Performance Evaluation And Constitutional Protections For Public Employees

916 Words4 Pages
For many years, the federal government has been operating with certain performance appraisal procedures to strengthen the relationship between pay and performance. These programs have not achieved the desired objectives despite the series of adjustments and changes. The ability to demonstrate the relation between performance, merit, and pay in civil service has remained problematic for the federal government. The Performance Bonus was started to reward all the civil servants who perform beyond their requirements. Additionally, the Merit Increment framework was started to relate increments with performance and potential in civil service. Ingraham (2006) argues that reform should allow more flexibility for the manager and be structured to place more focus on performance as a measure of merit. Thompson (2006) argues that you can’t have merit without protection, and while reform may be necessary, the current system has value and should not be completely swept aside. Throughout this paper, both positions on this relationship will be discussed along with the implications of their arguments for performance evaluation and constitutional protections for public employees.
Performance as a Measure
According to Ingraham (2006), using efficiency as a measure of performance is important to both civil service systems and merit (490). However, the relationship between performance and merit in civil service is complex. Ingraham (2006) states that both neutrality and competence are the basis

More about Performance Evaluation And Constitutional Protections For Public Employees

Get Access