How to fire a fed

There's a hint of irony in the Government Accountability Office's recent workforce report, which finds that agency leaders are too often doing a subpar job of dealing with under-performing employees.  

While agencies have several avenues to address employees' performance -- including routine performance management activities, probationary periods and formal procedures -- GAO found that these tactics are generally underutilized due to a lack of leadership training and concerns over internal support and legal proceedings. 

And then there's the sheer amount of time required:

GAO found that a formal dismissal process can take anywhere from 170 to 370 days. (*The Chapter 75 process, which does not require a formal improvement period, can speed things along, but the burden of proof for sustaining a dismissal is much higher.) And a dismissal can then be appealed. In 2013, the Merit Systems Protection Board took an average of 243 days to adjudicate such complaints.

As a result, the vast majority of dismissals take place during a new hire's one-year probationary period. The following two charts display the employee dismissal rates and appeals of employees to the Merit Systems Protection Board for 2013.

Performance Dismissals By Legal Authority and Employment Status (2013)

¹U.S.C. § 4303: "Unacceptable performance may be due to a teachable knowledge gap and training, guidance, and/or clearer expectations may help the employee improve. [...]" (The average performance improvement period granted to an employee takes 50 to 110 days.)

²U.S.C. § 7513: "Performance is unlikely to be improved with additional training, guidance, or clearer expectations, and a good faith effort has been made to help the employee. [...]"(No improvement period is necessary, however, the burden of proof must be significantly higher in order to establish a dismissal.)

MSPB Decisions on Dismissal Appeals under Chapter 43 (2013)

³According to GAO's findings, MSPB takes an average of 243 days to adjudicate an appeal from start to finish.

The process can work better, GAO concluded, and recommended the following actions:

• Confirm that supervisors are both well-qualified and capable of addressing poor performance, while determining if promising practices should be implemented government-wide.
• Ensure supervisors obtain the skills necessary to effectively conduct performance management responsibilities, and assess the quality of leadership training made available within agencies.
• Educate agencies on the benefits of an automated system to notify supervisors of probationary period constraints, and determine whether an extended probationary period might be warranted in certain occupations.
• Make informed decisions through the use of OPM's provided tools and guidance--e.g. SHCM survey results, FEVS results, PAAT responses and other existing information.

Source: GAO's "Improved Supervision and Better Use of Probationary Periods Are Needed to Address Substandard Employee Performance"