U.S. Office of Personnel Management
Speech by Janice R. Lachance, Director

Symposium on Employee and Labor Relations (SOELR)

It is my pleasure to be with you at this years Symposium on Employee and Labor Relations.

And before I began my remarks, in the spirit of partnership, I would like to introduce Bobby L. Harnage, Sr., national president of the American Federation of Government Employees, and then ask him to share a few comments with us.

Bobby became National President of the AFGE last November. I know Bobby well enough to know that -- while he is well-suited to his job and honored to serve his union in this ultimate capacity -- he wishes he would have come into it in another manner.

Just 10 days ago Bobby and I gathered with others at a memorial service for John Sturdivant, who was President of AFGE until his untimely death last year.

John was a friend to both Bobby and myself, and I know I speak for both of us when I say we miss him. However, we all know the inescapable truth that we do not choose our time here on Earth.

Our arrival and our departure is in other, more competent, more inscrutable hands. Remembering that helps us focus on what is important, and pay less attention to the insignificant. John was remarkable at keeping his eyes on the prize. We should strive to do likewise.

Bobby has long served with AFGE, including a seven-year stint as national secretary-treasurer, the unions number two official, before he became National President. In that role, he harnessed contemporary technology to spur AFGEs success, increased investment opportunities, undertook a successful database cleanup effort and overhauled the union's entire computer system, among other notable accomplishments.

Bobby served for 13 years as 5th District national vice president, from 1978 to 1991, representing government employees in the Southeastern United States and Caribbean. Before that, he was a national representative for the 5th District, from 1968 to 1978. He came to AFGE after serving in the U.S. Air Force and then as a civilian employee with the Air Force.

He is truly multidimensional.

Bobby has been active as a volunteer in public service and on boards. He is a strong advocate for public employees.

That is perhaps best demonstrated by the fact that, despite his strong interest in, and skill at, small arms competition, he resigned his membership in the National Rifle Association in 1994 when it switched from its emphasis on shooting safety, sports promotion, and Second Amendment issues and implemented a policy of anti-federal employee rhetoric and support of government-bashing political candidates. In light of subsequent events, that was a remarkably clear-headed and timely decision.

An AFGE family man, Bobbys wife Sharon of Jacksonville, Florida, was president of her AFGE local for 12 years.

She also served as a vice president and president of the AFGE National Housing and Urban Development Council. Bobby and Sharon now live in Chesapeake Beach, Maryland. They have four children and six grandchildren.

[break]

Thank you for those comments, Bobby.

Ill begin by stating the obvious. The last five years have been tough for federal workers. But through it all we have realigned and corrected our vision about the bottom line for federal government. The bottom line is: Service to the nation and better customer service for the American public.

Growth and change are never effortless and rarely easy. But without growth and change, individuals and institutions stagnate.

We have grown greatly in the past half-decade, and as a result we can look forward with confidence to the future.

Five years ago, federal employees did not receive the respect they deserve. They still do not receive as much respect and credit as they deserve. But we have made a good beginning. For without the respect and trust of the people we serve, we cannot function well and most certainly we cannot grow as individuals or as an institution.

This symposium is about looking forward. We can look forward from a position of growing confidence and support from the public we serve.

In March 1992, only 18 percent of Americans were satisfied with how government works. In January of this year, 46 percent of Americans were satisfied. It is essential to all of us to keep that momentum. Forty-six percent is better than 18 percent, but we have a long way to go until we get back to the 60 percent-plus public confidence levels of the 1950s and 1960s.

Last week, Vice President Al Gore shifted the Administrations government reform efforts into second gear. The National Performance Review is now the National Partnership for Reinventing Government.

That is more than a name change -- it is a reflection of the Administrations determination to build on the positive progress of the last five years and embark on a campaign to win back public confidence in federal government.

Well, we know a great deal about Partnership. Bobby and I both serve on the National Partnership Council. Partnership is vastly more than just cooperation, or agreeing amiably to disagree, between employees and employers. Partnership in the larger sense means bringing all affected interests together to hammer out the best solution -- not the perfect solution for any faction, but the best solution to reach the goal. In our case, that goal is outstanding service to the American public.

If we do not succeed for the customer, then we will lose the capacity to succeed for our agencies and our workers. If we dont keep our eyes on the prize, if we sacrifice the strategic purpose for our short-range individual tactical needs, we will all lose.

I want to talk about other levels of partnership that together help build that complete concept of national partnership. These levels are federal labor-management relations -- what the National Partnership Council is all about -- and OPMs partnerships with our customer agencies to unlock the potential of the federal workforce.

First -- the partnership of federal labor-management relations.

For the past four years, the federal labor-management relations community has been working hard to improve labor-management relations and to make partnership work. At the same time, you have been representing the interests of either management or labor. Many of you and the organizations you represent have risen to these tasks splendidly and I congratulate you.

I want to share with you my ideas regarding labor-management relations and partnership.

First, OPM is committed to supporting you in your partnership endeavors and in providing expert labor-management relations assistance. Rose Gwin, the new Director of OPMs Center for Partnership and Labor-Management Relations, was introduced earlier. I hope you have an opportunity to chat with her during the week. I know she is committed to providing you the guidance and assistance you want and need.

For example, this week we are unveiling our modernized Labor Agreement Information Retrieval System (or LAIRS), which I think you will find to be a valuable tool in your collective bargaining endeavors.

We would like your feedback on LAIRS so that we can improve our products and tailor them to meet your needs. I invite you to stop by the exhibit area upstairs, take a look, and try it out.

Now let me talk about the not-so-traditional atmosphere of labor-management relations that represents reinvention in this area.

In 1993 the President issued an executive order outlining his vision for how reinvention would occur. This order directs us to implement the current theories of managing which call for the inclusion of all agency stakeholders in the improvement of organizational performance.

Let me be clear: I see partnership as an effective means to operate in labor-management relations and in a world where federal agencies must seek continuous improvement. But it is not the only way.

Some issues will not lend themselves to partnership and partnership will not make all labor-management differences disappear. Serious and legitimate issues may divide unions and management, and when they cannot be resolved in partnership, traditional methods do remain. The parties will still have statutory rights to fall back upon.

But, the Executive Order clearly directs federal agencies to develop a partnership between management and employees through their elected representatives. It is the Presidents order, and it is good business as well as good government.

Over the past four years, the National Partnership Council has collected a lot of rich data -- both quantitative and anecdotal -- indicating that partnership is having a positive impact on both the federal labor-management relations program and the day-to-day business of government.

Our research indicates that:

Partnership continues to expand across government.

Both labor and management favor partnership over traditional labor relations.

And partners are tackling more non-traditional issues and achieving positive results.

Our 1996 data showed that while partnerships had not been started in every organization, the government-wide statistics were reassuring.

Seventy percent [70%] of bargaining unit employees were represented by partnership councils, up from only 55 percent [55%] just two years earlier.

Our 1996 Report to the President noted that many partnerships were seeking help in dealing with specific issues and problems, or were working to maintain the level of energy and leadership to sustain the partnership over time.

In 1997 the NPC conducted an assessment of the labor-management relations climate in the federal sector and the perceived effect of partnership on organizational performance.

The survey indicates that partnership continues to grow. Nearly 80 percent [80%] of respondents reported that a partnership council or an agreement had been established for their bargaining unit.

Only about 36 percent [36%] of respondents characterized labor-management relations climate in the PAST as cooperative, while about 67 percent [67%] described the CURRENT climate as cooperative. These results support the idea that partnership is making a difference in the workplace.

Although there are no neat definitions of partnership, and one size does NOT fit all, we have observed that partnerships go through what may be referred to as a life-cycle. In each stage of the life cycle, particular issues or challenges may predominate. As the partnership matures, initial issues -- such as relationship-building -- may become less important, and new issues -- such as dealing with downsizing -- may arise.

During the first years of the partnership initiative, the National Partnership Council focused on issues most important to forming partnerships.

The council devoted its attention to such issues as changing the labor-management climate to develop trust, training in interest-based problem solving, and starting partnership councils and preparing partnership agreements.

In 1997, this form of partnership celebrated its fourth anniversary. Though there are many successes, a number of participants in working-level partnerships have expressed continuing concern about implementation of the President's directives in Executive Order 12871.

They were particularly concerned that, in some cases, partnership councils at the bargaining unit level had not been established, and that there was little evaluation of partnership efforts taking place.

The NPC has been working with labor-management partners from across the government to begin addressing systemic challenges to partnership and to provide resources to individual groups to help them overcome any barriers.

The Council will continue several key initiatives we began last year, and will take a more strategic approach to our leadership functions in 1998. Let me tell you what actions and activities the Council plans to undertake to support partnership.

This year we will sponsor more in-depth skills-building opportunities for labor-management participants. We will continue to travel to areas outside Washington, including Atlanta, Denver and Baltimore this spring and summer. I understand there is an information flyer at the OPM exhibit here at SOELR on these skills-building workshops.

We hope that these extended, one-day workshops will expand the councils functions to provide tools, resources, and help directly to the practitioner community.

I encourage you to take advantage of this opportunity and call OPM for more information about these workshops.

We also plan to invite the National Partnership for Reinventing Governments High Impact Agencies to participate in the workshops so that we can begin to forge a stronger relationship between partnership and reinvention efforts.

Last year, in response to requests from a number of working-level partnerships, the Council started a Facilitation Project to work directly with partnerships facing challenges at various stages of that life cycle I mentioned. The Council will continue its direct work with partnerships, with what we believe are some definite improvements.

The skills-building workshops that I described will be a cornerstone of our Facilitation Project. They will allow us to focus on such key issues as:

Evaluation and measurement strategies for partnerships -- and, direct follow-up with facilitation project participants, emphasizing evaluating changes over time.

Following each of the workshops, we will be strengthening our follow-up and evaluation of the partnerships with which we work so that we may see what has changed over time, and what strategies have been most effective.

One important NPC strategic objective is to bring high-level attention to partnership issues to ensure that partnerships are established and working effectively throughout government. We, of course, will continue our government-wide awards program to recognize outstanding partnerships and highlight places where partnership is improving the bottom line.

These awards recognize success in such areas as saving money, increasing productivity, and improving customer service.

We have named this award the John N. Sturdivant National Partnership Award in honor of John. John gave so much leadership and energy to collaborative labor-management relations that it is fitting that we should name this award after him.

Award criteria will focus on linking partnership success with the Government Performance and Results Act, and will measure effectiveness and results through the awards criteria. We will more strongly emphasize the need for partnerships to develop formal evaluation measures

The award announcements will be going out in May of this year, and I would ask that you encourage partnerships at all levels of your organization to participate.

Another step in the direction of bringing high-level attention to partnership is to coordinate with the High Impact Agencies, as mentioned a moment ago.

In January, the Council forwarded to the White House its annual Report to the President. Once this report is approved, we will be publishing and distributing it throughout the government. It will be available for downloading from OPMs web site.

The report is built around the theme of Getting Results through Partnership, and emphasizes using partnerships to manage change, improve the way the government does business, and evaluate results.

One of the National Partnership Councils major goals is to continue and enhance our focus on measuring and evaluating the effectiveness and results of partnerships. We need to know more about such topics as cost savings, cost avoidance, and improved customer service. We hear anecdotes, but lack more solid information.

Executive Order 12871 requires agencies and unions to evaluate the effectiveness of their partnerships. The NPC has been focusing on strengthening the link between partnership and agencies implementation of the Results Act. It is more important than ever that partnership be linked to the forces driving change in agencies, and that it become part of the way they do business.

I believe that parties should address evaluation and performance results in the context of their overall partnership objectives as well as the strategic plans of their agencies, as required by the Results Act. As agency accountability and evaluation efforts increase because of legislation such as the CFO Act (1990) and the Results Act, so too must partnerships focus on evaluating their efforts.

On this point the Executive Order is clear. As agencies embark down the path of labor-management cooperation, they will need to set objectives and expectations for results.

If relationship issues are creating barriers to partnership, then the parties goal should be breaking those barriers and improving the relationship.

If the parties have a good relationship and need organizational goals to focus on, then they should look at their organizations strategic plan. They should be asking themselves what they can help accomplish that will improve the overall effectiveness of the agency.

The Executive Order directs labor and management to seek out problems and craft solutions to fix them. Once those problems have been identified, then measuring the ability to fix them should not be difficult.

Partnership is a tool, not a goal. We cannot determine how successful this tool is without some type of measurement of how it works.

I have asked that the Presidents Management Council notify the NPC about any areas or locations where the Presidents directive is not being carried out, or let us know of any cross-cutting or systemic barriers in your agency.

Likewise, I ask that you let us know both about any barriers or success stories you have with regard to partnership or any evaluation efforts your agencies may have undertaken.

Very few agencies have conducted formal partnership evaluations. I commend the Social Security Administration and the U.S. Customs Service for their efforts in evaluating partnership efforts on an agency-wide basis. We are interested in receiving more information about evaluation efforts.

The second major kind of partnership I want to discuss today is the partnership of OPM with other federal agencies to empower federal employees to do an increasingly better job for the nation.

Toward this end, we at OPM are setting goals -- with deadlines -- to meet the Presidents call for continued improvement and reinvention in regard to that core mission.

We intend to increase performance to improve the public face of the federal government.

We will do this by seeing that the numbers of poor performers are reduced -- to eliminate the lingering perception that poor performance is tolerated by federal government. We will improve organizational performance by improving individual performance.

Using the latest technology, we will provide managers with clear, easy-to-use tools -- including an interactive CD-Rom that will be highlighted during one of the breakout sessions -- to identify and rectify poor performance. Each of you received your own CD-Rom to take home with you when you registered for the conference. In addition, during the week, you can stop by our exhibit upstairs for a hands-on demonstration. We will hold managers accountable for resolving performance problems at all levels -- and we will free government leaders to showcase the good work done by the overwhelming majority of federal workers.

As a measuring tool, we will measure improvement against our baseline 1997 survey of federal workers, where 57 percent [57%] said they believe employees who fail to meet required standards are not removed.

We will create a compensation system that emphasizes achievement.

We will do this by working with stakeholders to create a modern, performance-oriented approach to compensation in accordance with Results Act initiatives. Our vision is that compensation will be able to adapt to a variety of missions, structures, labor markets and work technologies.

We will promote current pay and incentive flexibilities to maintain the governments competitiveness in recruiting employees with critical skills. And to measure our progress, we will again use the baseline 1997 survey that showed that only 36 percent [36%] of federal employees believe deserving employees are recognized and rewarded for their contributions.

We will assist agencies as they tailor their own decentralized personnel systems in accordance with merit principles.

We will strive to be the governments consultant of choice, helping our customers -- agencies and federal workers -- better serve their customers -- the American people.

We will ensure consistent guidance and hold both agencies and ourselves accountable for clear communications. We will give maximum flexibility while demanding accountability and protecting the merit-based civil service through oversight. And we will measure our success by the success of our customers, as well as through oversight reviews.

We will continue to spur decentralization within agencies by eliminating internal agency barriers to put even more personnel authority in the hands of line managers.

We will track instances where we have removed barriers, but where agencies have maintained internal barriers. We will publicize existing flexibilities and success stories as well as identify agencies who continue to do business as usual.

With the support of the Office of Management and Budget and the National Partnership for Reinventing Government, we will hold agency heads accountable and work with the Presidents Management Council, the Interagency Advisory Group of personnel directors, the National Partnership Council, and the Council on Administrative Management to make our accomplishments more visible to the public.

And we will measure improvement against a baseline survey that indicates only 18 percent [18%] of Federal supervisors report they have gained more flexibility in their ability to take personnel actions since 1993.

So, in the spirit of the Results Act -- OPM is promising measurable results -- not adherence to processes.

We are already at work. We have created the Workforce Compensation and Performance Service that includes a compensation think tank to design improved systems. We are advancing human resource management initiatives that will help us attain those four Reinvention Leadership Goals I just detailed.

I hope to be back in two years with a report card measuring OUR performance.

Remember -- YOUR work to establish and maintain an environment which recognizes employee and management needs, resolves disputes, preserves the merit principles, and respects due process and employment rights is the key to a productive workforce. Creating and maintaining such a workforce is vital to the future of everyone in this room, everyone in government, and everyone in the nation.

We have to keep our vision focused on the end, not the short-term. Remember, results, not process, are what matter.

We are beginning to succeed. The American people are beginning to respect government again. But we are truly at the end of the beginning, not the beginning of the end.

Before we leap into the future, its time to begin enjoying and learning in the present.

As I was reviewing the very ambitious program being offered this week, I was struck by the many different and difficult issues that we must deal with at our agencies

-- including violent and intimidating behavior in the workplace, downsizing and restructuring, stress, poor performers, employee-employer dispute resolution, RIFs, sexual harassment -- whew! Lets all head for the class on stress and chocolate!

With all there is to learn and experience, I hope you can manage to spend some time ENJOYING the symposium. I dont want to keep you from that essential activity any longer. I am going to be around this evening. I hope to get a chance to visit with you at the reception.

Id like to thank Steve Cohen and his crew and everyone else involved in putting this symposium together. Id especially like to thank you for attending. Welcome to SOELR 98!

Weve done enough business. Lets go have some fun!

--end--