{"id":2586,"date":"2011-08-10T15:23:54","date_gmt":"2011-08-10T20:23:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/postalemployeenetwork.com\/news\/?p=2586"},"modified":"2011-08-10T15:23:54","modified_gmt":"2011-08-10T20:23:54","slug":"oig-report-says-usps-lowered-pay-for-performance-scores","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/postalemployeenetwork.com\/news\/2011\/08\/10\/oig-report-says-usps-lowered-pay-for-performance-scores\/","title":{"rendered":"OIG Report Says USPS Lowered Pay for Performance Scores"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

A recent audit by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) has found that “Managers lowered core requirement ratings inconsistent with PFP policies and procedures.”<\/p>\n

Craft employees do not receive Pay for Performance, or PFP, bonuses or pay – PFP is received by field supervisors, postmasters, and managers. So, USPS managers were found to have lowered the PFP scores for their management employees.<\/p>\n

The audit tells us “Specifically, 46 percent of the evaluators, and 40 percent of the second-level reviewers responsible for rating 59 sampled employees lowered employee ratings because they either were instructed to do so or believed ratings should be in line with unit scores. Managers also used numeric targets to rate postmasters\u2019 core requirements contrary to policy. PFP policy states employees should be rated based on agreed-upon objectives, targets, and individual achievements and that numeric targets are not set for behavioral objectives.”<\/p>\n

The report responds to a request from the National Association of Postal Supervisors (NAPS), the National League of Postmasters, and the National Association of Postmasters of the U.S. The objective of the audit was to determine whether USPS complied with PFP policies and procedures in determining fiscal year 2009 Executive Administrative Schedule (EAS) employee final ratings for field supervisors, postmasters, and managers.<\/p>\n

You may read the entire OIG report here<\/a>\u00a0(PDF).<\/p>\n

NAPUS tells us:<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Office of Inspector General for the U. S. Postal Service has issued an audit report on the 2009 Pay- for-Performance program. On August 27, 2010 NAPUS and the League filed a joint letter to the OIG requesting their assistance with an investigation into Postmasters\u2019 2009 Pay-for-Performance program\u2019s final core requirement ratings and appeals. Our request for an investigation was not based simply on reduced monetary payouts due to manipulation of the program. Rather, we requested this investigation based on the failure of the U.S. Postal Service to comply with the administrative rules of the PFP. It appears from the OIG\u2019s report that the OIG found that the Postal Service did fail to comply with the rules.<\/p>\n

The OIG\u2019s objective was to determine whether the Postal Service complied with Pay- for- Performance (PFP) policies and procedures in determining fiscal year (FY) 2009 EAS employee final ratings for field supervisors, postmasters, and managers. Details of the findings and recommendations can be viewed here \u2013 OIG Core Final Report 080811 .<\/p>\n

This report will not have any impact on any previous end of year NPA\/PFP ratings for 2009. The OIG\u2019s recommendations will be included in the current Postmaster pay talks with USPS representatives.<\/p>\n

Charlie Moser
\nAugust 10, 2010<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A recent audit by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) has found that “Managers lowered core requirement ratings inconsistent with PFP policies and procedures.” Craft employees do not receive Pay for Performance, or PFP, bonuses or pay – PFP is received by field supervisors, postmasters, and managers. So, USPS managers were found to have […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2586","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-breaking","last_archivepost"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/postalemployeenetwork.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2586","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/postalemployeenetwork.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/postalemployeenetwork.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/postalemployeenetwork.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/postalemployeenetwork.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2586"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/postalemployeenetwork.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2586\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2589,"href":"https:\/\/postalemployeenetwork.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2586\/revisions\/2589"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/postalemployeenetwork.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2586"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/postalemployeenetwork.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2586"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/postalemployeenetwork.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2586"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}