General Schedule system is inherently discriminatory

In regard to "Federal unions attack pay-for-performance efforts," I take issue with the notion that the General Schedule pay scale is fair and a pay-for-performance system is inherently discriminatory. In fact, I believe the opposite to be true.

Where is the fairness in marginal and poor performers receiving the same step increase as a superior performer? Where is the incentive to excel? I certainly don't know. How is it discriminatory for a superior performer to be given a larger increase in pay than a poor performer? Sounds fair to me.

Unions project a victim mentality, routinely implicating that management is "out to get ya." It appears that unions are always striving to protect the least productive among us, while they are not too worried about top performers. The article quoted the secretary-treasurer of the AFL-CIO as saying that pay-for-performance was based on subjectivity, as if subjectivity is a dirty word. Subjectivity allows a manager to at least strive for fairness, whereas the GS scale is certain to be unfair to top performers.

Anonymous

Featured

  • Budget
    cybersecurity (vs148/Shutterstock.com)

    House's DHS funding bill would create public-private cyber center

    The legislation would give $2.25 billion to DHS' cyber wing and set up an integrated cybersecurity center with other agencies, state and local governments and private industry.

  • Workforce
    Former vice-president Joe Biden formally launches his 2020 presidential campaign during a rally May 18, 2019, at Eakins Oval in Philadelphia. (Matt Smith Photographer/Shutterstock.com)

    Biden promises to undo Trump’s workforce policies

    Democratic candidate pledges to appropriate permanent funding to feds in case of another shutdown.

Stay Connected

FCW INSIDER

Sign up for our newsletter.

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.