SEARCH:     Search Options
OnPolitics   Federal Page
 The Issues
 Federal Page
 The Administration
 Supreme Court
 Today in Congress
 Post Series
 Columns - Cartoons
 Live Online
 Photo Galleries
Other News:
Editorial Page
Real Estate
Home & Garden
News Digest
Print Edition

Pentagon Personnel Plan Questioned
Lawmakers Complain About Rush to Revamp Management System for Civilians

Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) calls bill a "blank check" for Pentagon.

E-Mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Version
Permission to Republish
By Christopher Lee
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, April 30, 2003; Page A21

Members of a House civil service subcommittee complained yesterday that Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld is trying to rush through a plan to overhaul the personnel system at the Defense Department without giving Congress a chance to study it.

At a 31/2-hour hearing, Republicans and Democrats alike criticized David S.C. Chu, undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, over the handling of proposed legislation that would change the way 746,000 civilian employees are hired, paid and promoted in the federal government's largest department.

Defense officials quietly submitted the 205-page bill two weeks ago during the congressional recess and are now trying to fast-track it through the armed services committees in the House and the Senate, lawmakers said.

"We're doing this so quickly and so fast that I can't say I'm very comfortable," said Rep. Jo Ann S. Davis (R-Va.), chairwoman of the panel. "I'm not anxious to run forward and vote for something when I just don't know what it's going to do to 700,000 people. . . . I think we're all concerned with the sweeping power that would be given."

Democrats said the bill would grant Rumsfeld and future defense secretaries a license to pay, promote, discipline and discharge workers without adequate regard for seniority, performance and merit principles.

"The bill before us is a blank check," said Rep. Henry A. Waxman (Calif.), the ranking Democrat on the House Government Reform Committee. "We don't know what the Defense Department is going to do. Given the Bush administration's track record on civil service issues, there is no reason to think that the new system will be a fair one."

The department's proposal would push aside the General Schedule and replace it with a pay-for-performance system that would end guaranteed annual raises based on longevity. The plan would make it easier to hire workers quickly, relax restrictions on the hiring of retirees and limit the ability of unions to bargain over changes in workplace conditions. The Pentagon did not include union leaders when drawing up the plan.

David M. Walker, the head of the General Accounting Office, said he has "serious concerns" about the proposal. The Pentagon needs to improve its management systems and to show that adequate safeguards would be in place to minimize the chances of political abuse, he said, and it should have consulted the unions from the start.

"The process is critically important," Walker said. "I wouldn't have done it this way."

Bobby L. Harnage Sr., president of the American Federation of Government Employees, which opposes the bill, said union officials sought to help shape the measure but were rebuffed by the Pentagon.

"They basically said they were too busy," Harnage said. "The timing of this legislation is more important than the substance -- that's my impression of the Pentagon."

Chu, who said the Pentagon wants to implement the plan as soon as this fall, defended the proposed changes as necessary to turn the department into a more "agile" force. After the hearing, he conceded that "we have to do more to build the confidence of members that, if given this power, we will exercise it responsibly."

As for the quick pace, Chu attributed that to a request by the House Armed Services Committee, which may include the measure in the defense authorization bill that it is scheduled to take up in mid-May. "The department is not saying we have to decide all this in a few days," he said. "That was not our intention."

Harald Stavenas, spokesman for the House Armed Services Committee, said consideration of the measure "shouldn't be a revelation to anyone. It's something that's been in the works for a while. . . . I don't think anyone can say this isn't being given a fair hearing."

Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) is "generally supportive" of Rumsfeld and the proposed changes in civil service law, Stavenas said.

Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, is reviewing the legislation but has not taken a position, said John Ullyot, the committee spokesman.

The House Government Reform Committee plans to take up on Thursday a bill that includes parts of the Defense Department plan and other personnel proposals for NASA and the Securities and Exchange Commission.

"This bill is flawed throughout," said Greg Junemann, president of the International Federation of Professional Engineers, a union that is part of the AFL-CIO. "It tramples on the collective bargaining and civil service protections of loyal and dedicated federal workers, while doing little in creating a more efficient DoD."

2003 The Washington Post Company

Related Links

Special Report

 News Home Page
 News Digest
 Home & Garden
 Weekly Sections
 Print Edition