The Office of Personnel Management recently proposed a rule that would streamline the federal Reduction in Force process.
The Partnership for Public Service believes the proposed rule includes some meaningful improvements, but that it also raises serious implementation questions, particularly when evaluated alongside recently proposed regulatory changes to the federal performance management system and employee appeals processes.
What it gets right
OPM’s proposal to use an employee’s three most recent performance ratings as the most important factor to determine a RIF retention register is a welcome change. Federal agencies that retain their highest performers during a RIF are better positioned to serve the American people over the long run. In this respect, the proposed rule reflects a sound and principled federal policy judgment. But in adopting this change, OPM should ensure that the performance ratings used in the RIF process are credible, consistent and free from manipulation.
The Partnership also supports OPM’s proposal to exclude employees in their initial probationary period from RIFs. These employees are often the first casualties of a RIF despite being the newest talent brought in to meet pressing agency needs. Because probationary employees can already be removed at-will, excluding them from RIF processes reduces unnecessary administrative burden for agency human capital offices.
Concerns with the proposed rule
Any reform to RIF regulations must still safeguard merit principles and protect employee rights even as they make the process faster and more streamlined. Despite the noted improvements, the proposed rule has gaps that could undermine the very goals it sets out to achieve.
First, the rule relies on a performance management system that isn’t working. Making performance the top retention factor for RIFs only delivers results if ratings are accurate and meaningful.
As we have stated in prior rule comments, performance goals must have clear outcomes, supervisors and managers must have the competency, commitment and capacity to make the system work in practice, and performance management systems must be user-friendly for employees and managers alike. Unfortunately, the current federal performance management system has well-documented problems that this rule ignores despite proposing a new RIF framework that prioritizes reliable performance evaluation.
Equally concerning is that the proposed rule does not address the need for strategic workforce planning by agencies before executing a RIF. OPM’s proposal explains how to conduct a RIF but offers no framework for determining whether one is appropriate or what skills an agency needs to retain mission effectiveness afterward.
Without this guidance, even a procedurally correct RIF can leave an agency missing critical capabilities, forcing costly rehiring or contracting later.
A better path forward
The Partnership commends OPM’s attempt to modernize the RIF process, but getting RIF reform right means pairing the performance-first approach with an updated performance management system, instituting guardrails against manipulation of retention registers and engaging in strategic workforce planning.
In short, OPM needs to focus on holistic, evidence-based reforms to performance management systems as part of the effort to update current workforce policies and processes.
Through our Government for a New Era initiative, the Partnership will continue advocating for solutions focused on the performance management system and other foundational government management issues.