Mid-Term Bargaining Issues Tabled March 15, 2006

We at AFSA Commerce (VP Donald Businger and Rep Will Center) tabled three mid-term bargaining issues on March 15 as follows:

1. Senior Foreign Service Pay Policy Needs Reform

The current SFS pay policy allows for a “level 0” which equates to “unsatisfactory” in the SES system at Commerce. To best of our knowledge, Commerce is the only FS agency that denies the comparability pay adjustment to SFS officers placed in this group (of which there were a few in 2005). Moreover, the SFS Commerce pay policy appears inconsistent with the Commerce SES (Senior Executive Service) Pay Policy, which does not contain a provision for a “level 0” and which has again to best of our knowledge never denied the adjustment because no SESers were “unsatisfactory” in recent years.

AFSA therefore proposed simply that Commerce adopt a new SFS Pay Policy so that all employees who are otherwise performing at a fully successful level or better (defined as not referred for selection out for unsatisfactory performance) receive at a minimum the comparability adjustment authorized by OPM. This would harmonize the Commerce SFS Pay Policy with that of the other FS agencies as well as that of Commerce SES.

2. Employee Performance Plans (Work Plans) – ITA 723 Need Improvements

The existing form for work plans and appraisals has had serious administrative and technical issues that lead to many delays and delinquencies and impose an unnecessary burden on managers (rating and reviewing officers) and rated employees alike. AFSA proposed first that electronic signatures be brought into full effect prior to the next rating cycle beginning June 1, 2006; that signature blocks on certain pages (notably p. 18) of the reviewing officer and rated employee be separated on different pages; and that an annual working group or task force including management and AFSA be established to make recommendations for changes especially to critical elements of work plans so as to keep pace with evolving priorities and new initiatives on strategic plans and balanced scorecards.

3. Standing Committee for Annual Review of Selection Board Precepts

The Precepts for Performance Management guide the Promotion and Selection Boards in ranking officers for promotions and to an increasing extent in “pay for performance”. AFSA’s third proposal was for a Standing Committee comprised of management, other representatives, and AFSA to act as a discussion and recommendation forum for improving the Precepts and the adherence of Boards to the Precepts.

As always, views of AFSA members on these proposals are most welcome in any form.