Pentagon buries evidence of $125 billion in bureaucratic waste (1 Viewer)

[DaVinci]

My new job is mostly putting together the Navy's annual construction budget. I can assure you there is no waste. 

 

[dgreen]

This organization is set up so that it is practically impossible to fire it's lowest performers.  In 2013, 0.46% of the workforce was fired.  Compare that with private industry, where typically 3-5% of a workforce is fired annually, and some successful companies are built on the premise of firing the bottom 10% of workers annually.  Over time, this has a cumulative impact.  Low performers stay put.  High performers get fed up with the culture or pay and move on to elsewhere.  Over time this changes the composition of the workforce to be primarily comprised of low performers.

I've been through the "firing" process once. I've rated an employee lowly, put the employee on a PIP, and gave the employee a Proposal to Remove letter. The Proposal to Remove was fully supported by my supervisor, so the appeal to my supervisor whose duty is to make the final decision was just a formality. The employee took it all the way to the end and voluntarily resigned just as the 30 day appeal was coming to an end. I believe the agreement barred the employee from applying for jobs within the Department.

It was a lot of work. It was hard to face the employee at times. The employee is a good person and was less than a year from retirement eligibility. In a weird sort of way, I'm glad I went through that. When i talk to other managers with low performers, I tell them that it is possible to take action against them. It's a lot of work and you need the support of your hierarchy, but I think you come out at the other end as a better manager.

I'm not going to disagree with you about the vast number of low performers. I definitely see it. For the most part, I think they are capable (I don't think my employee was capable) but they are allowed to get away with being a low performer. I'd say the two main reasons they aren't fired (in my agency, at least) is that it is a lot of work and because too many managers are promoted because of their technical skills and have little interest in dealing with this side of the job. But, another reason the firing rate may appear so low is because employee's are given plenty of opportunity to leave voluntarily before it reaches a firing. From the time I took over my employee to when the employee left was about 20 months.

Now, this organization of low performers is given a sum of money to spend each year.  They know that if they do not spend it all, they will get less money in the future instead of more.  So, they always spend every last cent, even if they have to come up with a hare brained scheme to do so at the 11th hour.  I've personally witnessed an organization replace it's year old $800 blue chairs with $800 black chairs on Sept. 29th to top off it's annual spending before the fiscal year closed.  This sort of thing is rampant.  The system is set up for each of these organizations to spend everything they can so they can justify continuing to get that same or more money in the future.

There is NO benefit or incentive for any of these organizations to reduce costs.

I'm sure there are some advantages, but one-year money is full of incentives for poor management. I'm so glad I run a no-year money program. It's so nice carrying money over to the next FY.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

I can't wait for the swamp to get drained.

Strangely, I'd guess you're going straight down that drain. 

 

[Doctor Detroit]

I'm pretty sure that @Doctor Detroit is responsible for a sizable amount of the $125B.  He has a place in Italy and some cabin somewhere.  Plus I think he drinks expensive Scotch.

also add in that mega pension.  

Yeah, I just got some Mercedes pamphlets in the mail today.  Also thinking of buying an island in Bora Bora, not Tora Bora...I've been there already and the beach really sucked. 

 

[dgreen]

I run a small office in a small agency in a big Department.

When I took the job 6 years ago, my budget was about $50M per year, with a very specific set of goals (essentially litigation support).  My first year on the job, I reorganized, got rid of duplicative jobs (either VERA/VSIP or transferring the jobs to other parts of the agency), and cut some costs.  We also performed our job so well (forensic accounting) that it made it easier for the lawyers to settle the lawsuits we support.  Ooops, making ourselves obsolete.

My budget is now $19M a year, we are supporting 25 lawsuits instead of the original 100 that I inherited, and I've empowered my senior managers to make high level decisions without me.

Was I successful?  Possibly.  But I'm also terrified that I'm going to be let go/transferred/marginalized because I've essentially made myself disposable and my office less necessary (I can't tell you the number of times I've heard comments from higher ups that say something along the lines of "Are we even going to need [MyOffice] anymore? We're settling all the lawsuits".).  I'm a walking pile of anxiety coming into the office.  I hate my life and I'm looking for another job.

Yay, government.  :confetti:  

I consider it successful. And I don't think there's any reason to worry about the job. What you've done should be attractive to other agencies who are facing shrinking budgets. You should be highly marketable for another position.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

The DoD has a lot of inefficiencies although the OP in this thread should be treated with a great amount of skepticism. 

Homeland Security has exponentially more waste per capita than the DoD, as I've been saying for over a decade.  The smaller agencies are inefficient as well at times, particularly HUD, OPM, and Department of Ed.  Other smaller agencies do quite well, particularly the DOJ components of the FBI, DEA, and ATF.  Border Patrol and Coast Guard are solid too but now they are under DHS I have my reservations.  NASA and the EPA are run pretty well also as far as I know. 

Still, compare out government agencies to any other country in the world and you'd be thankful.  Waste occurs in any government, but at least in ours we don't have half the people taking handouts and kickbacks.  Well unless we are talking about Congress, that's a different story. 

 

[Quez]

Strangely, I'd guess you're going straight down that drain. 

 

[Jayrod]

I've been through the "firing" process once. I've rated an employee lowly, put the employee on a PIP, and gave the employee a Proposal to Remove letter. The Proposal to Remove was fully supported by my supervisor, so the appeal to my supervisor whose duty is to make the final decision was just a formality. The employee took it all the way to the end and voluntarily resigned just as the 30 day appeal was coming to an end. I believe the agreement barred the employee from applying for jobs within the Department.

It was a lot of work. It was hard to face the employee at times. The employee is a good person and was less than a year from retirement eligibility. In a weird sort of way, I'm glad I went through that. When i talk to other managers with low performers, I tell them that it is possible to take action against them. It's a lot of work and you need the support of your hierarchy, but I think you come out at the other end as a better manager.

I'm not going to disagree with you about the vast number of low performers. I definitely see it. For the most part, I think they are capable (I don't think my employee was capable) but they are allowed to get away with being a low performer. I'd say the two main reasons they aren't fired (in my agency, at least) is that it is a lot of work and because too many managers are promoted because of their technical skills and have little interest in dealing with this side of the job. But, another reason the firing rate may appear so low is because employee's are given plenty of opportunity to leave voluntarily before it reaches a firing. From the time I took over my employee to when the employee left was about 20 months.

I'm sure there are some advantages, but one-year money is full of incentives for poor management. I'm so glad I run a no-year money program. It's so nice carrying money over to the next FY.

I think this is insane, however, the flip side sucks as equally.

I've worked for several small private companies and I could be fired at any point for any reason.  That fear is sometimes motivating, but sometimes debilitating.  I know I hate feeling like my livelihood is held sway by one person's mood and at times it has become a detriment to my performance because that level of anxiety causes mental lapses and later resentment.

 

[(HULK)]

I've been through the "firing" process once. I've rated an employee lowly, put the employee on a PIP, and gave the employee a Proposal to Remove letter. The Proposal to Remove was fully supported by my supervisor, so the appeal to my supervisor whose duty is to make the final decision was just a formality. The employee took it all the way to the end and voluntarily resigned just as the 30 day appeal was coming to an end. I believe the agreement barred the employee from applying for jobs within the Department.

It was a lot of work. It was hard to face the employee at times. The employee is a good person and was less than a year from retirement eligibility. In a weird sort of way, I'm glad I went through that. When i talk to other managers with low performers, I tell them that it is possible to take action against them. It's a lot of work and you need the support of your hierarchy, but I think you come out at the other end as a better manager.

I'm not going to disagree with you about the vast number of low performers. I definitely see it. For the most part, I think they are capable (I don't think my employee was capable) but they are allowed to get away with being a low performer. I'd say the two main reasons they aren't fired (in my agency, at least) is that it is a lot of work and because too many managers are promoted because of their technical skills and have little interest in dealing with this side of the job. But, another reason the firing rate may appear so low is because employee's are given plenty of opportunity to leave voluntarily before it reaches a firing. From the time I took over my employee to when the employee left was about 20 months.

I'm sure there are some advantages, but one-year money is full of incentives for poor management. I'm so glad I run a no-year money program. It's so nice carrying money over to the next FY.

Interesting stuff.  Not a lot of no year programs in DoD, only a smattering.

As for the employee... if they fight the firing, it's pretty impossible for them to fire them.  So, let me tell you the story of A, a GS-14 @ DHA who had 1 monthly task to complete (basically a data gathering task that involved minor organization of the data).  So, A had literally 1 thing to do, and A constantly messed it up.  A slept @ her desk routinely.  A was combative whenever she was asked to do anything other than her 1 assigned task.  Not like mild combative, full blown shouting matches in the cubes.  So, management decided to fire A.  But A was a crafty person.  She was probably one of the most lazy people I've ever encountered, but she was definitely clever.  So, A, in response, immediately filed an EEO complaint to say that she was being discriminated against.  A was black, but so was like 85% of the office, so she specifically said she was being discriminated against and singled out because she was the darkest shade of black in the office, which maybe was true (I didn't walk around comparing people's shades to verify).  Anyways, the EEO complaint froze the firing action for quite a while.  During this time, she applied to a program to go to Afghanistan for a year to do budgetary work there... which she got, so she went.  In doing so, it completely suspended the firing action against her.  When she got back a year later, nothing had changed, except management didn't think it was worth trying to fire A again.  So, they just let her continue to exist, sleeping at her desk, and botching her 1 monthly task.  She's still there to this very day.  The best part, as a contractor in an office full of civilians who refused to do more than the bare minimum, her entire workload was passed down to me.  It took me a grand total of 30 minutes to do her monthly workload every month.  When she returned, they had me continue to do it on the sly (without telling her), so they could use mine since it was correct instead of routinely botched.  This story is entirely true, and not exaggerated in the slightest.  It might be hard to believe for those outside DC, but it is what it is.  You can fire people with some effort, but not if they aren't willing to be fired.  There are too many ways for them to worm past and eventually management gives up.

 

[dgreen]

@(HULK)

I believe it. I've seen similar. However, I disagree that it is pretty much impossible to fire A. I strongly believe it is possible. It just has to be a priority and you have to commit to it, which is admittedly difficult since the managers also have to make sure the office continues to deliver their regular products. For me, I was approved OT, delegated more than I would have liked to other employees, and made it clear to my supervisor that some of the less important tasks just weren't going to get done while I worked through the process. Now, I'll admit that I don't know your agencies situation. While my HR and legal office worked slower than I would have liked, they did a great job helping me work through the process the right way. Maybe your office doesn't have that support. Or maybe the support just isn't there in the management chain. Or maybe it's something else.

By the book, the situation you describe is a slam dunk.

 

[rascal]

I've been through the "firing" process once. I've rated an employee lowly, put the employee on a PIP, and gave the employee a Proposal to Remove letter. The Proposal to Remove was fully supported by my supervisor, so the appeal to my supervisor whose duty is to make the final decision was just a formality. The employee took it all the way to the end and voluntarily resigned just as the 30 day appeal was coming to an end. I believe the agreement barred the employee from applying for jobs within the Department.

It was a lot of work. It was hard to face the employee at times. The employee is a good person and was less than a year from retirement eligibility. In a weird sort of way, I'm glad I went through that. When i talk to other managers with low performers, I tell them that it is possible to take action against them. It's a lot of work and you need the support of your hierarchy, but I think you come out at the other end as a better manager.

I'm not going to disagree with you about the vast number of low performers. I definitely see it. For the most part, I think they are capable (I don't think my employee was capable) but they are allowed to get away with being a low performer. I'd say the two main reasons they aren't fired (in my agency, at least) is that it is a lot of work and because too many managers are promoted because of their technical skills and have little interest in dealing with this side of the job. But, another reason the firing rate may appear so low is because employee's are given plenty of opportunity to leave voluntarily before it reaches a firing. From the time I took over my employee to when the employee left was about 20 months.

Same thing happened to me, but not quite as long (15 months).  The time required was just insane, but it was worth it.

 

[dgreen]

I think this is insane, however, the flip side sucks as equally.

I've worked for several small private companies and I could be fired at any point for any reason.  That fear is sometimes motivating, but sometimes debilitating.  I know I hate feeling like my livelihood is held sway by one person's mood and at times it has become a detriment to my performance because that level of anxiety causes mental lapses and later resentment.

In fairness, my employee situation could have been resolved quicker. Nothing like you describe in small private companies, but it didn't need to take 20 months. For performance issues of a seasoned employee, I'd say 12 months is doable.

• 3-4 months for the manager to accurately assess the performance
  
• Hopefully less than a month to put a PIP together
  
• 4 months on the PIP
  
• If the employee fails the PIP, hopefully less than a month to finalize the proposal to remove documentation
  
• 1 month to appeal to the proposal to remove
  
• removal
  

In my situation, assembling the PIP and the proposal to remove took longer and I took about 8 months before telling HR I'd like to put the employee on a PIP.

 

[dgreen]

My main two pieces of advice for any federal government manager are:

1. document, document, document
   
2. call HR and follow their lead
   

If you don't do those things, you're dead in the water.

 

[msommer]

In fairness, my employee situation could have been resolved quicker. Nothing like you describe in small private companies, but it didn't need to take 20 months. For performance issues of a seasoned employee, I'd say 12 months is doable.

• 3-4 months for the manager to accurately assess the performance
  
• Hopefully less than a month to put a PIP together
  
• 4 months on the PIP
  
• If the employee fails the PIP, hopefully less than a month to finalize the proposal to remove documentation
  
• 1 month to appeal to the proposal to remove
  
• removal
  

In my situation, assembling the PIP and the proposal to remove took longer and I took about 8 months before telling HR I'd like to put the employee on a PIP.

The work you are detailing here would probably qualify as bureaucratic waste in the spirit of the OP

 

[(HULK)]

In the private sector (including defense contractors which is what I manage), you fire people when they don't perform.  They go on a PIP if they're lucky.  We let a guy go this week because he couldn't be on time and it was visible to the client.  He had been on a PIP a year ago and improved, but then fell off again.  This time he got a verbal warning and then was late a few days later (not like kinda late, hours late).  I went in and fired him on Tuesday.  It sucks to do without having a replacement lined up, but it needed to happen.

 

[dgreen]

In the private sector (including defense contractors which is what I manage), you fire people when they don't perform.  They go on a PIP if they're lucky.  We let a guy go this week because he couldn't be on time and it was visible to the client.  He had been on a PIP a year ago and improved, but then fell off again.  This time he got a verbal warning and then was late a few days later (not like kinda late, hours late).  I went in and fired him on Tuesday.  It sucks to do without having a replacement lined up, but it needed to happen.

This highlights another important distinction: performance vs conduct. Performance is a PITA. Conduct is much easier to discipline. Being late is a conduct issue (and can obviously impact performance). Of course, we still won't move as quickly as you did, but we can move quicker on that than we can performance. The steps would be counsel, letter of reprimand, then probably one or two suspensions before removal.

First time someone is late, you can say, "Hey, you're late and that's not acceptable. If you know you will be late, you need to contact me to get approval for leave."

Next time you work with HR to write a letter of reprimand that says on such-and-such date you were late and I talked to you about it then you were late again and that's why I'm giving you this letter that will go in your permanent file.

When they do it again, you can get into the real stuff like suspensions. First would probably be a short suspension and then a longer one the next time.

After counseling them, giving them a letter, and suspending them a couple times, removal isn't that difficult if they do it again.

Keep in mind, though, that the first letter of reprimand (and every letter of suspension) will include language that they can talk to HR if they have a medical condition that they think the agency should consider during the disciplinary process. If they go down that road, things are obviously delayed more as the agency looks into whether FMLA or a reasonable accommodation is appropriate. But, barring a health condition, you can remove someone for repeatedly being late.

And, of course, probably most important thing for all managers is to use the probationary period to your advantage. You should never suspend someone who is still in their probationary period. If you've reached that point with them, just let them go. You don't have to go through all of that with a probationary employee. The number of employees who get to their first anniversary despite showing red flags is pretty amazing.