Posts

And Now a Word With … Marcus Hill

,

By Dan Gephart, March 29, 2021

As the former Senior Executive Advisor for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers, Marcus Hill (pictured at right) knows a lot about training. When it comes to determining whether training is going to be effective, he recalls something one of his mentors Dr. Phil Callicutt once told him: “Marcus, you have to believe in the song and the singer.”

“I believe the same is true related to determining if so-called leadership training will be effective, hence ‘the song.’ I believe you have to start by assessing the credentials, credibility and reputation of the developer and the delivery of the training, hence ‘the singer.’”

FELTG Nation, we’re pleased to introduce you to our newest singer.

Marcus Hill retired earlier this year, ending a distinguished 37-year federal career that included stints with FLETC, the United States Air Force, the Department of the Navy, and the Transportation Security Administration, where he was instrumental in establishing the TSA infrastructure and screening operations at Jacksonville International and Gainesville Regional airports.

Marcus served an active-duty tour with the US Air Force, and retired from the USAF Reserves in 2007. His honors include a 2017 Presidential Rank Award for Meritorious Service, the 2014 Department of Homeland Secretary’s Under Secretary for Management Partnership Award, DON Civilian Meritorious Service Medal, and USAF Meritorious Service and Commendation Medals.

He is currently the Principal of Hill Management Consultancy LLC, a minority, veteran-owned small business. And he serves on the Senior Executives Association Board of Directors.

You’ll have the opportunity to see Marcus during FELTG’s upcoming Emerging Issues in Federal Employment Law virtual event. Marcus will co-present with FELTG President Deb Hopkins the session “When Employees Go Insubordinate: Don’t Mess With the Wrong Elements” on Tuesday, April 27 from 3:15-4:30 pm.

Recently, Marcus and I had a chance to discuss some of FELTG’s favorite topics — leadership, accountability, and labor relations.

DG: What is a key component of effective leadership that is often overlooked?

MH: Empathy; good leaders must exhibit the capacity for empathy. Effective leaders must have the ability to understand others’ thoughts and feelings from their points of view (insead of) the leader automatically overlaying hers/his. My former boss and good friend, Paul Hackenberry, emphasized this with me. He often says, “You don’t get to decide how others feel.”

DG: What lessons, advice or experiences from your Air Force career had the most impact on your federal civilian career?

MH: I credit the Air Force for developing my teaming skills and providing great opportunities to demonstrate them, in both follower and leader roles. Secondly, the Air Force provided my first significant exposure to strategic planning. It emphasized the importance and value of inculcating this process into your organizational DNA to ensure its long-term sustainability and continued relevance. These two experiences/attributes carried over into my civilian career and positioned the organizations in which I served to enjoy many successes.

DG: The pendulum has swung back to a pro-union Administration. What’s the best way for agency labor relations professionals to carve out a positive working relationship with unions? 

MH: Pro-union administrations really allow and expect labor relations professionals to actively engage and include union officials, representing bargaining units, in the planning and execution of their agencies missions. The belief is promoting and leveraging a partnering relationship will result in less labor-management turmoil, and more opportunities to achieve organizational wins through unity of efforts. The best way to carve out a positive working relationship with unions is “to seek to understand before being understood.” Create expectations to share appropriate pre-decisional information, exploit opportunities to dialogue in advance of making unilateral decisions and collaborating to achieve mutually desirable results which satisfy the mission and lion share of people that perform it.

DG: What do you suggest for supervisors and/or leaders who are having a difficult time navigating change?

MH: Actively engage change, don’t run from it. Change is consistent and here to stay. I view change as a process consisting of various phases – shock, denial, acceptance, plan, execute and overcome. The easier you can get through the first two phases, the quicker you can get to identifying and achieving the opportunities presented in the change. There are always opportunities in the change.

DG: What do you think is stopping supervisors from holding their employees accountable for performance and conduct?

MH: Two reasons. The first is supervisors not having a good understanding of the governance related to poor performance and misconduct, and their authorities within laws, regulations and policies. The second is supervisors not feeling comfortable that the institution will support them in holding employees accountable. Therefore, they take on the mindset it’s too hard and risky to pursue. That is why it is critically important to ensure all institutional managers and supervisors are knowledgeable and properly trained to carry out their duties in this space.

DG: What’s your favorite part of teaching/presenting?

MH:  My favorite part of teaching/presenting is hearing from former students/participants on how they were able to apply the learning objectives to achieve desired results. I also like to observe the facial expressions when they “get it” during the training session.

Mr. Hill teaches on numerous FELTG topics, including Leadership, Labor Relations, Employee Relations, and EEO. If you’d like to bring Mr. Hill to your agency (onsite or virtually) for training, contact me at Gephart@FELTG.com.

A Future of Dramatic Workplace Change is in the Cards

, ,

By Dan Gephart, March 16, 2021

A few years back, I read that a Topps 1973 Mike Schmidt rookie baseball card in mint condition could fetch $10,000. Like me, my Schmidt rookie card didn’t quite make it out of childhood in mint condition. Still, I optimistically took the corner-frayed, slightly torn, decidedly non-glossy card to a sports memorabilia collector. When the collector told me the card was in fair condition, I took that as promising. Then he explained that “fair” is the lowest grade he gives to baseball cards, and, by the way, my card barely qualified for that grade. Forget $10,000. I’d be lucky if my card could cover a large cold brew and a scone at Starbucks.

Starting this year, I could purchase a pack of the NBA’s new Top Shots, where a $15 investment could land me a Lebron James card, currently valued at $208,000. These cards are guaranteed to always be in mint condition because they will never be physically touched by human hands. These investments won’t be devalued by card flipping or bike spoke-propelling.

You see, the NBA Tops Shots are crypto-collectibles purchased as a non-fungible token (NFT) created through blockchain technology.

If you’re as confused as I am by what the heck that last sentence means, then you better buckle up. If sports cards can make that kind of sudden leap in technology, imagine what’s in store for the workplace. Numerous workplace experts have already wondered about that. They predict numerous dramatic changes in the workplace in the future.

But not all change will be technology-fueled. Job market changes could lead to major reorganizations, experts predict. Some change could result from the very real potential of future health crises. Look at how the workplace changed during the current pandemic.

Years of telework initiatives, COOP plans, and Snowmaggedons failed to move the needle on remote work. But when the virus hit pandemic levels last year, most Federal employees immediately started working from home. Work travel, except when absolutely essential, screeched to a halt. Crowded meeting rooms were replaced by Zoom, Microsoft Teams and Webex.

And, as the FELTG Nation knows very well, change could be driven by law and policy. It’s happening now, as agencies adjust to the Biden Administration’s reversal of the previous administration’s federal workplace initiatives. As FELTG President Deb Hopkins said, the whiplash is real.

To protect your organization against constant whiplash, workplace experts say that you need employees with creativity and critical thinking skills, and a continuous learning environment. If you take care of hiring the right employees, we’ll be here to provide the continuous learning. In the next couple of months, we are offering several training events to help manage change, both current and future.

Honoring Diversity: Eliminating Microaggressions and Bias in the Federal Workplace on Wednesday, April 7. Talk about a sharp shift. Just a few months ago, diversity training was frowned upon. However, the new administration has made it clear that training on diversity and inclusion is a key piece in advancing racial equity and strengthening workplace protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity. In this two-hour virtual training, FELTG Instructor Meghan Droste, attorney at law, will explain what microaggressions look like in their various forms — microinsults, microassaults, and microinvalidations.She will share an implicit bias test, explain its impact, and provide examples. She will also review EEO law so you can determine when bias or microaggression rises to the level of discrimination.

Biden Executive Orders, OPM Guidance and an Update on the Status of Civil Service on Thursday, April 8. FELTG was the first out of the gate with comprehensive training events on the new president’s Executive Orders impacting the Federal workplace. If you attended any of those training events, then you have a huge step up on your peers. FELTG President Deborah Hopkins and Instructor Ann Boehm will dive into the language of recent OPM guidance, and interpret what it means for your day-to-day operations. They will also share all of the latest information on Federal employment law-related news.

What to Expect When You’re Expecting a New Board on Tuesday, April 27. This 75-minute session kicks off the FELTG Forum 2021: Emerging Issues in Federal Employment Law. We have a glimmer of hope that a new Board could soon be in place at the MSPB, and that’s the kind of dramatic change that we all would applaud. What does this mean for federal HR professionals? What does this mean for all those agencies and employees whose cases have been piling up unread at the board? FELTG President Deborah Hopkins will give an overview of what we can expect in the upcoming months from a new MSPB, and where the board will stand on critical issues like performance and conduct accountability.

Legal Update: Recent Developments in Federal Employment Law, Part I (MSPB, EEOC, Federal Circuit) on Thursday, April 29 and Legal Update: Recent Developments in Federal Employment Law, Part II (FLRA, FSIP) on Friday April 30. These two sessions are also part of the FELTG Forum 2021: Emerging Issues in Federal Employment Law and will be presented by FELTG Instructors Ann Boehm and Joseph Schimansky.

Not a One-Way Street: How OIGs and Agencies Can Successfully Work Together on Thursday, June 24. Navigating all of this change requires leadership and coordination. And there is a resource right at your agency that can help with both. Scott Boehm brings his 32 years of leadership experience and nearly 20 years of experience in Offices of Inspectors General to this hourlong webinar. If you work in your agency’s OIG, you will learn what you can do to foster this coordination. And if you’re an attorney, HR professional, EEO specialist or supervisor, you’ll learn how the tap your OIG’s knowledge and resources.

Visit the FELTG website for information on these and other training events. And if you’d like to bring these trainings to your agency virtually, contact me. Unlike my Mike Schmidt rookie card, FELTG training will retain its value. Gephart@FELTG.com

Pop Goes the Mountweazel: Find the Roadblocks to Swift, Effective Action

, ,

By Dan Gephart, February 10, 2021

Mountweazel. I just love this word. I discovered it last week as I was reading Liar’s Dictionary, a new novel by Eley Williams. Neither a steep scalable landmass nor a rat-sized mammal, a mountweazel is a bogus entry inserted into a dictionary, encyclopedia or other reference work as a trap to catch future copyright infringers.

About midway through Williams’ novel, the protagonist Mallory is charged with finding the mountweazels left behind when the fictional reference book was first published more than a century ago. All of the fake words must be found before the publisher posts the reference book online. The problem is Mallory knows not where the mountweazels are nor even how many there are. (OK, I get it, a John LeCarre spy thriller this most certainly is not.)

Picture Mallory sludging through thousands of dictionary entries to find the fake words. It gives me a headache just thinking about it, and I love words. When overused, used incorrectly, or improperly communicated (all were the case in the novel), mountweazels make it harder to accomplish the mission, which in Mallory’s case was digitizing an accurate reference book.

So here’s my question: What mountweazels are keeping your agency from meeting its mission? Not fake words, but unnecessary or improperly communicated procedures.  When it comes to discipline and performance, to paraphrase a certain insurance commercial, we’ve seen a mountweazel or two. (Bum ba dum bum bum bum bum.)

Back in 2017, FELTG Past President Bill Wiley was tired of hearing from supervisors who took useless actions like Letters of Admonishments and Letters of Caution to address wayward employees. Supervisors would take these actions because they were easy and, they assumed, if the same situation arose again, they could say they’ve taken prior disciplinary action. But guess what? These actions are not discipline as defined by case law. The action was a temporary Band-aid that did nothing to address the root of the issue, and, more often than not, the suspect behavior would continue unabated. Even worse, these empty actions are actually grievable, putting the supervisor and the agency on the defensive.

So Bill created the “yellow donut.” If you’ve taken part in FELTG’s UnCivil Servant training over the last couple of years, then you’ve seen the graphic. It’s the yellow donut that looks more like a three-tiered bullseye. (Seriously, are you going to pay attention to a donut or a bullseye?) The outer edge is the illegal stuff that you should never do, and you most likely don’t. (Please tell me you don’t.) The inner red part is the good stuff that FELTG teaches, which is the legal minimum, things you must do.

The largest tier in between the inner and outer is the yellow part. That’s the mountweazels of donuts of unnecessary actions, keeping you and your agency from meeting the mission. These actions are perfectly legal, but not worth using. Each unnecessary action is a barrier to a swift, effective, and legally sufficient conduct or performance-based action. Keep your stumbling blocks to a minimum.

If you’re vegan or on a New Year’s Resolution Whole 30 kick, you might eschew the donut for FELTG Instructor Ann Boehm’s approach. During her federal career, Ann has also seen far too many unnecessary actions taking place. Why, why, why Ann would ask. The reason, she has been told is: “That’s what HR told us to do.” Ann spelled this out in her Good News column in the January 2020 newsletter, when she introduced readers to The Office of Folklore, know more affectionately as OOF! That newsletter article included a checklist, which empowers supervisors to demonstrate to the folklorists there is a better and more direct way to handle the situation. (Print the story and cut out the checklist now. I’ll wait.)

I hope you are part of the UnCivil Servant: Holding Employees Accountable for Performance and Conduct virtual training we are holding starting today. If not, then put a hold on these dates —  May 19-20. That’s when we’ll be holding the class again. Or you can bring that course directly to your agency (in person or virtually). Email me (Gephart@FELTG.com) and we can discuss.

If you’ve attended UnCivil Servant previously, join us for UnCivil Servant – Next Level on March 11, where you’ll be able to put the tools you learned in the original class to the test with some challenging and realistic scenarios.

These courses were designed to help you determine the minimum steps to take effective and legally defensible performance and conduct actions. We’re not doing this to make your job easier, although it will.  The more unnecessary steps you take when addressing discipline and performance problems, the harder it gets, the longer it takes, the more likely you are to make a mistake – and the further you get away from mission. Gephart@FELTG.com

Joe Schimansky: Add Value, Listen, and Set the Record Straight

, ,

By Dan Gephart, February 2, 2021

This is the third article in our Transition Talk series, where members of the FELTG Faculty share their advice on how to best work with presidential appointments and thrive under a new administration. See our previous article in the series:

 

Joe Schimansky (pictured here), former executive director of the Federal Service Impasses Panel, still regrets how he handled a long-ago meeting with a newly confirmed political appointee.

Joe was asked a question about the FSIP’s processes. After a purposely succinct response, the appointee accused Joe of answering with a variation of “because that’s the way we always do it.”

“To be clear,” Joe explained. “That’s not what I said, but how she interpreted what I said. At that point, I should have responded by indicating that the FSIP’s processes have evolved over many years for sound practical reasons.”

In deference to the appointee’s position, Joe did not respond. He learned the hard way that it often falls on career staff to set the record straight.

“Political appointees often come into their first meetings with their newly acquired professional staffs after having been told how badly the particular organizations they are now responsible for leading were run by their politically appointed predecessors,” he said.

During one transition, a higher-up in a federal sector union had met with President Clinton’s new FSIP chairman and “spread poorly informed allegations” about how long it took the previous administration to resolve impasses.

“When I met with my new boss, her head had already been filled with horror stories about how incompetent her newly inherited staff was at fulfilling its mission in a timely manner,” Joe said. “I was fortunate to have a new boss who had been a career fed and understood the dynamics of transitions.”

Joe was given time to research the allegations and found a legitimate explanation for all of the delays. But you’re not always going to work with appointees with Federal backgrounds. Joe offered some other worthwhile advice.

DG: What is your best advice for FELTG readers working with new presidential appointees?

JS: When dealing with new presidential appointees, the best advice I can think of is to strive to add value to their lived work experience. How you do that usually depends on the appointee’s understanding of the mission of your agency and the portion of that mission your particular part of the organization is responsible for. The typical way to assess this is by preparing detailed briefing materials that cover the main areas of your professional responsibilities and to schedule a reasonable time period to present the material.

Always remember you are engaging in a dialogue with the appointee and not merely presenting a stale lecture. Engaging in a dialogue allows the appointee to ask questions that will inform you of what the appointee understands already and what they may not grasp about the limits of their authority.

In this regard, you should be attentive to how the briefing is being perceived. I recall a briefing that I and the rest of my staff prepared for a group of newly appointed Impasses Panel members. It became clear early on that the material was far too detailed for the audience — part-time presidential appointees, most of whom had very little knowledge of how the Federal sector impasse resolution process works. The staff quickly perceived that the presidential appointees’ eyes were glazing over as we dug deeper and deeper into the FSIP process. The best response in this circumstance was to shorten the length of the briefing and to highlight only the most important points you want them to come away with. Opportunities to “teach them up” would be plentiful over the next four years.

DG: What is the most important skill necessary to survive and thrive in a new administration?

JS: The first skill that popped into my head was “active listening” defined as “where you make a conscious effort to hear not only the words that another person is saying but, more importantly, the complete message being communicated.” To do this, you must pay attention to the other person very carefully, particularly to his or her body language and non-verbal cues. I would suggest that most career management officials meeting with their newly appointed political bosses have reached that higher level in their organizations because they were already accomplished active listeners, but I’m sure there are exceptions. Through active listening, a career civil servant is more likely to add value to a political appointee’s lived work experience. If you do that, you can survive and thrive in a new administration.

Joe Schimansky will also be one of the presenters at FLRA Law Week. Joe is available to provide training to your agency on topics such as employee accountability, MSPB and EEO law, discipline, and much more. If you’re interested in bringing Joe Schimansky to your agency for training, email Gephart@FELTG.com

Bob Woods Explains Types of Political Appointees, Offers Advice

, , ,

By Dan Gephart, January 11, 2021

For far too long, the American public has taken for granted the peaceful transfer of power. As a new Administration prepares to take office a week from today, all eyes, even more so than usual, will be on the outgoing and incoming presidents. But the important work for an effective transfer of power has already started – and will continue to take place after President-elect Joseph Biden finishes his oath and releases his hand from a family heirloom Bible.

The transfer involves the close coordination of numerous agencies who are about to welcome thousands of new presidentially appointed employees. The majority of those positions will be filled quickly and without the need for Senate confirmation, and they will be doing the policy and leadership jobs that are critical to mission success. This transition is happening as political bi-partisanship is at its nadir. Oh, and lest we forget (not that we could if we tried) that it’s occurring in the middle of a pandemic.

FELTG understands the challenges and changes that will be impacting your job. We’ve developed several programs that we’ll be presenting over the next few months to help you navigate the transition. The day after the Inauguration (January 21) we’ll be presenting the first of three webinars in our Toolkit for a New Administration: Essential Skills and Knowledge for Federal Supervisors, Managers, and Leaders series. FELTG President Deborah Hopkins will deliver the first 60-minute training Federal Employment Law: The Current Landscape. It’ll be followed by training on Navigating Change Through Effective Management and Communication (January 28) and Effective Performance Under Stress (February 4). Register for one, two, or all three webinars. Keep an eye on the webinar and virtual training pages on FELTG’s website for the latest on our transition-related programming.

Faculty’s Faculty Staff  Lounge is filled with instructors who are engaging, smart, and experienced. And for many of our instructors, their experience includes working through more than a few Administrative transitions. Several of these instructors have offered to share their advice and guidance for a series of articles we’re calling Transition Talk.

For this first article in the Transition Talk series, we chat with FELTG Instructor Bob Woods (pictured at left). Bob retired from the Air Force in 1998 after more than 20 years of active duty. His distinguished Federal civilian career came to an end recently when he retired from his position as Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) for the Department of the Navy last year.

In all of these years as a Fed, Bob has worked with a good number of Presidential appointees. He noted that there are actually four types of Presidential appointments. When it comes to interactions with appointees, “I think it’s important to know what type you’re dealing with,” he said.

DG: Can you explain the difference between the types of appointments?

BW: Yes, they are:

1 – Presidential appointments requiring Senate confirmation (aka PAS officials):  These officials fill the highest-level positions in any Department or Agency (e.g. the Secretaries, Under Secretaries, Assistant Secretaries and General Counsel, etc.).  Typically, these officials are introduced to their Department/Agency roles by their career Principal Deputies (or equivalent), most of whom were either serving as the Acting official or “performing the duties” of the position during the transition period.  These roles are governed by the U.S. Vacancies Act, which provides authorities and limitations. In past administrations, Departments/Agencies outgoing PAS leadership direct/orchestrate transition books and orientation briefings/tours for their successors.

Depending on your position in the organization, you may be called upon to prepare some of these materials and to present the same. In my experience, incoming PAS officials often have little/no experience working with Federal employees and often have significant preconceived notions (some positive, some negative). If they have no Federal experience, they will also often be perplexed by our highly regulated work, contracting and ethics rules. If you’re advising or assisting one of these officials, you should remain alert to this and try to explain to the official that Federal employees are (or should be) trained to be apolitical in their work efforts. Assure them that your role is to guide them and support their Administration’s agenda while closely adhering to these myriad rules/regulations.  It’s critically important to quickly build trust.

2 – Presidential appointments NOT requiring Senate confirmation:  The same observations and advice provided in 1 above applies to transitioning these officials as well.

3 – Non-Career Senior Executive Service (SES). These positions are limited to no more than 10 percent of the total number of SES positions authorized. They can be filled by career SES or non-career SES. A career SES encumbering a non-career position can be displaced by a Presidential appointee and agencies are obligated to work to place these career SES.  Many of those appointed to non-career SES have prior Federal government service either as a Senior Executive or other level. These SES appointees should be treated like other new SES and given the support normally accorded to any new SES.  Obviously, if they have no prior Federal experience, the advice in #1 above should apply.

4  – Confidential or Policymaking Positions (Schedule C (SC)): Typically, these appointees are appointed into various GS (or equivalent) positions. These positions are often created on an ad hoc basis and may be geared to the qualifications of the individual appointee. These appointees are supposed to be assigned to and supervised by a PAS official, but that may be delegated to a non-career SES reporting to a PAS official. Often, these employees have little or no prior Federal experience and may have no subject-matter expertise for the staff/work unit to which they are appointed. These employees should be welcomed and provided orientation like any new similarly-graded employee.  If the employee has little or no subject matter expertise, the supervisor should explain that the employee has been given a great opportunity to learn about the inner-workings of the Department and the specific subject(s) of their assigned work unit.

The supervisor should assess their skills and create a plan to maximize the use of those skills and to provide them with on-the-job training.  These employees serve essentially at the pleasure of their PAS supervisor and/or the Head of the Agency but removals and reassignments are typically coordinated/controlled with the White House personnel office.

DG: What is the best advice you have ever given — or would like to have given — to a presidential appointee?

BW: Trust in the expertise of their career SES and non-SES staff and pay close attention to the rules/regulations that we have all learned to live by. Once this advice was given, it was incumbent upon the career staff to prove their expertise and their willingness to support the appointee and his/her agenda moving forward.

DG: What is the most important skill necessary to survive and thrive in a new administration?

BW: Actually, the same skills that help you survive and thrive in any organization. High on the list are communication  (including listening skills), interpersonal skills, leadership and time management. Especially in the early months, it’s imperative to be flexible, available, and prompt.

For more guidance, Bob suggests the following:

Bob Woods will present the webinar Why, How, and When to Avoid Whistleblower Reprisal on February 25, 2021. He will also be presenting during the virtual trainings EEOC Law Week and MSPB Law Week, as well as our second annual Emerging Issues in Federal Employment Law virtual conference. If you’re interested in bringing Bob Woods to your agency for training, email Gephart@FELTG.com

Have Discipline or Performance Problems? Take the Right Forking Path

, ,

By Dan Gephart, December 15, 2020

Back in pre-GPS days, my older brother and his wife were driving to a holiday celebration at her family’s house in a small backwoods New Jersey town. They were still many miles away from their destination when they hit a fork in the road. My brother turned to his wife and asked: Which way do we go?

She replied: It doesn’t matter.

My brother told me this story a couple of years ago. I had just moved to the Garden State and I was struggling to find some semblance of reasoning to the left-turn-denying, circle-embracing, ever-winding road system. His story perfectly encapsulated driving in New Jersey, where two roads going in seemingly opposite directions will sometimes lead to the same place.

A couple quick things about my brother. He’s an accountant. Everything comes down to cold hard numbers. Also, he’s a bit of a geek. That’s not an insult; he fully owns and embraces his nerdiness. Every purchasing decision he makes, no matter how minor, is based on extensive research, usually tracked on a complicated multi-column spreadsheet. So “it doesn’t matter which road we take” wasn’t going to work for him.

That December morning, he went right at that fork. He tracked the miles, counted the traffic lights, factored in the speed limits, and noted the potholes. Next time he made the trek, he turned left at the fork and made the same calculations. From then on, he got to his destination via the shortest, least-complicated route.

When it comes to supervising federal employees, all roads are forked. When conduct and performance challenges rise, supervisors are faced with a hard decision about which path to take. Unfortunately, they often take the one that seems less difficult, at least at the time. But the easy path is never easy.  You may eventually get to the same place, but it’s going to take longer and it could be quite painful for you and your agency.

Here’s a story we often hear, in one variation or another: An employee’s misconduct seems minor or simply annoying at first, so the supervisor ignores it. After a few more instances, the supervisor tells the employee: This has to stop. It doesn’t, and now the behavior is impacting the rest of the staff. The supervisor issues a Warning Letter. Instead of correcting behavior, the employee ratchets up the misconduct a few notches. It’s months later and the supervisor just wants to be rid of this employee.=

If you’re keeping score at home (and you’ve been to FELTG training), you’ll note that this supervisor has taken zero disciplinary actions so far. But what about when she admonished the employee, you ask? That’s not discipline. And neither is the Warning Letter. Letters of warning, caution, counseling, and requirement are what FELTG calls “lesser letters.” These lesser letters are not acts of discipline. But you know what they can be? Grievable. So by taking that “easy path,” this supervisor has basically just driven in circles – and put herself and her agency at risk. If you want to write a letter, start with a Letter of Reprimand. Now that is a disciplinary action. Read Ann Boehm’s September Good News column for more on how this action can save you time and money.

If back at the original fork in the road, the supervisor had taken a disciplinary action, say the aforementioned Letter of Reprimand, then she would be in a much better place now and further along to her destination.

FELTG is like my nerdy older brother. Instead of tracking miles and creating spreadsheets, we’re reading cases, studying the law, and reviewing regulations – and then sharing the strategy with you. FELTG’s Developing & Defending Discipline: Holding Federal Employees Accountable and UnCivil Servant: Holding Employees Accountable for Performance and Conduct courses give you the latest GPS coordinates to take necessary disciplinary or performance action in the most efficient way with the fewest potholes.

If you care about accountability, you can bring either of these courses to your agency. Just email me, and we’ll get your supervisors on the right path. Or you can register for our upcoming UnCivil Servant open enrollment virtual training, which takes place February 10-11 from 12:30 – 4 pm eastern. Gephart@FELTG.com

Top 10 FELTG Newsletter Stories of 2020

,

By Dan Gephart, December 7, 2020

Our last newsletter of the year will be published next week. So barring any major late-breaking news, this is the final FELTG Flash of 2020. As we’ve done the last couple of years (2019, 2018), we’d like to take this opportunity to look back at our most popular newsletter stories (based on the number of reads and forwards) over the past year.

I know what you’re thinking: “A look back? At 2020?”

Well, yes. While many of us quarantined in our homes, federal employment law challenges continued to run rampant. As always, FELTG was here to help guide you.

This year’s Top 10 stories reveal a wide range of issues related to performance, conduct, telework, sexual harassment and, in a few cases, how those situations were impacted by COVID-19.

1 – He Claimed He Teleworked for 2 Months, but His Laptop Charger Was at the Office (June)

2 – Why a Supervisor Should Never Give a Summary Performance Rating of Unacceptable (January)

3 – Failure to Follow Instructions: A Charge That Seems Particularly Fit for 2020 (May)

4 – What Dave Wants Dave Gets: Sexual Harassment is Misconduct (September)

5 – To Err is Human — and Maybe Also a Reason to Change a Personnel Record (May)

6 – Is There a Legal Path to Fire Dr. Fauci? (July)

7 – The Great Debate: Douglas in the Proposal or Douglas in the Decision? (January)

8 – Ripped From the Headlines: A Case for Today’s World (August)

9 – Precedential Fed Circuit Decision: Which Expert Determines if Employee is Unfit (October)

10 – How Long is Too Long for COVID-related LWOP? (November)

Twelve months from now, we’ll once again share our top 10 stories. Let’s hope that we will be looking back at a much better year. Gephart@FELTG.com

And Now Another Word With … Bob Lavigna

,

By Dan Gephart, November 23, 2020

On the heels of positive vaccine news, talk about the eventual return to workplace normalcy has picked up. But that normalcy does not necessarily mean a sudden end to remote working, especially if government workers have a say.

Eighty-five percent of state and local government employees who did not work at home before COVID-19 want to continue working remotely permanently, at least part of the time, according to a recent survey by CPS HR Consulting. This fascinating report Leading Through a Pandemic: The Impact of COVID-19 on the Public-Sector Workforce, like most of the organization’s work, was focused on state and local governments. But it’s not a stretch to think that many federal employees feel the same as their more local counterparts.

Agency leaders are embracing telework, too. Several told Congress last week they also hope to make telework more permanent in the post-pandemic world. The CPS HR Consulting survey determined that “government should also view the demand for remote work as an opportunity to expand the search for talent (i.e., recruiting may no longer be limited by geography)” and that “leaders need to systematically ask employees for feedback to identify and meet the needs of all employees.” CPS HR Consulting suggests that government organizations:

  • Equip managers and supervisors with the skills to manage results and outcomes (and not just time and attendance)
  • Redesign jobs to adapt them to remote work
  • Acknowledge and communicate that employees working from home must have the flexibility to balance work and personal lives
  • Provide the tools and resources remote workers need, especially technology

“Effective leadership, flexible work environments and effective use of technology can drive employee productivity, well-being and engagement and, therefore, organizational performance – regardless of where employees are working.”

This month, we continue our conversation with Bob Lavigna, director of CPS HR’s Institute for Public Sector Employee Engagement. Lavigna (pictured above) is the former vice president of research for the Partnership for Public Service and author of Engaging Government Employees: Motivate and Inspire Your People to Achieve Superior Performance.

DG: How do you “equip managers and supervisors with the skills to manage results and outcomes (and not just time and attendance)?”

BL: When employees are working remotely, it’s no longer possible for managers/supervisors to know if employees are working productively simply by seeing them at their desks or work sites. Managing in this new and different environment is often difficult. According to one government HR executive, managing remote employees means ditching the, “If I can’t see you, you’re not working” mentality.

Instead, leaders need to measure and manage goals, results and outcomes, not just time and attendance. This often-difficult transition requires new performance metrics, tools, systems, and expectations. And, where possible, even linking financial rewards to results.

To help managers and supervisors adapt, organizations are providing training, tools, resources and tips on leading a remote workforce. Many of these programs are online (including our own CPS HR Consulting training curriculum). For example, one city has assembled a manager’s toolkit that includes tips, articles, webinars, etc. on managing a remote workforce. Organizations are also setting the expectation that managers and supervisors need to be more flexible. According to one government executive, “We’ve had to drastically change,” putting aside the usual focus on counting workers’ hours and days. “People who have kids need to take an hour off to put someone down for a nap or to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich.”

Government may also need to change how leaders are identified and selected. Organizations need to select managers and supervisors who can manage effectively in this new environment, instead of advancing employees because they have good technical skills or have long tenures.

DG: The report revealed that employees were “anxious” and “stressed” and unsettled, but that was early on in the crisis. Do you think that the answers would be different now? 

BL: Good question. There is some evidence (e.g., from Gallup) that engagement levels were on the rise after declining at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the recent resurgence of the coronavirus is likely to keep everyone unsettled and on edge. I don’t think anxiety and stress will decline until we have an effective vaccine and see some light at the end of this tunnel.

DG: There’s a general assumption among many remote workers that when you work at home, you work more hours. While 34 percent of remote working respondents said they were working more, the majority are not. Is that general assumption just wrong?

BL: I think that 34 percent is a substantial number. But I question the assumption that, during COVID-19, working remotely automatically translates into working more. Given the other factors that affect the ability to work remotely, like the availability of technology and personal responsibilities such as dealing with kids and spouses at home, I don’t think it’s possible yet to evaluate whether the new working environment has resulted in increased workloads. Let’s see what happens when things get back to “normal.” What has clearly changed, however, is when work is getting done.Employees operating remotely are working when they can, while also balancing their personal responsibilities. Therefore, the traditional workday has been stretched.

And we believe this is a permanent change. As the research conducted by the Institute and others has shown, employees working remotely for the first time want to continue this arrangement permanently, at least part-time. In other words, the world of work has dramatically changed. Organizations, including in government, need to adapt to – and not resist – this evolution. Otherwise, government will not be able to attract and retain top talent.

DG: Some employees view attempts to engage them skeptically. How do you get past that?

BL: In our work conducting engagement surveys across the nation, we’ve encountered this skepticism. I remember one employee who stated during an employee engagement kickoff meeting that, in his opinion, the organization’s focus on engagement was merely a cynical attempt to squeeze more work out of employees. My answer was that efforts to improve engagement – done right – should be a win-win. Employees feel better about their work and their organization, and, therefore, are motivated to deliver for the people they serve.

But what does “done right” mean? It means surveying employees to understand empirically what the workforce issues are, preserving the confidentiality of employees’ responses, sharing survey results, making a long-term commitment to improving engagement and – most important – taking action on survey results. Organizations that survey and then fail to act on the results will see a decline in engagement – and an increase in skepticism. And they will deserve these outcomes.

DG: What role does onboarding play in the eventual success or failure of employee engagement efforts? And, if it does have an impact, how do you make sure that remote onboarding lays the groundwork for successful employee engagement?

BL: You only get one chance to make a first impression. Research, including by the Partnership for Public Service, has shown that effectively onboarding new employees results in a higher level of engagement, lower turnover and faster time to full productivity.

But it’s important to define what onboarding is – an integrated set of activities during the new employee’s entire first year that provides the information, support and resources the employee needs to succeed.

Of course, like most activities with a remote workforce, onboarding becomes more complicated. But the fundamentals are the same – provide tools and resources, connect with the supervisor, assign work, set expectations, deliver training and provide feedback. For remote workers, these steps may need to be done virtually. I have worked remotely from my home in Madison, WI for two organizations (way before COVID). In both cases, I was onboarded pretty seamlessly, including setting up my laptop, printer, etc. It can be done, even with a remote workforce.

[Editor’s note: Bring FELTG’s popular webinar training Manging a Mobile Workforce: Tools for Accountability to your agency. For more information, contact Dan Gephart at Gephart@FELTG.com]

Threats of Violence: Assessing Risk and Taking Action

, ,

By Dan Gephart, November 17, 2020

While the nation is grappling with a pandemic, the government’s most well-known scientist has been besieged with death threats. And as more than 150 million people exercised their right to vote earlier this month, state and local officials, as well as volunteer poll workers, also faced violent threats as they attempted to count the ballots.

This dangerous risk to our nation’s civil servants is not new.

A September 2019 GAO report and a subsequent article by Government Executive laid out the stark reality of the dangers faced by federal employees at one particular agency — the Bureau of Land Management. The report included numerous examples of violence against BLM employees, including an employee who was stabbed outside a federal building, and another who received hundreds of aggressive calls, including death threats, after someone posted his phone number on Twitter.

So you bet I listened closely last week as FELTG Instructor Shana Palmieri, LCSW, delivered the third and final of the webinars in her Behavioral Health series — Threats of Violence in the Federal Workplace: Assessing Risk and Taking Action. (The previous webinars were Understanding and Managing Federal Employees with Behavioral Health Issues and Suicidal Employees in the Federal Workplace: Your Actions Can Save a Life.)

Violence can come from a current or former employee, a customer/patient, a domestic partner, a personal conflict that spills into the workplace, or someone not known to the agency. Regardless of where the threat is coming from, it’s awfully hard to predict. More than 3 percent of the general US population commits one or more violent acts each year.

What are the factors that lead to violence? A lack of education, decreased social stability, and high unemployment are factors.

What’s not a factor? Mental illness. The majority of patients with stable mental illness do NOT present an increased risk for violence. In fact, researchers estimate that only 4 percent of violence in the United States can be attributed to mental illness.

“The potential of violence lies within all of us,” Palmieri said during the webinar. “It’s something anybody can be driven to as a human, not just a result of mental health (issues).”

During the webinar, Shana offered numerous suggestions for risk assessment and response management plans, with a focus on “intervention early on and using practices that are evidence-based to mitigate or de-escalate the potential for violence to occur.”

If you missed the webinar, and you’d like to book Palmieri, who handled the psychiatric aftermath of the Navy Yard shooting in 2013, to come to your agency (virtually or in-person), email me at Gephart@FELTG.com.

In the meantime, you can share with your staff these techniques for de-escalating aggressive and potentially violent behavior, which were discussed more in-depth during the training:

  • Respect personal space – do not move towards employee. Don’t lean into the employee. Keep your distance.
  • Be aware of your body position. Stand at an angle. “You don’t want to come in with a defensive stance. If I’m standing face-to-face, staring them right in the eyes that’s a defensive stance,” she said.
  • Use a calm voice. If the aggressor gets loud, speak quietly. People tend to mirror those they are engaging with.
  • Be empathetic and validate the person’s feelings. You don’t have to agree with the content of what the individual is saying, but you can let them know you understand that they’re feeling angry. “Stay calm,” Palmieri said. “Be present.”
  • Avoid all power struggles. People who are angry will try to bring you into the fight. Don’t let them trigger you. “It’s very important to avoid that power struggle,” Palmieri said. “It will only escalate the dynamic. It’s not the time to fight the battle.”

Gephart@FELTG.com

And Now a Word With … Bob Lavigna

,

By Dan Gephart, November 10, 2020

We’re still a good half-year away from the next Public Service Recognition Week, but we need not wait until May 2021 to recognize the critical work civil servants have done over the last several months.

You know it’s a challenging year when the (arguably) most well-known and respected federal employee, Dr. Anthony Fauci, needs to be protected from constant death threats – at the same time he and his colleagues are working to save lives. Meanwhile, we need to recognize the important work everyone else out there in FELTG Nation is doing during these very trying, and logistically challenging times.

Recognition is a key part of employee engagement, and so we reached out this week to someone who knows a lot about both subjects. Bob Lavigna (pictured above), the former vice president of research for the nonprofit/non-partisan Partnership for Public Service, directed the annual Best Places to Work in Federal Government. The Partnership was also responsible for the federal government’s wide embrace of Public Service Recognition Week, providing a toolkit, organizing events, and facilitating executive proclamations.

Lavigna, author of Engaging Government Employees: Motivate and Inspire Your People to Achieve Superior Performance, is now director of the CPS HR Institute for Public Sector Employee Engagement. He has also been assistant vice chancellor and director of HR for the University of Wisconsin — and he’s a previous winner of Governing Magazine’s Public Official of the Year award.

Lavigna’s focus these days at CPS is on local and state government, as well as nonprofits, but his advice and perspective are as useful as ever for federal leaders.

DG: Not considering the pandemic, what are the biggest barriers keeping supervisors from being better at employee engagement?

BL: I think there are two primary barriers – not understanding why improving engagement is important and not knowing how to improve it.

In the first case, supervisors often consider engagement to be just another touchy-feely HR fad or about making employees happy all the time. And their job is to deliver results, not make sure everyone is happy. What these managers and supervisors often fail to realize is that improving engagement drives productivity and results. In other words, they don’t appreciate the business case for engagement. As I describe in Engaging Government Employees, decades of research, including in government, have clearly shown that improving engagement can dramatically improve organizational performance.

The second reason concerns how to improve engagement. Too often, even when leaders want to improve engagement, they guess about how. The book 180 Ways to Build Employee Engagement includes great suggestions. The challenge is to figure out what will work in an individual organization or work unit. Too often, leaders act without data on what matters to their employees.

Research has shown that the best way to understand the level of engagement is, and what influences engagement, is to conduct an engagement survey. As we advise the public-sector organizations we conduct engagement surveys for, it’s important to generate survey data and drill down to the work-unit level. We can’t prescribe a solution without understanding what the condition is.

DG: Are remote workplace situations a barrier to engagement, or can remote workplaces be an opportunity to improve engagement? And, if so, how?

BL: There are clearly challenges to maintaining the engagement of employees working remotely. However, while it may be a cliché that the flip side of challenge is opportunity, I think this cliché applies today. Organizations that take care of remote employees can actually boost engagement. Taking care means:

Providing strong and visible leadership. Leaders need to continue to be visible, even if not in person. Leaders also should manage goals, results and outcomes, not just attendance and activities. And effective leaders understand that employees working remotely need to balance their work and personal lives. According to one government leader: “We’ve had to drastically change. People who have kids need to take an hour off to put someone down for a nap or to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich.” Leaders also communicate through multiple means (i.e., not just email or messaging), using telephone, web sites, blogs, intranet, Twitter, Facebook; and face-to-face communication platforms like Zoom, Teams, WebEx and Skype.

Continue to focus on training and development. It might be tempting to overlook employee development as we scramble to adapt to the COVID-19 workplace. But this would be a mistake. Managers, supervisors and employees should continue to focus on development, using options that don’t require in-person contact, including the explosion in online training.

Recognize accomplishments. Our Institute’s national survey has consistently found that a key driver of engagement is making sure that employees feel valued. This can be tough without physical proximity, but it’s important to recognize the contributions and accomplishments of employees working remotely, as well as the employees who continue to report to their work sites.

DG: Many people are suffering from “Zoom fatigue.” They’re just tired of communicating over the computer. Is there ever a danger of over-engagement?

BL: Over Zooming can be a problem, but is not the same as over-engaging. Our research, and the research of others, has shown that employee engagement is low, including in government. I don’t think we should worry about over-engagement, at least not yet.

But we should worry about over Zooming. As our Institute has emphasized, simply seeing employees at work, whether in person or via computer, is no guarantee that employees are being productive. In fact, too many video meetings may actually reduce productivity, Managers and supervisors need to move away from the need to simply see their employees at work. Instead, they should manage goals, products and outcomes; not activities, time and Zoom attendance. More focus on the former and less on the latter will improve productivity and minimize any Zoom fatigue. [Editor’s note: For more guidance on communication in a remote environment, read about Zoom Zombies, and/or register for The Performance Equation: Providing Feedback that Makes a DIfference.]

We’ll talk more with Mr. Lavigna about the latest trends in employee engagement in an upcoming FELTG Flash. Gephart@FELTG.com