Trump clasping hands

Executive orders target official time, employee performance

President Trump signed three executive orders aimed at making it easier to fire federal employees and limiting the use of official time, Federal Times reports.

The orders — signed on May 25— will 1) limit the amount of time an employee can be under investigation for misconduct and encourages firings for underperformers, 2) states that employees who conduct union activities while on the job must spend at least 75 percent of their time doing government work and 3) calls for the Office of Personnel Management to renegotiate contracts with unions regarding the reporting of official time instead of working directly with individual agencies.

The American Federation of Government Employees opposed all three of the executive orders, contending that the administration is attempting to replace civil service with political service.

Reader comments

Thu, May 31, 2018

There is a problem with the current "process in place" that is not "appropriately utilized" to get rid of the bad performers. Most bad government employees are great at understanding the "process in place" and learn ways to get around it. The "bad managers" now have to spend their time that they are doing their job and the "bad employee's job" to learn how to follow the exact guidelines to get rid of someone.

Wed, May 30, 2018

How is this not a taking? Supreme Court has held government workers have a property right in their jobs. These executive orders diminish the value of the jobs at issue without providing just compensation to employees. Time to file a lawsuit in federal court.

Wed, May 30, 2018 Jade W. Columbus

Haven't a pay raise in 10 years and earn 20% less than I would in the private sector if I were willing to work 100 hours per work and have zero union protection.

Wed, May 30, 2018

As a 16yr fed, I have seen high and low performers and while challenging to rid the lows, it can be done. I'm currently in an office with low morale and poor leadership - this rule makes me worry that after 16 years of maxing my performance ratings, rising to a supv 14 and then to a 15, I or others may fall victim to the inability of our leadership to define/manage the workload beyond their favorites. Anyone with a voice or an idea not part of the favs is ignored, marginalized, detailed, etc. Dysfunctional and unhealthy leadership should not be permitted to affect the careers of dedicated and diligent employees. Caution to any in a similar sitch - document everything.

Tue, May 29, 2018

This is “Way” overdue must not be a federal employee. We have guidelines in place to ensure people are doing their jobs as required, one of which is a point system which requires you to meet a minimum of points each day in order to be successful. Also in place is a % related to your performance, mine says I must maintain a minimum of 93% over the year. So if I have five (5) items reviewed every month and I have 1 mistake I now have 80% performance rating for the month therefore I did not meet my performance standards. If I continue that performance I am now “unsuccessful” in my performance and could be fired. Way overdue, I think not just, a government who is forcing its will on one of the largest agencies in government. Signing of these polices are no different then then a school bully enforcing his will on others. 99% of federal employees have integrity, its a shame leadership doesn’t.

Show All Comments

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above

Contributors

Edward A. Zurndorfer Certified Financial Planner
Mike Causey Columnist
Tom Fox VP for Leadership and Innovation, Partnership for Public Service
Mathew B. Tully Legal Analyst

Free E-Newsletter

FederalDAILY

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.

Stay Connected

Latest Forum Posts

Ask the Expert

Have a question regarding your federal employee benefits or retirement?

Submit a question