be narrowing, even as
American work force becomes more diverse. And Federal
retirements continue to increase. That is what we are facing
today.
In its 2003 report GAO speculated that 55 percent of the
SES would retire and diversity of the SES would improve, given
the diversity of the talent pool. The Office of Personnel
Management, in its response to GAO, insisted that increasing
diversity in the senior ranks was a top priority, but OPM's own
numbers prove it wrong.
While 63 percent of the SESers retired since 2000, the
potential gains estimated by GAO and OPM to improve diversity
have not been made. We need to examine why more minorities and
women are not becoming part of the SES and how to improve that
shortfall.
With an estimated 90 percent of Federal executives eligible
to retire in the next 10 years, agencies must take this
opportunity for agencies to bring in a new group of diverse and
talented leaders.
One way that Congressman Davis and I propose we address
this issue is through the enactment of the Senior Executive
Diversity Assurance Act. Our legislation would create a panel
of diverse employees responsible for reviewing candidates for
merit appointments and passing them along for review. Too many
executive candidates are accepted into the SES without a woman
or minority ever looking at the available pool of applicants.
Our bill requires that diversity be incorporated into the
process of review, but not in the standards of the review. The
standards are high for entry into the SES, and we need to
continue to ensure that the merit system principles are
supported in the process of candidate review. However,
diversity is not at odds with merit system principles, and we
believe that our legislation supports merit principles, while
promoting diversity.
Furthermore, our legislation re-establishes the Senior
Executive Resource Office, which was dissolved by OPM's
reorganization in the year 2003. This office would be
responsible for ensuring diversity within the SES through
strategic partnerships, mentorship programs, and more stringent
reporting requirements. New cultures bring new ideas, and in
our Civil Service, America's work force, in that work force we
need leadership that reflects those varied cultures and
backgrounds.
I want to thank our witnesses for being here today to
discuss this official and critical issue, and I look forward to
hearing your thoughts on improving diversity in the senior
leadership of the Federal Government.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Senator Daniel K. Akaka
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.008
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Senator Akaka.
Delegate Norton.
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I think all
of us are indebted to you and Senator Akaka for your leadership
on moving forward to do something about what has become a
chronic problem in the SES. We talk a lot about it. We hear
back from various administrations that they are working very
hard to do something about it, but with matters of this kind,
unless the kind of action your Diversity Assurance Act takes,
you are not going to see, in my judgment and in my experience,
what you are expecting.
Mr. Chairman and Senator Akaka, as we look at a country
that is becoming more and more diverse, with some States
already majority minority States, we are seeing a Senior
Executive Service that is less and less diverse. The tiny
incremental change really means that it is going down; that as
retirements come, replacements are being made from the same
pool of people who already occupy the Senior Executive Service.
It is stunningly at odds with what we see in certain sections
of the private sector, for example.
What Chairman Davis said about Black men actually being
reduced is just the tip of the iceberg. I think we can predict
that without some definitive action you are going to see this
kind of reduction throughout, for two reasons: one, minority
applicants today do not have the same incentive either to work
for or stay in the Federal Government that they had in my
generation and in my parents' generation. The private sector is
out there looking for them, reaching for them, giving them the
kind of benefits and pay that, frankly, we do not give them.
Second, we should be focusing on two things: recruitment,
to be sure, beginning at the levels where people can move up,
and retention. Yes, there is every incentive to get out of the
Federal work force now. You have been in the work force, you
have received all the benefits and training of the Federal work
force, you look at the private sector and it does seem to me
that economically there is every incentive to leave early
retirement, certainly for retirement, itself.
I have a special interest and concern, frankly, for newer
minority entrants to the work force like Hispanics. It does
seem to me one would have to make a very special effort when we
see what is the fastest-growing minority population in our
country, a population that may not be as accustomed to looking
to the Federal sector as a place for employment, where a very
special effort needs to reach out to draw them in and to
encourage them to move up so that they, in fact, become a
larger part of the SES.
I have a very special, very special concern about African
Americans who have a very, very long history of work in the
Federal sector, who were able to work in the Federal sector,
frankly, when they couldn't work anywhere else, albeit in the
bowels of the Federal sector, and then have found themselves
for a long time stuck. And now, although they are long-term
employees going back for decades, even when, if I may say so,
Mr. Chairman, as a native Washingtonian, when Black people
couldn't even eat lunch in the cafeterias of Federal agencies,
still there were Federal employees working in the lower levels.
Long history of work in the Federal Government. So there would
be very special disappointment to see that the Senior Executive
Service looks the way it looks today.
I recognize the bill that you and Chairman Akaka have put
in, particularly with its requirement that there be a woman and
a person of color on panels, may seem to be radical. All I can
say is, after years and years of jawboning the issue, I am
grateful that you are willing to take the leadership on doing
something about it. The courts have said that it, in fact, is
legal and Constitutional and in keeping with merit system
principles.
If I may offer a legal opinion as the former Chair of the
EOC, I regard it as an action that would withstand and has
withstood court scrutiny because it is an action to correct a
disparity that the Federal Government cannot explain, cannot
justify. It will disappear and the courts will make it
disappear at such point when, in fact, the system corrected
itself. That is the way this kind of affirmative remedy works.
Unless the administration has something to offer the two
chairs that will assure that we get some movement on this
issue, as we have not gotten for decades, then it seems to me
this is the only recourse before us, and we all should be
grateful to you for having the guts to move forward with the
provisions in the bill.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Delegate
Norton.
We will now go to Representative Kucinich.
Mr. Kucinich. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And to my good
friend, Congressman Davis, and to my good friend, Senator
Akaka, thank you very much for holding this hearing.
When you look through the table on the GAO report which
charts the comparisons of various demographic profiles year to
year at various supervisory levels in the departments of the
Federal Government, it makes it clear that the work of this
committee is well taken in causing these statistics to be
reviewed, because they tell a very important story of the
progress or lack thereof when it comes to various individuals
who have committed themselves to serve the people of the United
States of America.
When we understand, as we do today on this commemoration
day of Dr. Martin Luther King, that true equality means
equality of opportunity within organizations once you become a
member of that organization, studying these figures becomes
very important to give this committee and this Congress an
opportunity to develop policy guidelines so that the diversity
which the people of the United States have a right to expect in
their Government since our first motto, e pluribus unum, out of
many we are one, ought to be reflected in the Government, but
we also ought to see how it is reflected in the highest-ranking
positions within the Civil Service.
This is an important hearing, and I thank my colleagues
from the House and the Senate for your leadership in this.
Thank you.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Representative
Kucinich.
Now it is my pleasure to yield to Representative Charles
Gonzalez.
Yes, Senator Akaka?
Senator Akaka. I just received word that we are going to
have votes in the Senate, and I just want to apologize for
leaving, but I want to again commend your leadership on this
issue and tell you and all of our witnesses here that I look
forward to working with all of you to improve the diversity of
the senior levels of the Federal Government.
Thank you for all that you are doing, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Senator. We
know that when the Senate votes, good things are happening, so
we understand. Thank you.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Mr. Davis and Senator
Akaka and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for allowing
me to participate in today's hearing. On behalf of the
Congressional Hispanic Caucus, I appreciate your efforts to
address the under-representation of minorities at the executive
level in the Federal work force.
The legislation that both of you have introduced, H.R. 3774
on the House side, the Senior Executive Service Diversity
Assurance Act, is a step in the right direction to address the
severe problem of under-representation of minorities at the
Senior Executive Service level.
I support this legislation because it will do one thing
that a number of Hispanic employee groups have requested for a
number of years: it will introduce accountability into the
process of hiring and promoting candidates for senior positions
in the Federal Government.
Let us look at the numbers. I know that we have gone over
these, but they bear repeating. In the pathway positions for
SES, the GS-13 to GS-15, Hispanic hiring has dropped by 2.8
percent. The latest OPM report cites the reduction from 5.8
percent to 3.2 percent of Latinos in management positions
entering the SES. The majority of Hispanic hires in the Federal
work force are concentrated at the GS-1 through GS-8
categories.
Now, we received a great deal of information about the
outreach conducted by agencies in Hispanic and other minority
communities, and the guidance OPM has provided to help recruit
for those various positions. Yet, there is very little in the
way of data that tells us about the effectiveness of those
outreach efforts.
The current agency initiative process of moving along
candidates has failed to produce the results we should be
seeing. Despite the outreach and Federal requirements, agencies
just haven't been up to the task of promoting diversity in the
senior ranks in a way that is convincing. The results of their
efforts thus far speak volumes to that point.
Members of our communities can no longer wait for agencies
to wake up to the fact that they have to consider diversity in
their succession planning. The bottom line is they have not
done a good job of this, despite the requirement to do so;
therefore, something different is in order.
It is no mystery. The Federal Government will begin to see
a mass exodus of employees due to retirements in the coming
decade. This provides an incredible opportunity for OPM to work
with the agencies to develop the future work force. Agencies,
by themselves, cannot and will not do it and, frankly, will not
succeed, at least when it deals with considering diversity in
that equation; therefore, it is up to OPM to demonstrate
leadership.
This legislation puts the responsible of promoting
diversity with the agency that recruits the candidates for
public service, the Office of Personnel Management. It will
require a hands-on approach, genuine engagement, and active
direction, and not the mere issuance of passive directives to
do the right thing, which are rarely enforced. It is a first
step in providing OPM with the tools it will need to affect the
problem and requiring that once and for all they get engaged.
However, this will not stop here, for we will tackle the issue
at the agency level and bring more accountability to the
process so we develop a work force that actually looks like
America.
When Congress passes this legislation, which I believe they
will, and it becomes law, I know that the Members here today
and many of my colleagues who support this issue will be
eagerly looking for results; therefore, expectations are,
indeed, high for OPM to produce notable and positive outcomes.
Again, I want to thank Chairman Davis and Senator Akaka and
members of this subcommittee for allowing me to participate
today and, of course, for the introduction of this important
legislation.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Charles A. Gonzalez
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.011
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Representative
Gonzalez.
We have been joined and I would yield to Representative
Clay from Missouri.
Mr. Clay. Mr. Chairman, in the interest of time I will
forego an opening statement and wait and anticipate the
testimony from the five panels.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Representative
Clay.
I would yield to Representative Cummings from Maryland.
Mr. Cummings. Mr. Chairman, I first of all thank you for
calling the hearing. Considering the fact that we have Members
that have to get home, I will submit a written statement. Thank
you very much.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Elijah E. Cummings
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.013
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you, Representative Cummings.
We will now go to our first panel. Let me introduce the
panel.
Ms. Nancy Kichak is the Associate Director of the Strategic
Human Resources Policy Division at the Office of Personnel
Management. She leads the design, development, and
implementation of innovative, flexible, merit-based human
resource policies.
We welcome you, Ms. Kichak.
Ms. Susan LaChance is the vice president of employee
development and diversity at the U.S. Postal Service. Ms.
LaChance reports to the chief human resources officer and
executive vice president and is responsible for employee and
leadership development, succession planning, equal employment
opportunity, and diversity initiatives.
Ladies, as you know, it is procedure of our committee to
swear in witnesses. If you would, stand and raise your right
hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Davis of Illinois. The record will show that the
witnesses answered in the affirmative.
Ms. Kichak, thank you so much. We will begin with you.
STATEMENTS OF NANCY KICHAK, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, STRATEGIC HUMAN
RESOURCES POLICY DIVISION, OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; AND
SUSAN LACHANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT AND
DIVERSITY, U.S. POSTAL SERVICE
STATEMENT OF NANCY KICHAK
Ms. Kichak. Thank you for the invitation to discuss our
efforts to create a diverse Senior Executive Service and
improve the overall diversity of the Federal work force.
I also welcome the opportunity to review the Senior
Executive Service Diversity Assurance Act with you and update
you on our efforts to build the most effective Federal civilian
work force possible.
We have long recognized that reaching the broadest possible
pool of applicants for Federal jobs is essential to achieve the
goal of having an effective civilian work force.
Our efforts in this regard are conducted within the
framework of merit system principles. We must ensure that all
Americans have equal access to Federal employment opportunities
at all levels of the work force, and that their knowledge,
skills, and abilities are evaluated fairly.
The Office of Personnel Management promotes Federal
employment expansively, including in areas where the potential
applicant pool is very diverse. One of the techniques we use is
conducting job fairs and Federal career days at colleges and
universities, including community colleges, that are likely to
help us establish a pipeline of diverse and highly qualified
individuals.
Our efforts to build the most effective core of senior
executives depend, in part, on ensuring an effective pipeline
into the Senior Executive Service. Many of our efforts are
aimed at supporting agencies' development of future leaders
through leadership training and succession training programs.
Federal agencys often include SES candidate development
programs in the leadership succession strategies they are
required to implement. Data clearly show these programs are
proving to be an excellent vehicle for minority entry into the
SES. Candidates placed into the SES from these programs
represent higher percentages of both minorities and women than
are in the SES today.
OPM reports to Congress annually on minority representation
in the Federal Government in relation to the overall civilian
labor force. Our most recent report was submitted to the
Congress and to your subcommittee in January. The report shows
that the Federal Government continues to compare favorably to
the civilian labor force in employing minorities, with the
exception of Hispanics. The Federal Government also employs a
slightly lower percentage of women than the non-Federal sector.
The proposed bills, H.R. 3774 and S. 2148, are designed to
enhance diversity and make other improvements within the SES. I
appreciate the attention and commitment you have devoted to
this issue; however, although the administration has not yet
taken an official position on the legislation, I want to share
with you some initial concerns.
First, these bills would establish a new office within OPM
which would assume all functions relating to the Senior
Executive Service. Today there are several offices within OPM
supporting the SES. We believe the current structure allows the
agency to bring a higher level of expertise to issues that
arise, and thus serves the SES community well. Also, the
proposed separate office would have substantial cost
implications.
In addition, the bills would create new entities called SES
evaluation panels that would be inserted into each agency
between the recommending official and the executive resources
boards. Their task would be to review the qualifications of
each candidate for career SES appointments and to certify the
names of candidates the panel believes to be best qualified.
Each SES evaluation panel would have three members, at
least one of whom would have to be a woman, and one of them
would have to be a member of a racial or ethnic minority.
The Department of Justice has advised that these race- and
gender-based requirements are very likely unconstitutional
under governing and equal protection precedents. I assure you
that OPM shares your goal of a Federal work force that is
effective in large part because it draws on the strengths of a
broad and diverse applicant pool. This will continue to be our
goal with respect to developing and recruiting senior
executives, as well as the rest of the Federal civilian work
force.
I would be happy to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Kichak follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.017
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Ms. Kichak.
Ms. LaChance.
STATEMENT OF SUSAN LACHANCE
Ms. LaChance. Good afternoon, Chairman Davis and members of
the subcommittees. Thank you for the opportunity to highlight
our efforts to develop and recruit a diverse talent pipeline
ready to accept the challenges of leadership to tomorrow.
Our recruitment and development efforts have been extremely
successful, resulting in many prestigious awards and other
recognition for the Postal Service. We are the second-largest
employer in the Nation, with almost 700,000 employees. Key to
the Postal Service's business objectives is the development of
talented individuals who are prepared to assume leadership
positions quickly and successfully. The Postal Service
recognizes the business imperatives of creating a pool of
talented employees with diverse backgrounds, perspectives, and
experiences. Employees are developed throughout their careers
to take on new roles, new assignments, and new challenges.
We have created a number of processes and programs that
assess and identify high-potential employees. We train,
develop, and ultimately foster their career advancement. Our
developmental programs include those designed to prepare
employees to become initial level supervisors, mid-level
managers, and executives. The Postal Service is identifying
tomorrow's leaders today.
Succession planning is a systematic process to ensure that
our organization has a steady, reliable pool of talented
individuals who will be ready and able to meet the Postal
Service's future leadership needs. The Postal Service's
corporate succession planning offers a structured, corporate-
wide, and transparent process for identifying those employees
with the potential to become executives in our organization.
The self-nomination process puts employees in control of
their careers by allowing them to express their interest in
career advancement and leadership roles. Our multi-tiered
review process and approval process ensures objective and fair
treatment of all applications.
Finally, corporate succession planning allows ongoing
development for program participants. We are proud to reflect
the diversity of America. Over 38 percent of our total work
force is minority, and almost 40 percent is female. Minority
and female representation continues to be strong in our
management, executive, and officer ranks. In 2007, 32 percent
of our managers were female, while 30 percent while minorities.
The number of employees occupying executive positions is
fairly small, as compared to our entire work force. These
individuals are responsible for operating our plants,
districts, and headquarters functions. In 2007, there were 748
executives, and of these, 26 percent were minorities while
nearly 29 percent were female.
We understand that developing our talented employees does
not guarantee us a viable future in our organization. We
recruit talented individuals from outside the Postal Service
who have knowledge and expertise that may not be available in-
house. The Postal Service requires leaders with a broad range
of knowledge and experiences, excellent business acumen, and an
understanding of the market drivers that influence our
business.
Last year, the Postal Service created an office dedicated
to recruiting the best and the brightest. We recruit talented
individuals at colleges and universities through professional
organizations and at career fairs. The Postal Service
participates on panels, sponsors events and conferences
targeting women and minorities, and promotes the Postal Service
as an employer of choice.
In addition, we are leveraging technology to reach new
generations interested in postal careers. Our job postings
appear on a variety of specialized Web sites. In the increasing
competition for talent, we must continue to attract and retain
the right people. We believe that our new recruitment office
and our diversity professionals' continuous community outreach
will succeed in attracting talent and diverse individuals with
the skills and expertise we need for ongoing business success.
In conclusion, the Postal Service has a long and proud
history of employing a diverse work force and is committed to
providing employees with the information, training, and
development that they need to do their jobs today and tomorrow.
Thank you. I would be happy to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. LaChance follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.027
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much. I thank both of
you for your testimony.
Let me begin with our questioning.
Ms. Kichak, you indicated that the Justice Department has
indicated that there might be some difficulty with the
requirement of panels, which is included in our legislation----
Ms. Kichak. Right.
Mr. Davis of Illinois [continuing]. That might have
Constitutional issues and pose problems. You also indicated OPM
had not taken a position on the legislation, itself.
Ms. Kichak. Yes.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Let me ask, does OPM have a position
relative to why it is so difficult to reach a level of some
semblance of parity within the ranks of the SES?
Ms. Kichak. Well, our data does show that the situation,
the minority representation in the SES is improving, although
not to the level that minority representation exists today in
the rest of the Federal Government.
We believe that the best way to bring people into the SES
is to train them and develop them and bring them along, and if
you look at the pipeline of people currently in the Federal
Government in the 13 to 15 level and in the senior pay level,
No. 1, it is definitely increasing for both minorities and
women; No. 2, it is substantially higher than the minority and
women representation in the SES. So we contend that, as new
members come into the SES, that the demographic profile of the
SES will change.
It does take time. We only had about 300 new hires, and not
new hires to the Federal Government but people moving into the
SES in 2007, about 330, I think it is. So out of a 7,000 person
service, when you only bring in about 5 percent a year it
definitely just takes time for the numbers to change.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. And so the time that it takes, the
most recent study that I looked at suggested that if we
continue at the rate we are going, that we would be into the
next 25, 30 years and still will not have seen any significant
movement or any significant progress.
Do you have any ideas? Well, let me just ask this: what is
the status of the training and development program?
Ms. Kichak. Agencies run their own Federal career
development programs. Again, we have been very successful when
we look at those at the agency level in recruiting people into
the SES. The Federal CDP program that OPM was running, right
now we are re-evaluating and reviewing what is going on in that
program. We have had some difficulties in its operation, and we
are reviewing that. We have told the candidates and the
agencies that we are currently on hold while we look to get
that back, and we will be restarting it shortly.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. So it is actually on hold right now?
Ms. Kichak. Well, we have to review certain things that are
going on that are not as we would like them to be. We want a
very high-quality process in that program.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Well thank you.
Let me just ask you, Ms. LaChance, according to Postal
Service data in GAO's testimony, the representation of African
American men among postal managers has declined in recent
years, while overall representation of women and minorities has
increased at a slow rate. For example, the percent of minority
executives increased less than 1 percentage point per year, and
the representation of female executives has not increased much
faster. What actions has the Postal Service taken to enhance
the diversity of executives? I know you talked about the
recruitment, job fairs and visiting colleges and universities
and bringing in people. Specifically as it relates to the
recruitment and development of executives, what is the Postal
Service doing?
Ms. LaChance. In terms of looking at what I describe as the
feeder pool of individuals who will move into executive ranks,
we recognize that we need a two-pronged structured approach to
that. As you mentioned, recruitment is one of those areas;
however, the second area is to really look at the feeder pool
and make sure that we have processes in place that are open for
individuals to self-nominate and have an opportunity for
development.
In the mid-level ranks, or our managerial ranks, we have
put in place what we call an EAS leadership development
program.
We also have used programs such as management intern
programs, which allow us to go out and, in fact, recruit
broadly in America for additional applicants to come in to the
organization at a level that is in that mid-level manager area.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much. Thank you both.
We will go to Ms. Norton.
Ms. Norton. I guess it is Ms. Kichak I have to ask whether
or not you are familiar with this decision or, for that matter,
the Justice Department is familiar with Phillips v. General
Services Administration 917 Fed. 2nd 1297 from the Federal
Circuit in 1990. Are you familiar with that decision?
Ms. Kichak. No, I am not.
Ms. Norton. Well, it seems to imply that the Federal
Government or at least the General Services Agency indeed had a
panel like the one in the chairman's bill that has been taken
to court and approved by the courts. Could I read you what the
court said, the Federal Circuit Court, in 1990, ``Requiring
that each SES evaluation panel shall include at least one woman
and one member of a racial or ethnic minority group does not
appear to violate merit system principles or constitute a
prohibited personnel practice. Merit system principles, which
appear in Section 2301 of Title V, United States Code, do not
themselves provide independent causes of action or independent
bases for jurisdiction and cannot be considered in the absence
of a violation of a statute, rule, or reg.'' Phillips v.
General Services Administration.
It would appear that there is precedent for what the
chairman and respective chairmen are trying to do in their
bill, and you are telling me that there is a problem with it?
Ms. Kichak. First of all, we would defer to the Justice
Department. That is their advice on that. But I want to
assure----
Ms. Norton. Their advice was based on what?
Ms. Kichak. Their reading of the proposed legislation.
Ms. Norton. And they then said that it is in violation of
what? You can't come before this committee and say, well, the
Justice Department says so, so that is the way it must be. What
was the view of the Justice Department, and on what was it
based? I just read you the view of the Federal Circuit Court of
the United States of America, which is over and above, stands
above the Justice Department, so I am just trying to find a
basis for their view.
Ms. Kichak. And I think the Justice Department is going to
have to answer that question.
Ms. Norton. I think what you are going to have to do is,
within 30 days, have the basis for your coming before this
committee to testify--the Justice Department is not here--
submit to the Chair the legal basis for your view. You are now
representing this as your view. You come to testify. I
understand OPM hasn't taken a view, but you have given us a
view that you consider apparently even more important than the
OPM view, and that is that the Justice Department says that
there is a violation of something, and within 30 days would
you, the Justice Department, or somebody--show the Justice
Department this. You have this cite.
Ms. Kichak. OK.
Ms. Norton. And ask the Justice Department how they
reconcile their view that there is a violation here with the
view of the Federal Circuit opinion in Phillips v. General
Services Administration, 1990, which appear to condone
precisely what this bill says.
Ms. Kichak. We do encourage the quality review boards or
the review boards that review the SES selections to be diverse,
to welcome members that are female, minority. It is just that
we don't mandate that.
Ms. Norton. I understand that. I have given you a cite that
said precisely what the chairman said.
Ms. Kichak. Yes. Thank you. We will do that. Thank you.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.028
Ms. Norton. I want to go to Ms. LaChance and the Postal
Service.
Ms. LaChance, you have something here that is quite
unusual. Largely because of the absence of opportunities for
African American, Hispanic men and women elsewhere, you have a
very largely minority work force. The GAO figures are stunning
in that regard.
I would like to ask you about figures that appear to go
down--these figures are reported in the GAO report--looking at
executives. Looking at September 1999--I think these are
percentages--looking at executives at large--that is a very
broad title, so I don't know what kinds of executives they are
talking about--but they show a percentage. Well, let's look at
2004, actually, because from 1999 to 2004 there was a slight
increase, but if you look at 2004 and 2007 you see, even given
the nature of your work force, a reduction from 9.8 percent to
8.7 percent of African American men, and a reduction of African
American women from 7.0 percent to 6.3 percent. Among Hispanic
men, there is a small increase, for which I congratulate you,
from 4.9 to 5.4, but among Hispanic women in these categories
it goes from 1.5 percent to 1.8, tiny increases.
The decreases in the men are perplexing, and the women who
are African American are perplexing. Could you explain them,
please?
Ms. LaChance. There are certainly many influences that do
come about when you look at the statistics. We have, as you
stated, Delegate Norton, we have enjoyed a good minority
population, and, in fact, we have had and continue to have a
large African American population, relatively large in
comparison with the Federal Government, in our executives as
well as in our supervisory managerial ranks.
We have seen, as the population has decreased overall for
us, we have seen retirements in our men, in general, and we
have seen like decreases in White men, as well as African
American men. There has only been a slight increase in our
Hispanic population.
Those areas are areas that we are working very closely with
our internal employee affinity groups with, because we
recognize that some individuals are not putting themselves out
there to actually make application and self-nominate to our
programs, so we are working very closely with our affinity
groups, encouraging individuals to self-nominate, giving them
the courage to make application and see that there are
opportunities. It is an ongoing effort that we have to make.
Ms. Norton. Do you support the panel notion in the
chairman's bill with a woman and a minority on the panels?
Ms. LaChance. In terms of the bill, I think that we have
already achieved a lot of what the legislation has called for.
In fact, with our succession planning process and our feeder
pools, we are seeing a good minority population. We have
offices that----
Ms. Norton. I just quoted you some statistics that showed
decrease in both Black men and Black women, so now you are
telling me the opposite. I am asking you, in light of those
decreases, do you support the chairman's notion, at least
temporarily, of having panels that would have a minority and a
woman on them?
Ms. LaChance. We currently do have executive resource
boards that are very diverse that look at this. It is not
necessarily the same as what the SES process is, because our
process is----
Ms. Norton. You already have this, you are saying?
Ms. LaChance. We have that process. We have review
committees that look at this, but our process is more about
development, not selection.
Ms. Norton. When it comes to selection, do you have a
process like the one in the chairman's bill?
Ms. LaChance. No, we do not.
Ms. Norton. Do you support or oppose a process like the one
in the chairman's bill?
Ms. LaChance. Again, I believe that we already have the
results the legislation calls for. To put a process in place--
--
Ms. Norton. Even though I have quoted to you statistics
that show over 3 years' time significant reduction in Black
male and Black female executive appointments?
Ms. LaChance. Again, let me just kind of go back. Our
process is not the same. Our process is very different. We do
not post----
Ms. Norton. I am looking at the GAO report. I am not
looking at your process. I am looking at the results. One thing
we should not expect in a work force with such a large
percentage of Black men and women is the numbers in that upper
category to decrease, and I am asking you whether, in light of
that decrease, you think something like what the chairman's
bill proposes would at least temporarily be helpful.
Ms. LaChance. I do not believe that the process that has
been proposed by the chairman would be helpful to the Postal
Service.
Although there has been a slight decrease in the
populations that you are citing, if you do go back to the 1999
data you will see that there has been a good decrease in the
GAO report. Further, I think, given the fact that----
Ms. Norton. Yes, there were increases between 1999 and
2004, not much for Black men, 9.0 to 9.8, but at least it was
an increase, and African American women, 5.3 to 7.0. Then I
look at the years between 2004 and 2007 and I see rather
significant decreases. That is what leads me to ask the
question I have just asked.
Ms. LaChance. Again, I do not believe that having the
legislation as proposed would be of aid to the Postal Service
because our process is really not about filling jobs and
promotions, but rather about developing individuals for
leadership.
What we have looked toward is identifying people and giving
them opportunities. If we look toward only----
Ms. Norton. Rather than giving them jobs.
Mr. Chairman, I think you said you are not for it. Giving
them opportunities which result in decreases does not show the
effectiveness of what you are doing, Ms. LaChance. Thank you
very much. I will go on to the next person.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Ms. Norton. We
will go to Mr. Clay.
Mr. Clay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me start with Ms. Kichak. You voiced two concerns about
the proposed legislation, H.R. 3774 and the Senate version. One
of the concerns is that it would create a new office and you
believe in the current structure that is there. You also voiced
a concern that I thought was quite interesting and have never
heard from any Federal agency, that you had a cost concern
about the cost of creating this new department. I found that
quite interesting. I have never heard any agency come up here
and say they did not want to create something new because of
cost. I just don't hear it. It is not a part of Federal
agencies' culture. I don't hear it. But I heard it today.
Your second set of concerns was about the Constitutionality
that was pointed out to you.
Change is always difficult, and it seems to me that the
culture of the SES selection process should be what changes.
When you really think about it, it is the culture. You think
that the levels of diversity in the SES are improving, but the
will must be there to make these improvements. The will must be
there to make the changes. It must be there to actually move
people up the ladder. Is the will there to do that in OPM?
Ms. Kichak. The will is definitely there.
The first thing is it is not a question of being afraid of
change. We did have one SES office prior to our reorganization
in 2003 which was not that long ago, and so those of us with
long careers at OPM remember that. I really believe the service
and the quality of service the SES community is better today
because, instead of having a small office devoted to one topic,
we bring together experts in various aspects of personnel
management, such as how you recruit, how you evaluate, how you
service, how you rank applications, and things like that.
So working with the SES, there are more people working on
it today, although not full time, than there were when we had
an individual office, so it is really, No. 1, an issue of
quality.
No. 2, OPM always does care about cost. We are a small
agency and we want to make sure we use our dollars wisely. But
we continue to support diversity in the SES. I mean, we just
issued new Executive Corps qualifications that you use to
evaluate applicants, and it requires a leadership element that
evaluates whether folks have been effective leaders in
encouraging diversity. So our interest is there.
We have a human capital score card. That is not strictly
SES. That is for measuring the management of human capital, and
there is a managing diversity element there. We require
reviewing diversity and succession plans. So we are very much
committed.
Mr. Clay. Commitment is one thing, but, I mean, I heard the
chairman say that it may take up to 25 years to get to parity.
To be committed and for you to come here and say you are
committed is fine, but the numbers don't bear that out. They
really don't. And you are not demonstrating national diversity
by your numbers, so in actuality you don't have a diverse SES.
You don't have a diverse work force that allows people to climb
the career ladder in SES. You aren't selecting numbers. Your
numbers just aren't there.
I am from Missouri, and we have a motto in that State. You
have to show me. You have not shown me that you are about
fairness and that you are about equity, that you are about
upward mobility of all of your employees. You don't look
nationally diverse.
Ms. Kichak. We can show you numbers that are improving, but
not numbers that have achieved the levels of representation in
the work force in general. You are correct.
Mr. Clay. And also I find it kind of different, too, that
OPM has come here today to take an adversarial position against
this legislation. My suggestion to you and OPM is that you all
figure this out how to work with both chairmen of these two
committees and to actually come up with a product that gets us
the result. Don't come here being adversarial, because you are.
Ms. Kichak. We would very much like to work with the
committees to come up with something that would improve the
diversity of the senior executive work force.
Mr. Clay. And it doesn't help when you come up here and
give us a line from the Justice Department that is really not
relevant.
Let me go to Ms. LaChance before my time runs out.
Why is there a disconnect in the number of rank and file
employees versus the executive level positions, the same point
that Ms. Norton was bringing up? What is the disconnect here?
Ms. LaChance. As I understand your question, in terms of
the disconnect between the representation in the rank and file
versus the representation in the managerial ranks?
Mr. Clay. The 54 or 55 percent of African American male and
females in the Postal Service compared to a much drastically
less number of executives in decisionmaking positions in the
Postal Service.
Ms. LaChance. In terms of diversity at the managerial
ranks, one of the things that we see in the managerial ranks,
in general, is that those individuals that are sitting in those
positions actually came into the organization some time ago
when the diversity of America was different.
As we have had over the years, as we influence and start to
do hiring, we see more and more of the ranks at the initial
level where we do more hiring from external coming in and
looking more like America as it does today.
As a result, without intervention or having programs like
management interns, which we have moved toward, or hiring
initial level supervisors, opening up our opportunities to what
America looks like today, our managerial ranks looks like the
population as it was perhaps 10, 15 years ago. So it takes an
extra effort for us to continue to encourage our own work
force, reach out, and to retain that work force.
Mr. Clay. And you know your line of reasoning here is
similar to Ms. Kichak in that you seem to have some challenges
about what you call leadership, but it seems to me that you
have individuals making judgment calls on applicants, which may
be influenced by other factors. So it may be something in your
own system that you may want to evaluate and change.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Mr. Clay.
We will go to Mr. Gonzalez.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Kichak, first of all I want you to understand that
Director Springer has met with members of the Hispanic Caucus
at least twice, has addressed our concerns, and I think has
shown a very genuine interest in some of the worries that we
have, so I am going to start off with that basic premise and
observation.
But I think what you see here is being expressed a certain
frustration, trying to get to the bottom of the problem and
seeing that the approach that you take and the direction that
you give the agencies and the departments is effective, and
there is some serious question about that.
I am going to refer to the Post article that came out today
that I am sure you read, and Congressman Jose Serrano's
questioning of Director Springer yesterday, and I am going to
read from it. ``Jose Serrano, Democrat from New York who is
chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee and is
interested in promoting diversity, cited a 2007 survey that the
OPM had conducted of its own employees. About 25 percent of the
OPM employees chose to neither agree nor disagree on whether
OPM policies and programs to promote diversity in the agency,
and an additional 12 percent selected do not know, as their
response. An additional 9.4 percent disagreed that the OPM's
efforts promote diversity in the agency.'' That was what was
reported in the paper today.
So you probably have about half of those within OPM that
were surveyed that either have a negative opinion or no opinion
or don't know. Even internally, that would be unacceptable, and
when you think in terms of what you are doing basically sets
the course, guides others and such, you have to look at it and
question internally what you all are doing. That is what gets
our attention.
And then if you spread that throughout the agencies and
departments that are not meeting any of the mandates or goals
or recommendations set out by Executive orders and such, now
you have really got us worried. It seems like the frustration
only grows from year to year because the numbers don't seem to
be improving.
Now, I understand that a certain agency or a department may
have a better record of diversity in hiring at all levels and
at the senior executive levels, and it is always amazing to see
which ones are more successful than others. In our discussions
with Director Springer we were trying to say, Would you
identify those programs that are more successful, and such.
One of the recommendations of this legislation--again, this
is from a memorandum that is prepared by staff for the benefit
of members of the committee. It says, ``The bill is divided in
two primary sections. The first section would recreate the
Senior Executive Resources Office at OPM, which was dissolved a
number of years ago. According to Senior Executives
Association--'' and I think they have a representative here--
``During most of the existence of Senior Executive Service
there exited at OPM a single Office of Executive Resource,
which was responsible for thinking about and overseeing the
specialize corps of senior executives and related
classifications constituting the career leadership of the U.S.
Government. Ever since the division of this office's
responsibility a number of years ago, concerns and issues
relating to the career leadership corps has been parceled out
among many different and sometimes hard to identify, let alone
locate, parts of OPM.''
And your position would be in opposition to that particular
aspect of this legislation?
Ms. Kichak. I think we are serving that community better by
giving them access to all the experts that touch on all facets
of SES, and my particular office will take any call from that
organization and make sure it gets to the right place. We are
committed to serving that population; we just don't think this
is the way to do it.
Mr. Gonzalez. I think it has been our experience that we
like to see things institutionalized within departments,
agencies, and so on that have certain duties and
responsibilities that address the issues that are before us. I
think that is the approach of this piece of legislation. I
don't speak for the author or anyone at this point, but that
would just be my understanding. I think we had something that
was in place truly dedicated to the proposition of looking at,
of course, senior executive levels and how you promote, what
you do to retain, and even the outside hires, as you were
saying, which were minimal when you think in terms of what you
have to draw from and who you bring in new at those particular
levels.
I do wish, and I am going to have to echo some of what my
colleague, Mr. Lacy, pointed out, I wish that you all were a
little bit more open minded about that. I understand even
Congress doesn't like sometimes when people are telling us that
we have to do some things differently and maybe have something
within our own Body that may overview certain actions of
Members, but, nevertheless, sometimes we do have to listen.
Ms. LaChance, let me ask you, where did you come up with
this model on how you approach on obviously attracting and
retaining and promoting within the Postal Service? Who gave you
all these ideas? Where did you receive your direction?
Ms. LaChance. Well, one of the things that we do is we
constantly look at best practices in an industry, and one of
the best practices in industry is to focus in on development.
That is really why we are very different than what the rest of
the Federal Government does. We do not post position by
position. We post for development, developmental pools, and we
identify individuals, give them opportunities, give them
coaching over time, and that is a best practice in private
industry. In fact, we were cited in 2005 by GAO as having a
best practice with our programs, as well.
While we always can improve and we continue to strive to do
that, looking at our programs and processes, making sure that
there are no barriers to any one individual or group in any of
our personnel practices is something that we, as well as the
Federal Government, do and report to EEOC.
So I think it is a combination of the two pieces: looking
to best practice and also monitoring on an ongoing basis.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much. Let me thank
both of you. We appreciate your testimony and appreciate your
being with us. You are excused.
Ms. LaChance. Thank you.
Ms. Kichak. Thank you.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. We will go to our second panel.
While they are being seated, I will introduce them.
Panel two is Mr. George H. Stalcup, the Director of
Strategic Issues at the Government Accountability Office, GAO.
He oversees a range of management and human capital issues. Mr.
Stalcup also oversees GAO's high-risk program and issuance of
GAO's biennial update to its high-risk list.
Ms. Katherine Siggerud is the Director in the Physical
Infrastructure Issues Team at GAO. She has directed GAO's work
on postal issues for several years, including recent reports on
delivery standards and performance processing, network
realignment, contracting policies, semi-postal stamps, and
biological threats.
Let me thank you both. As is the tradition of this
committee, we always swear in witnesses.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Davis of Illinois. The record will show that the
witnesses answered in the affirmative.
Let me welcome you both and thank you for being here.
Mr. Stalcup, we will begin with you.
STATEMENTS OF GEORGE H. STALCUP, DIRECTOR, STRATEGIC ISSUES,
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE; AND KATHERINE SIGGERUD,
DIRECTOR, PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE, GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY
OFFICE
STATEMENT OF GEORGE M. STALCUP
Mr. Stalcup. Chairman Davis, Congresswoman Norton,
Congressman Gonzalez, thank you for the opportunity to
participate in this hearing on diversity in the executive
ranks. I will first discuss the SES, and then Ms. Siggerud will
talk about the Postal Career Executive Service.
Our Government continues to face new and more complex
challenges associated with long-term fiscal constraints,
changing demographics, and other factors. Senior leadership in
agencies across Government, including the Postal Service, is
essential to providing accountable, committed, consistent, and
sustained attention to human capital and related organizational
transformational issues. A diverse executive corps can be an
organizational strength by bringing in a wider variety of
perspectives and approaches to bear on policy development and
implementation, strategic planning, problem solving, and
decisionmaking.
In 2003 we issued a report that looked at diversity in the
SES as of October 2000. We estimated by race, ethnicity, and
gender the number who would leave Government service by October
2007 and projected what the profile of the SES would be at the
end of 2007 if appointment trends did not change. We made
similar estimates for the GS-15 and GS-14 levels, which are
viewed as the primary developmental pools for the SES.
In testimony last year, we provided data on representation
at senior executive levels as of the end of fiscal year 2006.
Our statement today presents the baseline data from our October
2000 that we used in our previous study and updated
representation data as of the end of fiscal year 2007 for both
the SES and the developmental pool.
As requested, our full statement also compares the fiscal
year 2007 data to the projections we made in our 2003 study.
For both the SES and the developmental pool we included
data both Government-wide and for each of the 24 CFO Act
agencies. One of the charts to my right, your left, shows a
breakdown of representation in the SES as of 2000 and as of
2007, as well as the changes over that span. The other chart
presents similar data for the SES developmental pool.
Our 2003 report projected some increases in representation
in most categories of SES. You can see that fiscal year 2007
data show that increases did take place overall among both
women and minorities, as well as in most categories, although
the amount of those increases varied.
The only decrease in representation among minorities
occurred in African American men, whose representation declined
from 5.5 percent in the year 2000 to 5.0 percent in 2007.
Our 2003 report also projected some increases in
representation among both minorities and women in the SES
developmental pool. The 2007 data show that increases generally
did take place, but again the magnitude of those increases
varied.
It is important for me to note that we did not analyze the
factors that contributed to these changes, and therefore care
must be taken when comparing actual changes in demographic data
to the projections we made. Specifically, we have not
determined whether or not the estimated retirement and
appointment trends used in our projections continued.
Now, while we have not done that analysis, agencies are
required to analyze their work forces and, where representation
levels for covered groups are lower than the civilian labor
force, take steps to address those differences. Agencies must
also maintain effective equal employment opportunity programs
and develop strategies to mitigate or eliminate any barriers to
participation.
It is also important for agencies to consider retirement
eligibility and actual retirement rates of the SES.
In 2006, OPM reported that approximately 60 percent of the
executive branch's white collar employees and 90 percent of its
executives would be eligible for retirement over the next 10
years. Significant retirements could affect the leadership
continuity, institutional knowledge, and expertise among the
SES corps. This has important implications for Government
management and emphasizes the need for good succession planning
for this leadership group.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Stalcup follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.064
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.066
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.068
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.069
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.070
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.071
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.072
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.073
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.074
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.075
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.076
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.077
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.078
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.079
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.080
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.081
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much.
Ms. Siggerud.
STATEMENT OF KATHERINE SIGGERUD
Ms. Siggerud. Chairman Davis, Ms. Norton, Mr. Gonzalez, I
would like to echo my colleague's thanks for inviting GAO to be
a part of this hearing.
The Postal Service faces similar challenges as the
executive branch. The Service expects nearly half of its
executives to retire within the next 5 years, which underscores
the need for effective succession planning, but also presents
opportunities for the Postal Service to alter the composition
of its executive ranks.
Today I will provide similar information regarding the
Postal Service to the overview Mr. Stalcup provided with regard
to the SES. I will discuss first representation information for
the Postal Career Executive Service [PCES]; second,
representation from the ranks of postal employees who can be
promoted into the PCES; and, third, how the Postal Service
selects employees for executive promotion.
Turning to the PCES, our chart on my right does show
increases in the percent of women and minorities from 1999
through 2007 for the Postal Service. However, the trends did
vary in this group, which currently includes about 750
executives. For example, during the past 8 years there was a
decrease in representation of African American men, while
numbers for other minority men stayed largely steady. For
women, percentages stayed steady or increased.
The story is similar for employees in the ranks of the
Executive and Administrative Schedule [EAS]. They could be
selected for PCES positions. As shown in our chart, from 1999
through 2007, percentages increased for minority men, minority
women, and women overall, but there was a decrease in
representation of African American men.
We have not analyzed factors that contributed to changes in
the representation in the PCES or EAS. The Postal Service, like
executive branch agencies, has responsibility for analyzing its
work force, identifying barriers, and developing strategies to
counteract them.
Mr. Chairman, as the previous panel discussed, the process
for selecting new PCES employees differs from that used to
select SES members. Because the Postal Service has statutory
authority to establish procedures for its appointments and
promotions, it does not fall under the jurisdiction of the OPM
process my colleague described. Instead, the Postal Service
promotes employees to the PCES when there is a vacancy that
needs to be filled. There are no requirements to advertise PCES
vacancies. Selecting officials are not required to interview
candidates for such vacancies, and there is no board to certify
candidates' qualifications.
However, the Service strongly encourages its executives to
select PCES promotees from the corporate succession planning
program. The Postal Service created this program in 2004 for
the purpose of identifying pools of potential successors for
PCES positions and for developing these employees. While the
corporate succession planning program could be viewed as
similar to SES candidate programs, there are important
differences.
There are about 400 corporate succession planning position
pools which correspond to specific positions in the PCES.
Members of these pools are selected by committees convened by
each of 43 postal officers and include at least three
executives. Once selected, members participate in development
activities.
While the SES candidate programs have high rates of
placement in the SES, in 2007 about a tenth of corporate
succession planning participants were tapped to be executives.
In reviewing information about the corporate succession
planning program, we determined that about 87 percent of
employees selected for the PCES were, in fact, program
participants. We reviewed representation for program
participants for those EAS levels most likely to produce PCES
promotions. In this group, percentages increased for both women
and minorities from 2004 through 2007, but the percentage of
African American men decreased.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, racial, ethnic, and gender
diversity in the Government's executive ranks is an important
component of the effective operation of the Government.
Succession planning provides an opportunity for the Federal
Government to affect the diversity of the executive corps
through new appointments.
We have reported that the agencies in other countries use
succession planning to achieve a more divers work force,
maintain leadership capacity, and increase the retention of
high-potential staff.
GAO has said that an agency's human capital plan should
address the demographic trends that the agency faces with its
work force, especially retirements. Leading organizations go
beyond a so-called replacement approach that focuses on
identifying particular individuals as possible successors;
rather, they focus in broad, integrated succession planning
that focuses on strengthening both current and future capacity,
anticipating the need for leaders and other key employees with
the necessary competencies to successfully meet the challenges
of the 21st century.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes our statements, and we are
certainly happy to answer any questions.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Ms. Siggerud. I
appreciate both of you for being here and testifying.
Mr. Stalcup, let me ask, you mentioned the fact that GAO
did not analyze factors that affected changes in
representation. Let me ask you, you indicated that the
agencies, themselves, would have responsibility for doing that.
Do we know whether or not agencies are actually doing this?
Mr. Stalcup. Both the EEOC and Office of Personnel
Management, as you say, Mr. Chairman, do require agencies to
analyze their work forces, identify where there are disparities
with the civilian labor force, and work to overcome any
barriers that they identify. They are to report annually to
those respective organizations on how well they have done, and
those organizations, in turn, report to the Congress. So there
is information out there on what is being done in that regard,
but with 25 different agencies making it up you have a varying
situation in each agency.
So OPM and EEOC are the ones with that important oversight
role to be working with those agencies and getting those
numbers where they need to be.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. And so if we end up requesting from
OPM and from the Government Accountability Office that we
receive that information from the agencies, then we could
expect to be able to get it?
Mr. Stalcup. Yes. Typically on an issue like that we would
look for OPM to provide that information and we would then work
with your team in your office in analyzing those responses.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Yes, because I think it is very
important, especially if we find, as we are finding, that there
is regression among some population groups, which is difficult
to, quite frankly, understand, as we consistently suggest that
we are moving forward. We certainly would be in need of that
information.
Let me also ask you, what work has GAO done to take a look
at retirement expectations of SESers over the next 5 years?
Mr. Stalcup. We have not updated the study that we did
going back into 2003, which did that projection based on 2000
numbers for this year or this recently completed year of 2007.
Again, it is the responsibility oversight the individual
agencies under the leadership of both OPM and EEOC to analyze,
to make those analyses of their work force. It is a very
important function to know, have a feel for what retirements
are in play, and to plan and do work force planning
accordingly, not to do one-for-one replacements, but to figure
out where you need to move your organization from where it is
at today and where you need to be in the future and use
recruitment and hiring and appointments to get there.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Based upon your knowledge, would you
suggest that there will be significant opportunity to really
change the face of the SES over the next 5 to 10 years, given
the numbers of people who in all likelihood will be retiring,
therefore opening up additional opportunity?
Mr. Stalcup. Well, clearly the numbers that OPM has
presented are large in terms of people that will become
eligible for retirement in coming years. The next number that
is important is how many of them will, in fact, retire. But
assuming a good portion of them retire, the opportunity will be
there in terms of replacements and appointments for those folks
to, in fact, make a change.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Ms. Siggerud, let me ask you how
much change has there been in the representation of women and
minorities among postal executives in the Executive Service?
Ms. Siggerud. Mr. Chairman, this is really sort of a mixed
bag, I would say. When you look at overall representation in
the PCES over the time period from 1999 through 2007, which is
the data that we have available to us, we do see increases in
women of nearly 9 percent. We see increases in minority groups
of about 4.7 percent, a lower number than for women. But when
we look at the number of men, and in particular African
American men, there is a decrease over that time period, and we
see similar sorts of trends in the groups that could be
promoted into those positions.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Do you have any idea as to why this
phenomenon is occurring among African American males?
Ms. Siggerud. Mr. Chairman, as with the executive branch,
we have not at this point gotten beneath these numbers and
tried to identify causes and factors. As Mr. Stalcup said, I
would certainly be very interested in seeing what the Postal
Service has done in response to OPM and EEOC requirements to do
this analysis.
In its report to the Congress that was required in the
Reform Act looking at diversity among managers and supervisors,
in general--a little bit different group from what we did--the
Postal Service did mention significant retirement numbers among
men, in general, as perhaps being behind this issue.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much.
I will go to Ms. Norton.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First let me ask a threshold question to try to understand
these figures. Has there been a reduction in the number of SES
employees between 2000 and 2007?
Mr. Stalcup. I believe the answer is there has been an
increase.
Ms. Norton. Altogether?
Mr. Stalcup. Altogether.
Ms. Norton. White, Black, whoever is in there. Has there
been an increase, or has there been stability in the number of
SES employees between 2000 and 2007?
Mr. Stalcup. In the year 2000, based on our 2003 report,
there were 6,110 SESers. In the year 2007 there are 6,555, an
increase of 445.
Ms. Norton. All right. I am trying to figure out who have
taken all of the positions. You might ask where have all the
White men gone. Well, if you look at your figures, they have
probably retired, because the White male figures are even
larger in decreases, or there is even a larger decrease in
White men than in anyone else. I am talking about SES now. In
men, period, there is a 5.5 percent decrease. We see that in
the work force throughout. Men have, for various reasons--some
of them having to do with pensions and the rest. But if we look
at White men, there is an even greater reduction.
Who is getting these positions, Ms. Siggerud or Mr.
Stalcup, if you have an increase in the SES and we see these
tiny increases over 7 years--if you look at 7 years, these
increases are quite unimpressive, 0.6 percent for African
American women, of course a decrease for African American men,
0.9 percent for Hispanic men, 0.2 percent for Hispanic women,
White women do see an increase of 4.2 percent. You talk about
successive planning. We are told by Mr. Stalcup there is an
increase in employees. Well, who's getting the jobs?
Mr. Stalcup. Well, the numbers are in our appendix one of
the statement we did. The total number of White males at the
SES level actually did go down from 4,097 to 3,976, a small
decrease.
Ms. Norton. Or 6.4 percent. Yes. That is what leads me to
ask the question. But the numbers of SES employees went up.
Mr. Stalcup. That is correct.
Ms. Norton. So not only do you have vacancies that can be
filled, you got more employees than you had before in 2000, so
I am trying to figure out who are getting the jobs.
Mr. Stalcup. And the answer to who got the jobs is in that
column on the right. I can do the math and I can provide more
detail to you if you wish.
Ms. Norton. I don't see the numbers in here, frankly, in
the math, not when you consider the increases.
Mr. Stalcup. Page 19 of our statement.
Ms. Norton. I am looking at the blue chart. I am sorry. I
am looking at the blue chart at the moment. I wish you would
break down where have all the jobs gone. You have more SES
employees. You have men, White men who held the great majority
of them, reducing in even larger numbers. You see tiny
increases in all but White women. So I don't see why there
aren't greater increases, since White males aren't necessarily
filling the new positions. Or maybe they are. They are leaving,
but maybe more White men are, in fact, filling the positions.
Mr. Stalcup. The details on page 19 of our statement, which
you may not have with you----
Ms. Norton. I am looking at 19 now.
Mr. Stalcup. You can see on that first set of data under
SES that White women went from a number of 1,164 to 1,526, so
the increase----
Ms. Norton. Well, that is reflected in this data. That is
4.2 percent.
Mr. Stalcup. That is correct.
Ms. Norton. I don't want to belabor the point. I am looking
at increases, not large increases but 6,100 to 6,500.
Mr. Stalcup. Correct.
Ms. Norton. I am looking at decreases in White males. And
when you consider the increases overall plus the decrease in
White males, you would expect, it seems to me, that the White
women are not taking all these positions. I don't see that.
Mr. Stalcup. I understand your point. Yes.
Ms. Norton. And I would like to see you do that math.
Mr. Stalcup. We will.
Ms. Norton. I would very much appreciate that.
Ms. Siggerud, you said, interestingly, that the Postal
Service doesn't do advertisements, recruits from within. Is
that what you were testifying?
Ms. Siggerud. The Postal Service can either promote from
within, or occasionally will, in fact, hire someone outside.
Ms. Norton. They don't advertise for positions? Was that
your testimony?
Ms. Siggerud. There is a requirement to advertise for
positions. There may be occasions when the Postal Service does,
in fact, do advertisement.
Ms. Norton. I don't know which they do. Do they tend to
recruit from the ranks?
Ms. Siggerud. Primarily, yes.
Ms. Norton. That is good.
Ms. Siggerud. Yes.
Ms. Norton. Where you have this large pool of minorities
and women, you have this ready-made pool of people to recruit
from. I am trying to discover whether, when they get to these
SES-type positions, whether they are recruiting--it might be
quite all right--from laterally, whether they are recruiting up
the ranks. I am trying to account for the disparity.
Ms. Siggerud. Yes. The Postal Service does encourage
recruiting from this corporate succession planning program that
I mentioned, which are the pools of people that are being
developed to fill specific disciplines within the executive
corps of the Postal Service. What we found was that about 87
percent of the promotions into the PCS came from people who are
members of the corporate succession planning program. As I
said, there were occasionally outside hires that may also be
used to provide a very specialized skill.
Ms. Norton. Mr. Chairman, I am going to go on, since the
bell has rung, to the next person, but I think we need to know
what kinds of positions require lateral, because I think it is
very good to be in the Postal Service at the ranks and know
that you may 1 day get to be in the whatever is the SES of the
Postal Service, and so it would be important to know where are
the lateral hires and where are the promotions from the
succession planning, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Ms. Norton.
Mr. Gonzalez.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
It is good to see you again, Mr. Stalcup, and I want to
extend my thanks for the assistance that GAO provided us at the
request back in that time of the ranking member of the full
committee and the ranking member of this subcommittee, Mr.
Davis, and getting your services to address a very serious
question that the Hispanic Caucus had regarding Hispanic under-
representation.
What we learned then was very enlightening. There are many
different conditions that may, I guess, mitigate why an agency
or department may not be meeting certain numbers that are out
there, or they are encouraged to, so that is interesting. I
guess what I learned is that many times you can tell us the
what but not necessarily the why's. Today I think again I am
getting that sense that you can give us the raw numbers, you
can go in there and you can analyze this and say this is what
you have in the way of women, African American women, Asian
American women, Hispanic, and so on, but you can't really tell
us what might be the best practices or why one agency does
better than another.
My experience from the previous assistance that you
provided us is that in the final analysis it really is going to
be OPM and, of course, the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission [EEOC]. In everything, that is what we end up at the
end of this whole process.
I don't know if GAO is ever going to go in there and
analyze all the different departments and agencies and figure
out why they have greater success at attracting and retaining a
more diverse work force. I don't know if that would ever be
your charge. So if we told you go out there and we want you to
analyze all the different departments and agencies, not just
the senior executive levels, but across the board, who does a
better job and why do they do a better job, would that be a
legitimate request? Would you be able to ever do anything like
that?
Mr. Stalcup. Well, that would be a major undertaking. We
would obviously talk to you and work through what would be best
in terms of getting at that.
As you state, clearly OPM and EEOC have those very
important leadership roles to do that.
Let me also say that we have done a body of work not
directly focused on agency-by-agency and story-by-story, but we
have done a series of other reports. We have looked at the
overall framework for EEO in the Government for achieving
diversity. We have talked about various roles of both the EEOC
and OPM, what is rooted in law, what is rooted in regulation,
and presented some things out there, some observations in terms
of how that works. We have made recommendations based on the
Hispanic representation work we did for you, which was a very
important job. But we haven't yet, like you say, gone and
attempted to develop a story agency-by-agency. Chances are it
is going to be a different story for every agency, but there
will be common themes also.
Mr. Gonzalez. One thing that we were trying to arrive at
back then with the work that you assisted us with was really
the accountability or consequences of failing to be aggressive
and effective in the efforts of any agency and department, and
that is why we ended up with OPM and EEOC as really probably
being the entities that you would look for as far as maybe
exercising some sort of decisionmaking and policy
implementation that would result in the accountability and
responsibility of all those agencies and departments that maybe
aren't doing as good a job as we believe that they should.
But I know that cause and effect is an important thing
here, and these numbers I think are really important, but I do
believe they just provide us with some raw data, unless what is
attempting to be accomplished by this piece of legislation. If
we don't move aggressively ourselves and try to
institutionalize within OPM or an agency or a department some
sort of, again, either a body or a section that is truly
dedicated to this proposition of diversity in the work force, I
am not sure that we will make that kind of progress.
Again, I just want to commend the chairman of this
subcommittee for being not just creative, but again assertive,
and maybe we will get there.
I would ask the agencies and the departments and the
administration if they don't like this particular suggestion,
then what can we do to arrive at better results than where we
are today.
I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Mr. Gonzalez.
I want to thank the witnesses for being with us this
afternoon. We appreciate your testimony and your answers. You
are excused.
Mr. Stalcup. Thank you.
Ms. Siggerud. Thank you.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you.
We will go to the third panel. While we are transitioning,
I will just go ahead and introduce the witnesses.
Panel three is Mr. Steven Williams. He is the secretary and
director of the Office of Secretary and Administration at the
Postal Regulatory Commission. He manages the Office of
Secretary and Administration, which encompasses the functional
and administrative areas of human capital, Federal advisory
committees, information technology, budget, and purchasing.
We have Mr. Ronald Stith, who is the assistant inspector
general for mission support at the U.S. Postal Service Office
of Inspector General. He is responsible for budgeting,
contracting, purchasing, human resources, Federal advisory
committees, and vehicle management and professional development
activities.
We have Ms. Nicole A. Johnson. She serves as an assistant
chief inspector for the U.S. Postal Inspection Service. She is
responsible for leading the Inspection Service's mission
critical support functions, which include finance, training,
work force management, information, business requirements and
solutions, and technical support.
Ms. Johnson, thank you.
Mr. Bray Barnes is the Department of Homeland Security's
new Acting Chief Human Capital Officer. In this position he
oversees DHS's human capital policy, strategic planning,
learning and development, recruitment, performance management,
work force engagement, compensation, benefits, labor relations,
employee relations, and other areas. Mr. Barnes first joined
DHS in May 2007 as the Director of Workforce Relations.
Mr. Barnes, thank you.
And Ms. Carmen Walker has been the Deputy Officer for the
Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at the Department of
Homeland Security since its inception in March 2003. Prior to
joining the Department of Homeland Security, Ms. Walker was the
Deputy Director of the Department of Treasury, Office of Equal
Employment Opportunity Programs, where she managed the Civil
Rights complaint operations and Equal Opportunity Policy and
Evaluation Divisions.
Thank you all so very much.
If you would stand and be sworn in, as is our tradition,
and raise your right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Davis of Illinois. The record will show that the
witnesses answered in the affirmative.
Let me thank you all for being here with us this afternoon.
Of course, you know that a full copy of your testimony is in
our record. The green light means that you have 5 minutes, down
to the yellow light, you have 1 minute in which to wrap up,
and, of course, the red light means that your time is up, and
then we can end up having questions.
Let me thank you so much for being here. We will begin with
Mr. Williams.
STATEMENTS OF STEVEN W. WILLIAMS, SECRETARY AND CHIEF
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION; RONALD
STITH, ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR MISSION SUPPORT, U.S.
POSTAL SERVICE, OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL; NICOLE A.
JOHNSON, ASSISTANT CHIEF INSPECTOR INVESTIGATIONS AND SECURITY
SUPPORT, U.S. POSTAL INSPECTION SERVICE; BRAY BARNES, ACTING
CHIEF HUMAN CAPITAL OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY;
AND CARMEN WALKER, DEPUTY OFFICER, OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS AND
CIVIL LIBERTIES, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
STATEMENT OF STEVEN M. WILLIAMS
Mr. Williams. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a privilege to
be here. I thank the rest of the members of the subcommittee
for also being here.
I appreciate this opportunity to testify on behalf of the
Commission on Workforce Diversity. You have my full statement,
and I will summarize.
I am the Commission's Chief Administrative Officer with
responsibility for providing support to the Commission by
recording official actions and overseeing general Commission
administration, including human resources, our docket section,
information technology, and other support services.
The Commission is an independent agency that has exercised
regulatory oversight over the Postal Service since its creation
by the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970.
Initially, this oversight consisted primarily of conducting
public, on-the-record hearings concerning proposed rate
changes, mail classification, or major service changes, and
then recommending for a decision for action by the Postal Board
of Governors.
The Postal Accountability Enhancement Act significantly
strengthened the Commission's authority to serve as a counter-
balance to new flexibility granted to the Postal Service in
setting postal rates. The act requires the Commission to
develop and maintain regulations for a modern system of rate
regulation, consult with the Postal Service on delivery service
standards, performance measures, consult with the Department of
State on international postal policies, prevent cross-
subsidizations or other anti-competitive practices, promote
transparency, accountability, and adjudicate complaints.
The Commission is a micro-agency as defined by OMB, its
term for an agency with fewer than 100 employees. The
Commission has 55.
It has been almost 16 months under the leadership of our
Chairman Dan Blair and the enactment of the new law, and during
this time the Commission has transitioned from the role in
recommending postal rates into an expanded regulator.
On March 7, 2008, the Commission released its first
strategic and operational plan. The plan outlines the
strategies and activities we will employ to meet our goal of
ensuring transparency and accountability of the Postal Service
and foster vital and efficient universal mail system.
Strategic goal No. 6 ensures a system that fosters
recruitment, development, and retention of a talented and
skilled work force and recognized our work force as a valuable
asset. As stated in the plan, the Commission is committed to a
merit-based human resources program.
With the enactment of postal reform and shift in
responsibilities, the Commission benefited from the thorough
review of its work force needs. Over the past year the
Commission has analyzed its work force in terms of
demographics, position characteristics, work force trends, and
competencies. As noted, the Commission's strategic plan
articulates short-term and ongoing operational strategies that
include recruiting, developing and implementing the succession
planning system, and sustaining a capital plan to encourage
diversity.
AS noted, the Commission has 55 employees. Our expectation
is to grow to approximately 70. Of those currently employed, 49
percent or 27 are female, and 51 percent or 28 are male. Women
have assumed leadership roles as directors, assistant
directors, and policy advisors. The addition of women to our
successor pools increases our opportunity to improve the
representation of women in higher leadership positions as we
experience the turnover in the coming years.
Our progress in recruiting and hiring minority members is
an improving story, but much still needs to be done. Last year
more than 25 percent of our new hires were minorities. There
were two minority females. And 80 percent of the new hires were
women, 30 percent of those were hired into senior leadership
positions.
The Commission office heads are committed to broadening our
outreach actions. As one example, we have engaged in
discussions with the Department of Economics at Howard
University in order to assist in our recruitment efforts to
fill entry level and intern positions. Managers are now held
accountable for their efforts to increase diversity by
including provisions in their individual performance plans.
There is a commitment from the top down to support
initiatives to recruit, develop, and retain skilled, high
achieving, diverse work force.
The Commission has been exploring additional avenues in
reaching out to recruit from diverse pools. One such avenue
would in participation in the Presidential management
fellowship program. Over the years, many of those accepted have
gone on to become senior leaders in the Government, but
unfortunately OPM's regulations will not allow us to
participate this year.
Similar to the work force in other agencies, Commission
employees are graying. By 2011, approximately 40 percent of our
work force will be eligible to retire. That includes one-half
of our legal staff and a third of our technical staff. While we
have not finalized our succession strategy, we have been taking
steps to address the gaps in our existing skills.
In closing, I wish to reiterate the Commission's believe
that our most valuable asset is our employees. The Commission
is committed to a merit-based human resource program that
ensures an exemplary, responsive, and diverse work force.
I thank this subcommittee for its time.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much.
We will go to Mr. Stith.
STATEMENT OF RONALD STITH
Mr. Stith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the
subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss diversity
in the Office of the Inspector General, focusing in particular
on the diversity of our senior executive staff and our
developmental pool, our GS-14s and GS-15s. I will also discuss
our programs that assure we continue to gain insight into
diversity and the factors that affect it.
The Office of the Inspector General values and is committed
to diversity. We understand that diversity is important in
developing and maintaining a high quality and high performing
work force. Overall, 35 percent of our employees are
minorities, as compared to 33 percent in the Federal work
force; 40 percent are women, as compared to 44 percent in the
Federal work force.
The makeup of our senior executive staff and our
developmental pool also reflects our commitment to division.
Currently, 33 percent of our senior executives are minorities,
as compared to 16 percent of the Federal Government, and 42
percent are women, compared to 29 percent in the Government.
Turning now to our executive developmental pool, minorities
are 26 percent of our pool, compared to 21 percent in
Government, and women are 35 percent, as compared to 32 percent
in Government.
Each year we look at how our retirement may affect our
diversity. We expect that a third of our women and minorities
who are senior executives and one-tenth of our minorities and
women in our executive developmental pool will likely retire by
2011. However, with the diversity of our developmental pool and
our programs that support division, we are confident that we
can continue the diversity of our senior executive staff.
We have several programs that support our diverse work
force. For example, we review quarterly reports to gauge
diversity in our hiring and promotions. In our hiring and
promotions we ensure that we focus on including women and
minorities. In addition, our rating and ranking panels are
diverse to ensure that candidates are evaluated equitably.
As part of our hiring program, each year we recruit at
conferences such as those sponsored by the National
Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives, the National
Asian Peace Officers Association, the National Latino Law
Enforcement Peace Officers Association, and the Women in
Federal Law Enforcement.
Our leadership development program includes all of our
managers, including our executives. This program ensures that
all managers, regardless of gender, race, or performance
receive the same core leadership training.
The focus of this training is to enhance their
effectiveness in their current positions and to prepare them
for the executive ranks. As part of this program, students
receive theoretical and practical training to improve their
ability to manage a diverse work force. For example, the
program provides practical applications on how to address
individual and generational differences, recognize and prevent
bias, and assure equity.
In closing, we will continue these programs and seek other
avenues to ensure and to improve diversity in our senior
executive ranks and in our developmental pool and throughout or
organization. Diversity is a key element of our culture. We
recognize that the strength of our diversity increases our
ability to perform work that adds value to the Postal Service.
Again, I want to thank you, and I would be pleased to
answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Stith follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.082
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.083
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.084
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.085
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Mr. Stith. We
will proceed to Ms. Johnson.
STATEMENT OF NICOLE A. JOHNSON
Ms. Johnson. Good afternoon, Chairman Davis and members of
the subcommittee. It is my honor to be here today to discuss
the Inspection Service's commitment to a diverse and inclusive
work force. As one of our country's oldest Federal law
enforcement organizations, the Inspection Service has a long,
proud, and successful history of securing the Nation's mail
system and ensuring public trust in the mail.
I appreciate the opportunity to be here today to highlight
our diverse recruitment, retention, and leadership development
programs.
The Postal Inspection Service embraces diversity as
uniqueness and backgrounds, experiences, perspectives, and
personal characteristics of our employees, customers, and
stakeholders. Our 2,900-plus employees are multi-generational
and represent people with diverse and varied backgrounds. We
adhere to the philosophy that a diverse and inclusive
environment makes good business sense and promotes a strong,
successful organization. We recognize the challenges in
recruiting and retaining a diverse work force. Along with the
exit of baby boomers from the work force, we must also consider
the mandatory retirement of Federal law enforcement officers.
We are developing our future leaders through local
development programs, a national career leadership program,
corporate succession planning, and training.
Local development programs focus on the early
identification and development of employees with strong
leadership potential. The career leadership program is a
National Inspection Service program designed to develop and
prepare initial level supervisors for senior management
positions. The corporate succession planning process allows us
to identify and manage successor pools for executive positions.
We provide our future leaders with the opportunities to develop
their skills and abilities and gain experience by leading major
national projects or teams and by serving in acting executive
or mid-level manager positions.
The Postal Inspection Service concentrates recruitment and
retention efforts on identifying talent within the organization
and from outside labor markets. Field division recruitment
specialists use various outreach methods to communicate
awareness of our organization to potential applicants.
Recruiters partner with colleges, universities, and
organizations as part of their outreach strategy. As an
example, in November 2006 the Inspection Service partnered with
the Woman in Federal Law Enforcement to sponsor and create a
video honoring women's 35 years of service in Federal law
enforcement. The Inspection Service was recognized by the Women
in Federal Law Enforcement for contributing to the recruitment
of females to Federal law enforcement positions.
Concerning the demographics of our law enforcement
executives and managers, I would like to share with you some
information concerning the composition of this group. Today, of
the 31 Inspection Service law enforcement executives, women
comprise 17 percent of our executive ranks, and minorities
comprise 27 percent.
In regards to our current executive feeder pool of 379
employees, minorities comprise over 26 percent and women
comprise nearly 21 percent.
Over the past 10 years, we have seen increases in the
participation rate of females, African American and Hispanic
males and females, and Asian Americans. We seek to build,
foster, and sustain an inclusive and highly skilled work force.
We embrace the same belief as the Postal Service, which is open
and inclusive development systems that allow employees to align
their individual career goals with the goals of the
organization. Our directive is to provide our employees with
opportunities to fully participate, contribute, and engage in
our mission.
Thank you. I would be pleased to answer any questions the
subcommittee members may have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Johnson follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.086
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.087
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.088
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.089
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.090
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.091
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Ms. Johnson.
Mr. Barnes.
STATEMENT OF BRAY BARNES
Mr. Barnes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the
subcommittee. It is truly an honor for me to appear before you
today to discuss diversity issues within the Department of
Homeland Security, especially regarding our career Senior
Executive Service. Also with me today, Mr. Chairman, is Carmen
Walker, Deputy Officer, the Office of Civil Rights and Civil
Liberties from the Department.
Secretary Chertoff, Acting Deputy Secretary Paul Snyder,
and Deputy Under-Secretary for Management, Elaine Duke, are
committed to increasing diversity within the Department,
particularly within the Department's career Senior Executive
Service. For example, under Secretary Chertoff's leadership,
the number of career senior executives who are persons with
disabilities has increased dramatically.
It is my privilege to serve as the Department's Acting
Chief Human Capital Officer, a position which I was just
appointed to last month, and also as its Director of Workforce
Relations and Performance Culture, a position that I held since
joining the Department in May 2007. My service to the
Department has furthered my understanding of the importance and
benefits of maintaining a qualified and diverse work force.
The Department has continued its efforts to develop such a
work force, particularly with regards to its core career senior
executives. To date, that effort has enjoyed achievements that
DHS will continue to buildupon. DHS will continue to address
the challenges that remain. Indeed, we are making an effort to
develop a qualified and diverse pool of applicants for SES
positions by preparing current GS-14 and GS-15 employees
through new programs such as mentoring and coaching programs,
rotational assignments, the DHS fellows program, and the SES
candidate development program, of which of the 23 DHS employees
just selected for the next SES candidate development program,
22 percent are African American, 13 percent are Hispanic, and
30 percent are women.
We believe it is imperative to explore a variety of means
to ensure more diverse applicant pools for all of our jobs for
the present and future years to come.
Starting with recruitment efforts, we have implemented
Department and component recruiting strategies designed to
improve the diversity of DHS talent pool, including creating an
SES-level Director of Recruiting and Diversity within our Chief
Human Capital Office who is responsible for implementing
strategic programs to recruit a larger diversity talent pool
for all jobs within DHS, including the SES; establishing a
formal partnership with Urban League's Black Executive Program
[BEP], whereby 150 DHS employees have volunteered with
managerial endorsement to serve as presenters and speakers at
BEP events at historically Black colleges and universities,
pursuing similar partnerships with the National Association of
Hispanic Federal Executives and the African American Federal
Executive Association, and exploring the assistance of an
executive search firm with a proven record with enhancing
diversity.
In my previous role as Director of Workforce Relations and
Performance Culture, I initiated plans to create a Labor/
Management Council within DHS. As Acting Chief Human Capital
Officer, I will ensure that diversity is a focus of these
councils.
In order to demonstrate the Department-wide commitment to
diversity, DHS has designed our Management Council to be a
Diversity Council. This council is composed of top-level
officials from every component and is chaired by the Deputy
Under-Secretary for Management. Among the Council's most
pressing actions will be to issue DHS corporate diversity
strategy and to implement a diversity action plan for the
remainder of fiscal year 2008 through 2010.
In the coming year, DHS will pursue a number of other
avenues aimed at increasing diversity. As a first step, we have
begun to identify requirements for a consultant to conduct a
cultural audit of the Department. We are reviewing our SES
hiring procedures to identify potential practices and
procedures that would integrate attention to diversity in our
process. Our plans include establishing an external diversity
outreach advisory forum of interested stakeholders, ensuring
accuracy of current racial and gender information, prototyping
diversity management training for managers and executives, and
issuing specific guidance to executives holding diversity
advocate competencies in their performance plans.
These efforts are critical, given that 26 percent of our
career executives are eligible to retire in 2008, 34 percent in
2009, and 41 percent in 2010.
The Department of Homeland Security is only 5 years old.
When the President and Congress called for the integration of
22 disparate agencies, we answered the call and stood up the
agency that is today nearly 210,000 employees strong. By
reflecting on America's diversity, our employee work force will
provide a wide range of ideas and solutions to protect America,
and we are committed to achieving a DHS diverse work force,
including our executive cadre.
We are pleased with your interest and support in ensuring
that DHS continues to increase the diversity in its work force,
and we do look forward to working with you further to ensure
continued success.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Barnes follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.092
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.093
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.094
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.095
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.096
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Mr. Barnes.
Mr. Barnes. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. We will go to a round of
questioning. We thank you, Ms. Walker. We understand that you
will not testify, but you are, indeed, available to respond to
questions. Thank you very much.
Let me ask you, Mr. Williams, what recruitment and outreach
efforts is the PRC taking to enhance the diversity of its work
force, including its profile of women and minorities? And in
this context, can you discuss the efforts that the PRC recently
made as it hired staff to support its expanded activities under
the Postal Reform Act?
Mr. Williams. I will try. We are in the process of hiring
and expanding. In fact, we put up three again today. In the
past year, we have hired eight females, lost two males, and
four females and three males retired, so we netted in the past
year four females and one male.
Like I said, we have been very struggling with attracting
minority males. We have certainly had a couple, and I think
both retired recently, so this is a snapshot for us. It leaves
us with fully recognizing our lack.
The chairman has been very strong. Since he came down, he
has made this quite clear that this is something he wants to
see corrected. He has developed performance plans for all of
his managers, which did not exist a year ago, and he has put
that at the top of the goal list for each manager. And the
managers do the hiring. They are reviewed by a panel that is
selected.
We are on the way. We are beginning to recognize it. But I
don't have anything to show you now.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Well, let me also ask you what is
the PRC's executive development selection process, and how does
that compare with the Postal Service's selection process?
Mr. Williams. It is different. We do not participate in
their PCES, nor are we eligible to participate in SES, so it is
somewhat different there. If we need a director, which is our
highest staff office, those are paneled and selected, usually
by the chairman with the concurrence of the other
Commissioners. Your Assistant Directors are similarly paneled.
They are vacancy announcements. Usually all are, the directors
and the assistant directors. So you do have a panel review. The
Directors are reviewed by the Commissioners.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much.
Mr. Stith, I was somewhat intrigued and certainly impressed
by the numbers that you gave. Could you share those with us
again? Then I am going to want to know how did you really get
there, to those?
Mr. Stith. Seeing that overall 35 percent of our employees
are minorities, compared to 33 percent in the Federal work
force; 40 percent are women, as compared to 44 percent in the
Federal work force; of our senior executives, 33 percent are
minorities, 42 percent are women; of our executive
developmental pool, 26 percent are minorities and 35 percent
are women.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Let me just ask about the 33 percent
of the senior executives minorities. I am intrigued by that
number. The process that you actually have gone through to
arrive at those numbers consists of what?
Mr. Stith. Well, we have looked at all of our senior
executives. We have 24 senior executives, and 18 of our senior
executives are either women and/or minorities, and that
includes Hispanics, Blacks, and women.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. And so it is pretty obvious to me
that the agency has put forth--that didn't happen accidentally.
I mean, it didn't just happen without some tremendous focus to
make sure that there was real diversity within the agency. I
think that is quite good, myself, especially as I compare your
agency or your entity with lots of others that I come into
contact with.
Ms. Johnson, what is the Inspection Service's executive
development and selection process?
Ms. Johnson. Chairman Davis, the Inspection Service fully
embraces the Postal Service's corporate succession planning
process; however, we also supplement it with the career
leadership program, which is our developmental program that
helps to establish a strong feeder pool to our succession
planning process.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Let me ask, how do people get into
the career leadership development program?
Ms. Johnson. We use what we believe to be a very effective,
comprehensive approach. It begins with early identification at
the local level. We utilize and encourage our managers to coach
and mentor. They identify leadership, and each of the
executives within the field have established local development
programs. The local development programs feed into our career
leadership programs. Individuals self-nominate or managers
nominate individuals into our career leadership program.
Our career leadership program has a five-member board of
diverse executives that are responsible for reviewing the
applications. They interview the participants and the managers.
They track the developmental activities, and they monitor our
success indicators. From there, nominations occur to our career
succession plan.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. And how are managers held
accountable for diversity in the Inspection Services?
Ms. Johnson. In several ways, Chairman Davis. We believe in
managerial and organizational accountability. First, from the
standpoint of recruitment, we believe it is important to begin
with accountability at the point of recruitment. From that
standpoint, we have ad hoc field recruitment specialists that
have the responsibility for submitting after-action reports to
the headquarters recruitment program manager. The headquarters
recruitment program manager evaluates these after-actions
reports which detail recruitment activities on a quarterly
basis. These after-action reports are evaluated from a
diversity and operational need perspective, and information
concerning trends, concerns, things related to recruitment are
provided in terms of feedback to executive managers.
With regards to our feeder pool, our L-14, L-15 feeder
pool, which represents comparability to the GS-14 and GS-15
feeder pool, we feel that we achieve accountability there with
the career leadership program. The role of the Career
Leadership Board is to interface across the complexities of the
organization. They interface with senior management, as well as
local executives, looking at the representation of the career
leadership participant, providing feedback, working with the
managers, and that helps to strengthen our feeder pool, which
evolves into our career succession plan. There we believe that
the career succession planning process, in and of itself, holds
managers accountable because the components of the career
succession plan include nominations, reviews, evaluations, and
significant manager participation.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much.
Mr. Barnes or Ms. Walker, what recruitment efforts does the
Department of Homeland Security have as it relates to efforts
to enhance diversity, and especially relative to its profiling
of women and minorities?
Mr. Barnes. Mr. Chairman, as I outlined in my speech, we
have a number of recruiting efforts. The first I would like to
point out is the fact that we now have a dedicated executive in
charge of diversity within the Department, and additionally
under his office we have a Coordinator of Diversity and
Veterans Outreach, two people that are full-time, dedicated to
these efforts. As such, sir, we have reached out to the
organizations such as the Black Executive Program, where we
have engaged them to reach out to historic Black colleges and
universities. Our members within the DHS work force are going
out to career fairs within these colleges to recruit.
Additionally, we have reached out to some of the other
organizations, as I pointed out, such as the Hispanic Federal
Executives Association, as well as the African American Federal
Association, and engaged them, as well as to how we can develop
a more diverse and qualified work force.
Third, sir, we are exploring an executive search firm that
is going to hopefully broaden our pool of qualified and diverse
candidates to join the DHS work force.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Do naturalized American citizens
have more difficulty obtaining security clearances and
therefore more difficulty obtaining employment with DHS?
Mr. Barnes. Well, sir, I don't know the exact status of the
naturalized citizens, but certainly we would be happy to supply
the chairman's office with any information regarding that.
However, it is certainly an area that may be worth
consideration once they become naturalized citizens, to include
them in our pool.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. We would appreciate that, because we
have had inquiries and complaints from organizations and groups
who represent naturalized citizens or from naturalized
citizens, themselves, who feel that there might be some
impediment based upon their citizenship status and the whole
question of security and how it fits in, so we would, in fact,
appreciate that information.
Mr. Barnes. We will be happy to provide that information,
sir.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much. We appreciate
all of you being with us, and you are excused.
We will proceed to our fourth and last panel. While we are
transitioning them in, I will go ahead and introduce them.
Mr. William Bransford is the general counsel and lobbyist
for the Senior Executives Association. Mr. Bransford is a
partner in the law firm of Shaw, Bransford, Bellow, and Roth
PC, where he has practiced since 1983. His practice is
concentrated on the representation of Federal executives,
managers, and employees before the U.S. District Courts, Merit
Systems Protection Board, the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission, the Office of Special Counsel, Offices of Inspector
General, and with offices that adjudicate security clearances.
Mr. William Brown has served as national president of the
African American Federal Executives Association, Inc. [AAFEA],
since its founding in 2002. AAFEA promotes the professional
development and advancement of African Americans into and
within the senior levels of the U.S. Government, sponsors an
annual executive leadership and training conference, and
advocates for programs, policies, practices, and processes that
promote career-enhancing opportunities for African Americans.
Membership consists of active and retired Federal employees in
grades GS-13 through the SES.
Ms. Rhonda Trent is the president of Federally Employed
Women [FEW]. FEW is an advocacy group that works to improve the
status of women employed by the Federal Government and by the
District of Columbia government. Ms. Trent is a contracting
officer assigned to the Joint Strike Fighter Program in Crystal
City, VA.
Dr. Carson Eoyang is retired from Federal service and is
currently volunteering as the executive director of the Asian
American Government Executives Network. Prior to that, he was
appointed as assistant deputy director of National Intelligence
for Education and Training, and chancellor of the National
Intelligence University.
Mr. Jose Osegueda is president of the National Association
of Hispanic Federal Executives. He recently retired from the
Department of Agriculture's Office of the Assistant Secretary
of Civil Rights, where he was responsible for the development
of policies aiming to remove barriers that have traditionally
prevented the increase of Hispanic representation in the
Federal work force.
And Ms. Darlene Young, who is president of the National
Association of Blacks in Government [BIG]. BIG was organized in
1975 and incorporated as a non-profit organization under the
District of Columbia jurisdiction in 1976. BIG has been a
national response to the need for African Americans in public
service to organize around issues of mutual concern and use
their collective strength to confront workplace and community
issues. Ms. Young is currently employed at the U.S. Department
of State as a computer specialist.
Let me thank all of you for coming, for staying, and for
being with us at this hour.
If you would all stand and raise your right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Davis of Illinois. The record will show that the
witnesses answered in the affirmative.
Again, let me thank all of you for coming. As all of you
have testified probably a number of times, you know that the
green light means that you have 5 minutes in which to summarize
your testimony. The yellow light means you have a minute left.
Of course, the red light means that we are trying to end up for
the day.
Let me thank you all for being here. We will begin with
you, Mr. Bransford.
STATEMENTS OF WILLIAM BRANSFORD, GENERAL COUNSEL, SENIOR
EXECUTIVES ASSOCIATION; WILLIAM BROWN, PRESIDENT, AFRICAN
AMERICAN FEDERAL EXECUTIVES ASSOCIATION; RHONDA TRENT,
PRESIDENT, FEDERALLY EMPLOYED WOMEN; CARSON EOYANG, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, ASIAN AMERICAN GOVERNMENT EXECUTIVES NETWORK; JOSE
OSEGUEDA, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HISPANIC FEDERAL
EXECUTIVES; AND DARLENE YOUNG, PRESIDENT, BLACKS IN GOVERNMENT
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM BRANSFORD
Mr. Bransford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Senior Executives Association, the professional
association representing the interests of career Senior
Executive Service members and those holding equivalent
positions, appreciates the opportunity to testify about the
Senior Executive Service Diversity Act.
We applaud your leadership on this important issue of
achieving diversity in the career Senior Executive Service, and
we assure you that SEA wants to work with you and others who
care about this issue. After all, the success of sound
Government and the strength of our democracy depend on it.
SEA believes that, because of our close association with
career senior executives, we can offer ideas based on practical
experience that will help attain a diverse executive corps. We
do believe we have some suggestions outlined below that can
strengthen the bills.
SEA sees several areas where the Government could
dramatically improve diversity. First, we believe improved and
accessible, clear data needs to be developed. Second, specific
work needs to be done to build pipelines for career development
to assure that minorities and women are actually in a place to
be promoted to the Senior Executive Service.
Finally, and necessary for the other factors to work,
agencies must adopt a culture of leadership that emphasizes
being fair to and inclusive of all employees.
The first step in this is to obtain a centralized OPM
Senior Executive Service office, which we believe should
provide effective oversight and management to assure that those
parts of the diversity goal become a reality.
In the past, OPM has had an office for the Senior Executive
Service and it worked effectively to monitor and manage the SES
Government-wide. Currently, different offices within OPM share
the responsibility for managing the SES, with policy in one
office and implementation of that policy in another office. In
our opinion, the effect has been a diminishment in the
effectiveness of the management of the Government-wide SES
corps. With respect to diversity, this means that agencies use
different systems and standards for recruiting into the SES,
with varying outcomes on diversity resulting in different
agencies.
With one office to manage the SES, greater diversity is
more likely to become a reality sooner rather than later.
One provision of the bill does cause us concern. This is
the provision that requires panels in the role as gatekeepers
to the SES. These panels could slow the already burdensome
process of promoting general schedule employees to the SES and
could further complicate and hinder the overall selection
process.
SEA suggests that the current legislation be improved by
allowing agencies to choose between diversity selection panels,
as stated in the bills, or effective oversight and management
of its SES selection process by creating diversity
subcommittees of executive resources boards with authority and
responsibility to oversee the SES selection process, including
the development of pipelines.
These subcommittees would consist entirely of peer SES, a
majority of whom must be minorities or women, and they would
have veto or oversight power over SES selection. This would
provide a strong mechanism to encourage diversity, while not
adding any bureaucratic hurdles to an already difficult SES
selection process.
SEA recommends this alternative because it has proven to be
effective. It was used in the 1990's at the Department of
Energy under the leadership of then Secretary Bill Richardson.
Those who served in the DOE Executive Resources Board
Subcommittee tell SEA that it positively improved diversity in
the SES and had a major impact on changing the culture to
encourage the consideration of diversity in the SES selection
process.
Last, we believe that diversity will be further helped
along if Congress and the administration constantly strive to
assure that the SES is attractive as a career goal to all
general schedule employees. If quality general schedule
employees are content to stay at the GS-14 or GS-15 levels
because of pay compression and a sense that the SES pay system
is not being fairly administered, diversity may be harder to
achieve.
Reobtaining the Senior Executive Service's former stature
and prestige will assure that the most qualified candidates
apply, including minority and women candidates with impressive
credentials.
I thank you again for the opportunity to testify before
this subcommittee. SEA looks forward to continuing to work with
the subcommittee on what our organization sees as one of the
most important matters facing our members and our future
members. We hope to continue to be an effective voice of the
Federal Government career executive leadership on this and
other matters about the Civil Service.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bransford follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.097
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.098
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.099
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.100
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.101
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.102
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.103
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Mr. Bransford.
We will proceed to Mr. Brown.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM BROWN
Mr. Brown. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As you mentioned, I am a retired Federal Senior Executive
Service and president of the African American Federal Executive
Association. I would like to begin my remarks by thanking you
and Senator Akaka, your committee, and staff for introducing
this landmark legislation. This legislation will go a long way
in correcting the under-representation of minorities and women
in the SES. This under-representation was validated by GAO's
testimony before this subcommittee on May 10, 2007.
With regards to African Americans, GAO testified that only
8.6 percent of the approximately 6,300 career members of the
SES were African Americans. Between October 2000 and October
2006 the percentage of African American men dropped from 5.5 to
5.1 percent. During the same period the percentage of African
American women in the SES increased from 2.9 to 3.5 percent.
Looking at the total percentages, in October 2000 African
Americans represented 8.4 percent of the SES, and 6 years later
they represented 8.6 percent, an increase of 2/10 of a percent
in 6 years.
Approximately 90 percent of the entire cadre of career
SESers are expected to retire in the next 10 years. If current
trends are allowed to continue, in 10 years, when we would have
replaced these executives, African Americans may represent 8.9
percent, or an overall increase of 3/10 of a percent.
Another way of saying this is: at the current trends, 10
years from now over 92 percent of the SES will not be African
Americans.
The SES Diversity Act will correct this situation by
ensuring that as agencies go about the business of filling
vacancies, the selection process will be fair, consistent among
Federal agencies, and minority and women are considered and
evaluated against the same objective criterias as others.
Our organization's 225 African American senior leaders have
written to their Members of Congress urging passing of this
legislation in its present form. The responses we have received
overwhelmingly support this act; yet, despite the under-
representation of minorities, some are calling for voluntary
implementation of the act's requirement of the use of a diverse
selection panel.
AAFEA does not support such viewpoints. Federal agencies
have had years to voluntarily diversify, and failed to do so,
as the Government's own statistics point out. We see voluntary
implementation as an effort to slow roll the diversity mandate,
deprive our Nation of the talent it desperately needs to
maintain its position of leadership in the world, and deprive
our Nation of the opportunity to avert an approaching work
force crisis.
Since 2003, our organization has conducted three training
workshops where we trained over 450 senior-level African
Americans in core subjects critical for any member of the SES.
Many of these courses were taught by retired senior executives
like myself and have produced for our Nation a cadre of what I
refer to as leadership-ready candidates for Senior Executive
Service positions.
Despite this training by experts, African Americans
continue to be passed over disproportionately for SES
positions.
Mr. Chairman, we are a Nation at war. Our men and women,
White, brown, Black, short, tall, are being called to fight
and, if necessary, die defending our Nation's interests around
the world. We are also a Nation at war at home with bigotry and
indifference to minorities, with access to SES positions being
denied every day to people of color. Our military is not just
looking for one complexion of people to serve, so why should
our Senior Executive Service be any different?
AAFEA says full speed ahead with this act. It is a step in
the right direction. it levels the playing field and draws upon
the full resources of our Nation to solve the impeding work
force crisis.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Brown follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.104
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.105
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.106
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.107
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Mr. Brown.
We will move to Ms. Trent.
STATEMENT OF RHONDA TRENT
Ms. Trent. Thank you, sir. FEW very much appreciates this
opportunity today to participate in this important hearing, and
the passage of the bills in both congressional chambers is a
top legislative priority for FEW.
FEW also agrees with the panel compositions that is now set
forth in the bill as it is written. For 40 years, Federally
Employed Women has worked to end sexual discrimination and
enhance opportunities for the advancement of women in the
Government. Every day nationwide FEW is aware of the issues
facing women throughout the Federal Government. We also provide
a variety of different types of diversity training, which is
annually given in our national, regional, and chapter training
programs.
With respect to the two bills, FEW and its members have
been extremely active. First, we have hand delivered
individualized packets to every House and Senate Member that
enclosed a fact sheet on these bills. Included was a letter
requesting that the legislator co-sponsor or support these
measures. We also enclosed employment statistics detailing the
number of Federal employees working in each congressional
District and State. Within a couple of days several staffers
contacted our Washington representative to announce that their
bosses were adding their names to the co-sponsors.
Our members also have been extremely busy sending letters
directly to their legislators urging them to co-sponsor these
bills. So far, these letters have successfully resulted in two
more co-sponsors, which we are very proud of.
Finally, I want to talk about, I also met with OPM on two
different occasions because Federally Employed Women is very
concerned about the statistics and the status of women in the
Government. We wanted to pull statistics and do a Federal
survey. I met with Linda Springer and I also met with OPM
counsel. They both discouraged this survey to be sent out by
FEW. However, I am glad to report that on March 10th of this
year FEW did, indeed, send out this survey to 22 Federal
agencies. The survey asked a variety of questions regarding
alternative work schedules, training opportunities, career
development programs, upward mobility programs, formal
mentoring programs, and training dollars which are targeted
toward women. This survey will be used to assess the areas
needing support and the direction for women to advance in their
careers. It will be compiled into a report and presented to the
various agencies responding, as well as to Congress.
Our goal is to establish a tool to direct focus, identify
barriers, and plan for the future needs to ensure that the
Federal female work force is receiving the support and
direction that it deserves.
In summary, FEW would like to suggest that in order to
improve the representation of women in the management and other
senior positions, we must--and I emphasize must--increase the
development of those feeder pools that everybody keeps talking
about. With that in mind, we must ensure that managers and
supervisors are held accountable for diversity. We must ensure
that women have meaningful and decisive roles on committees,
task forces, and other decisionmaking entities, and we must
ensure that the assignments given to women are not purely task
oriented but rather include decisionmaking and strategic
thinking roles. We must provide networking training on issues
that affect women in the work force. And this is a big one, by
far, the lack of training and cross-training has been cited as
a major impediment for women moving in the top levels of the
Federal Government.
Women need to have leaders to whom they can ask questions,
obtain advice about their careers, receive suggestions.
Recruitment will not happen if you will not develop the feeder
pool.
Again, FEW very much appreciates the subcommittee and
chairman's interest in increasing the diversity in the Senior
Executive Service and all the support that you have given the
Federal work force in the past. And I and the over 1 million
Federally Employed Women offer to help in any way to ensure
that more women and minorities can aspire and succeed to
entering the Senior Executive Service.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Trent follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.108
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.109
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.110
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.111
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.112
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Ms. Trent.
We will proceed to Dr. Eoyang.
STATEMENT OF CARSON EOYANG
Mr. Eoyang. Good afternoon, Chairman Davis.
On behalf of the Asian American Government Executive
Network, we are very appreciative of this opportunity to speak
in favor of the Senior Executive Service Diversity Assurance
bill. We applaud your proactive leadership in addressing this
critical but neglected challenge confronting our Federal Civil
Service. We proudly join our fellow Federal executive
associations to support this landmark legislation.
Our issues simply mirror the central concerns of this
committee. First, Asian Pacific Americans are significantly
under-represented in the SES. Second, progress in SES diversity
has been slow, uneven, and inconsistent. Third, the SES
Diversity Assurance Act is long overdue.
When AAGEN previously testified on this subject before you
in October 2003, we made the following observations. According
to the GAO, representation of APAs in career SES was the most
significant disparity among all of the women and racial and
ethnic groups studied by the GAO. The GAO reports confirmed
that APAs are severely under-represented at the SES and other
senior levels of the Federal Government, and that there are
serious concerns about the lack of conclusion of APAs at the
pipeline levels and in succession planning.
Regrettably, 4\1/2\ years later inclusion of APAs in the
SES has not sufficiently improved. While the GAO projections
may not have been perfect in every agency, to our knowledge
there is no agency whose SES ranks matches or exceeds the APA
ratio of 5.89 percent of the entire Federal executive branch.
The number of Asian Pacific American SES in the entire Federal
Government only totaled 2.4 percent in 2007.
With the potential retirement of many if not most of the
career SES over the next 5 years, ensuring diversity in our
senior ranks is even more important as we grow the next
generation of senior executives. While administration officials
continue to urge progress in making the Federal Civil Service
and its top leadership look like America, this progress has
been slow, uneven, and inconsistent.
The Federal Government should have a diverse work force not
only to demonstrate that it reports the American population,
but also because diversity enhances the effectiveness of
Government. For example, our various law enforcement agencies
at all levels across the country must begin to mirror our
Nation's diversity if they are to maintain domestic peace and
equitably enforce our laws within and across our social strata.
Failure to have diversity in the law enforcement may lead to
misunderstanding and assumptions of prejudice by communities
that are not represented. However, the Department of Justice
reports that their APA percentage was only 0.7 percent, which
was half of what it was in the year 2000.
There is wide disparity in the degree of work force
diversity across the Federal Government, with little concrete
evidence on why some agencies have consistently been
unrepresented in the Nation, as a whole, while others have made
measured, if only partial, progress during the same timeframe.
Unfortunately, there has been too little study of recent
executive branch diversity efforts. While it is easy to measure
the changes in demographics, it is more difficult to understand
the causes. It is important that the executive branch and the
Congress address the various factors that promote and inhibit
work force diversity, such as minority recruitment, building
talent pipelines, succession planning, management development,
and, most importantly, sustained commitment of agency senior
leaders to diversity.
The SES Diversity Assurance Act is a long-overdue and
welcome correction to past policies and practices that have not
been adequate to expand executive diversity across our
Government. Without this legislation, it is unlikely the SES
will adapt quickly enough to meet the enormous global and
domestic challenges of the 21st century.
This legislation will require the Federal Government to
institute policies, practices, and reporting processes that
will clearly advance our common goals of equal opportunity and
diversity.
In conclusion, we encourage both committees to continue to
exercise vigorous oversight over the evolution of the SES. We
recommend that regular studies by the GAO be conducted to
assess the degrees and rates of progress in executive diversity
across all Federal agencies. Where particular challenges and
obstacles for specific minorities, such as Asian Pacific
Americans, are identified, executive branch, in cooperation
with the Congress, should formulate and implement appropriate
remedies and solutions to ensure that our Senior Executive
Service is truly reflective of all parts of American society.
Thank you for providing this opportunity to share our
views.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Eoyang follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.113
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.114
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.115
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.116
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.117
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much.
We will go to Mr. Osegueda.
STATEMENT OF JOSE OSEGUEDA
Mr. Osegueda. Chairman Davis, thank you for the opportunity
to appear before you today. I recently retired from Federal
service, and I am a true witness of the difficulties facing
Hispanics who try to achieve and pursue senior level positions
in the Federal work force. We are proud today to represent all
senior level Hispanics in the Federal work force and to speak
on their behalf today at this hearing.
It is clear that, with regard to Hispanic representation at
the senior level of the Federal Government, the current
selection methodology has not improved the bottom line.
Presently, Hispanics represent 3.6 percent of the career SES
cadre, while making up 13.8 percent of the national civilian
labor force.
Using these climate changes, it means that Hispanics today
are under-represented by close to 500 career SES positions.
Even worse, Hispanic representation is actually declining in
the feeder population leading to the career SES level, the GS-
13 and GS-15 grades. According to the most recent OPM reports,
Hispanic representation declined by 2.8 percent, or 570
positions, from 2006 to 2007.
That Hispanic under-representation in the Federal work
force has reached crisis proportions is born out of these
telling statistics. Hispanics remain the only under-represented
ethnic group at 7.7 percent in the overall government work
force. When compared to the present level of representation in
the national civilian labor force, 13.8 percent, there is a
Hispanic under-representation gap of 6.1 percent. That
represents 120,000 jobs, or approximately $5.5 billion in
salaries along to the Hispanic community.
To place the capstone on this dismal picture of under-
representation with another annual hiring rate of 0.13 percent
over the past 4 years, Hispanic representation in the Federal
work force will never reach parity with the numbers in the
civilian labor force. Yet, despite this history of
institutionalized exclusion, on November 16, 2007, OPM Director
Linda Springer eliminated the only Federal personnel hiring
authority established with the express purpose of promoting
diversity among minorities.
NAHFE supports the intended purpose of H.R. 3774 and S.
2148, to establish an office within OPM that will promote
diversity in the recruitment and selection of career SES
positions. NAHFE firmly believes it is time that the
responsibility for oversight, monitoring accountability for SES
selections, including the establishment of diversity evaluation
panels, is moved from individual agencies to a central
oversight office.
Clearly, the responsibility for accountability in diversity
selections rests with the gatekeepers to the recruitment
selection process, and the record speaks loud and clear that
leaving independent authority for ensuring diversity in career
SES selections with agencies will not improve the dismal bottom
line. One need only look at the current level of Hispanic
representation in several key Executive agencies to understand
why it is time to abandon the failed SES selection methods of
the past and turn to new, creative ideas for improving
diversity at the SES level.
For these reasons, NAHFE supports moving the gatekeeper
responsibility for overseeing diversity in career SES
recruitment and selections away from agencies to a central
oversight office within OPM and the establishment of SES
evaluation panels within agencies which makeup is reflective of
our Nation's diversity.
While we clearly share the Senior Executive Association's
goal of bringing greater diversity to the Federal executive
corps, unfortunately we are not in agreement with how to make
this a reality. We do not believe that continuing to rely on
the failed SES selection methodology of the past will deal
different, more positive results. It is time to turn over a new
leaf and dramatically improve the SES selection process.
We believe that the diversity bills as presently
constituted will do this. We believe that they will signal a
welcome change toward improving diversity at the SES level.
Chairman Davis, thank you for the opportunity to share our
views and support for the Senior Executive Diversity Assurance
Act.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much.
We will go to Ms. Young.
STATEMENT OF DARLENE YOUNG
Ms. Young. Thank you, Chairman Davis.
I thank you for having the foresight to develop and create
this legislation that will ensure that African Americans,
Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans, and women will have an
opportunity to serve our Government at the highest level in the
Senior Executive Service.
Blacks in Government, along with my colleagues here, were
ones who participated in supplying you with comments on July
23, 2007. You graciously incorporated our recommendations into
the bill. The recommendations are outstanding, and we
appreciate all the work that you are doing to get this bill
passed. BIG is very comfortable with the bill and looks forward
to the passage. This will make our Government leadership look
like America, which is the representation of all Americans.
We have a pool of minorities in the pipeline that are
currently certified by OPM and qualified to step up and serve
our Nation as Senior Executive Service leaders. These bills are
much needed, and Blacks in Government is awaiting the day of
passage of these bills.
To change the proposed legislation would suggest that
minorities would continue to be unrepresented in our senior
leadership of our Government. Essentially, not passing the bill
would state that the status quo would be maintained, and that
is unacceptable to BIG.
It saddens me that we are on the eve of Dr. Martin Luther
King's death, which we as Americans are about to celebrate 40
years after his passing, that we are still fighting for the
justice and the fairness in the workplace. When will the dream
be truly lived in all facets of our lives?
Thank you for giving Blacks in Government an opportunity to
reaffirm our support for this Senior Executive Service
Diversity Act, H.R. 3774, and S. 2148.
Again, BIG awaits, ready to celebrate the passage of these
bills.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much. I want to thank
all of our witnesses.
Let me just begin and let me make sure, Mr. Bransford, that
I understood and that I understand your position and your
testimony. Did you indicate that you felt that institution of
the panels in the legislation might create a level of
bureaucracy that could, in fact, impede implementation of the
concept and actually make it more difficult or delay increasing
minority representation within the ranks of the SES?
Mr. Bransford. Mr. Chairman, it is the view of the Senior
Executives Association and the career senior executives that we
have talked about this issue with that creating a requirement
that these panels be created with one minority, one woman, and
one other would actually delay the process, would create
eventually a mentality of check the box among the bureaucracy.
It would be a bureaucratic requirement which, in our view,
might not be effective in the long run.
It was the belief of our association that an alternative
would be to create effective leadership. We have submitted that
proposal in detail with our written testimony. And it is our
position, not that it be a voluntary selection panel, but that
agencies be required to use the selection panels as outlined in
the bill unless they implement one of these effective diversity
subcommittees which actually has the power, the authority to
veto SES selections and the responsibility to create a
pipeline. It is only then that we think that the agency would
be demonstrating the type of leadership necessary to then
relieve it of the requirement to have a panel.
So we are not suggesting that anything be voluntary. We are
not suggesting business as usual. We are suggesting that either
they do business as in the bill currently or they demonstrate
effective leadership in promoting diversity.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. And I guess at the very core of my
thinking relative to our shaping of the legislation and
relative to our look at historical efforts is the notion that
absolute subjectivity is probably as great as absolute
objectivity, and that in order to arrive at this notion of
objectivity, that much of it is like beauty: it is in the eye
of the beholder. And different people just see different things
based upon their experiences, based upon what they have been
taught, based upon what they have been made to believe, based
upon what they have been helped to believe.
My fear is that, as we go down the road to change, there
are certain things that people will just never see unless they
get the opportunity; that had Jackie Robinson not gotten the
opportunity that people just would not have seen his ability to
play baseball the way that he did, or his understanding of the
game.
I guess my question would be to other panel members. How do
you react and how do you respond to Mr. Bransford's proposal,
since we have all had an opportunity to hear and since all of
you have been engaged in these processes? Perhaps we begin, Mr.
Brown, with you.
Mr. Brown. Mr. Chairman, as I indicated, we do not support
that position, for a couple of reasons. One, I find the
terminology gatekeeper very interesting, but, nevertheless, in
any case this is not in addition, it is not to create an
additional layer; this is a substitute for the process that is
ongoing right now that is not working by the Government's own
statistics. So that is what we see as key in the bill here. It
provides a diverse panel and it is a better way, if you would,
of doing business.
We have talked to our members, and many of our members--and
there are certain agencies that have a very informal process
that they are using right now. We know of a particular agency
where one individual has selected everyone from GS-14 up
through the SES, and there is no one of color at the GS-14 or
above level in that agency. Because of a confidentiality that
we share with our members I can't mention the agency, but this
is the kind of data that we are collecting.
Then, when you look at statistics, you say where is the
concrete ceiling, not the glass ceiling, where is the concrete
ceiling. And so that is why we say it is time for change, it is
time to do it different, not to add anything on, but to
substitute a process that will give us better results.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Ms. Trent.
Ms. Trent. Thank you, sir. FEW is very, very comfortable
with the bill as written, and I am not sure what kind of
whatever we are trying to play here, but I came over for two or
three sessions and gave up my time, queried my membership on
many, many levels to ask about various words and various
phrases in this. My membership is behind this 100 percent.
During the various meetings that we had when we were penning
this piece of legislation it was suggested that perhaps the
word or a woman would not be appropriate on the panel, that it
might be easier to pass without a woman on the panel, and I
said no, the facts do not lie. I am digging my heels in. These
are desperate times, and they require huge, gigantic changes,
and if we are going to do it, let's just do it, do it right,
and let's go for it.
FEW is very, very comfortable with the way the bill was
written, or I would not have had my members go out and send
letters to their elected officials, so I like it as it is. FEW
likes it as it is.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you.
Doctor.
Mr. Eoyang. We support the bill as written. I understand
Mr. Bransford's concern about additional delays in bureaucracy;
however, I have every confidence that agency management will
put sufficient resources and time to select their senior
executives in an appropriate and timely way, because it is that
important to them.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Mr. Osegueda.
Mr. Osegueda. Chairman Davis, I would like to cite a couple
of figures. At the Department of Education and the General
Services Administration there is one Hispanic at the career SES
level. At the Department of Transportation there are two
Hispanics. That is 1 percent. State, two Hispanics. The
Department of Defense, with 1,200 career SES positions, 1.4
percent are Hispanics. Nearly all other executive or
legislative branches have a similar picture.
NAHFE believes that if we continue business as usual we
will never go beyond these figures, so we support the bill as
it is constituted at the present time.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Ms. Young.
Ms. Young. BIG is definitely in favor of the legislation as
it is. We also did a campaign to our Congress folks to support
the bill. At this point I am like Ms. Trent. We spent a few
hours coming over here to debate on what should and should not
be a part of that. I think during some of that we had a little
bit of that information provided to us and we did not agree, so
I would agree that the bills should go forward as they are, and
BIG is supporting that.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Let me just thank all of you. I
think that there are lots of different ways to look at
different opportunities, and as you, Ms. Young, were making
your comment earlier, I thought of the fact that a few days ago
I happened to pick up a book and I was reading the Preamble to
the Constitution, and I thought of how great this country is,
and those words continue to reside with me, where men with the
best of intentions wrote that we hold these truths to be self-
evident, that all men were created equal. Quite frankly, I
really think they meant men. I really do believe that they
meant men. And it has taken us a long time to have women come
full square, and we still have not gotten there into that
equation.
I also think that they were operating with the best of
their intentions as they reached a compromise relative to the
presence of Black people in this country whom they counted as
three-fifths of a person with something called the three-fifths
compromise.
As a result of a tremendous amount of struggle, and, as you
mentioned the fact that we are on the 40th anniversary of the
assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, and, of course,
tomorrow is that day, and we commemorate his life and his
legacy, that it has taken a long time to get to the point where
different population groups are feeling a sense of equity of
opportunity as we go through even the process of electing a
President for the United States of America. There seems to be a
tremendous amount of interest in where we are now.
I wouldn't be opposed to thinking that much of that
interest has to do with the diversity of the candidates, and
that diversity just may very well propel us into a new chapter
in the history of the development of our country as people who
had not surfaced surface to another level.
I suspect that we have some of that within the ranks of the
work force in our Government, and I believe that we owe it to
every single person in this country to help them believe deep
down within their hearts that they have the opportunity to rise
to the highest level of opportunity relative to the work that
they choose to do.
So I thank you for coming and testifying, and give
assurance that this subcommittee is going to do everything
within its power to try and make sure that people can
experience the realization of not only the dream of a Martin
Luther King, but the dreams that they have if they are
talented, willing to prepare themselves, willing to work hard,
develop leadership ability and leadership skills, that they
can, in fact, become SESers in this Government.
So I thank you for coming to testify, for the positions
that you have taken. We will adjourn this hearing.
[Whereupon, at 5:10 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[Additional information submitted for the hearing record
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.118
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.119
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.120
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.121
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.122
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.123
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4913.124
<all>