GAO Cites Barriers to Firing Poor Performers

Federal supervisors commonly are dissuaded from taking disciplinary actions against poor performers due to the length and difficulty of the process from the management side, compounded by lack of support from within the agency, according to a GAO report.

“A number of agency supports and constraints may reduce a supervisor’s willingness to pursue dismissal or other action against a poor performing employee,” GAO said. These include:

“Upper management may view the supervisor as unable to effectively manage employees, particularly considering that most employees have a history of meeting or exceeding expectations in performance ratings. Our analysis found that employees rarely receive performance ratings that indicate a problem with performance. In 2013, about 8,000 of the nearly 2 million federal employees received “unacceptable” or “less than fully successful” performance ratings. According to one expert we interviewed, senior managers who only have knowledge of an employee’s work history through past performance ratings may tell a supervisor, “None of the previous supervisors had problems with him. Why do you?”

“An agency’s personnel office may lack the capacity to provide guidance or an agency’s general counsel or a senior agency official may be inclined settle a matter or not pursue a dismissal action because of concern over litigation. According to CHCOs we interviewed, agencies are increasingly settling performance-related actions and discrimination complaints with financial awards, rather than litigating the cases. According to the CHCOs, such financial payouts may provide an incentive to file such appeals and claims–even when they are not valid.

“The time commitment for removing an employee under chapter 43 can be substantial. After communicating performance problems to an employee, a supervisor will likely find it necessary to increase the frequency of monitoring and documentation he or she conducts and of feedback sessions he or she provides during the performance improvement period. In turn, this takes time away from other job responsibilities and agency priorities.

“Supervisors who take performance-based actions may need to be involved in providing depositions, witness statements, internal meetings, and meeting with attorneys and union representatives for an extended period of time where an employee seeks an avenue of redress concerning the performance-based action. Supervisors may be concerned about appeals, grievances, or discrimination complaints if the topic of poor performance is broached.”

FEDweek Newsletter
Veteran insight on your federal pay, benefits, career and retirement!
Share