OPM Asking For List of Probationary Employees

[Anonymous]

Nevermind RTO. This is the real cause for concern:

https://www.chcoc.gov/content/guidance-probationary-periods-administrative-leave-and-details

[Anonymous]

Wow this would be incredible for my agency. Some of the recent hires are awful but (in my agency) firing someone on probation is almost as difficult as firing a permanent employee. My boss is going to be thrilled.

[Anonymous]

Now this could be a good development. The only one.

[Anonymous]

This sounds like those who aren't meeting expectations will be let go, and those who are meeting/exceeding expectations will be retained.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow this would be incredible for my agency. Some of the recent hires are awful but (in my agency) firing someone on probation is almost as difficult as firing a permanent employee. My boss is going to be thrilled.

Well good for you but we have fired people on probation before and we have a bunch of amazing new hires that are really critical to some high profile work that I think even this administration plans to continue,

[Anonymous]

I guess I need to start writing a justification to keep the guy who started on Monday and doesn't even have his computer yet...

[Anonymous]

The recent hires are the good ones. Ugh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This sounds like those who aren't meeting expectations will be let go, and those who are meeting/exceeding expectations will be retained.

At my agency, supervisors are not allowed to give out ratings lower than "fully successful." Even the worst employees receive "fully successful" ratings each year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow this would be incredible for my agency. Some of the recent hires are awful but (in my agency) firing someone on probation is almost as difficult as firing a permanent employee. My boss is going to be thrilled.

+1

[Anonymous]

Is this even legal?

[Anonymous]

I just started a few months ago and love my new job. This is a real bummer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This sounds like those who aren't meeting expectations will be let go, and those who are meeting/exceeding expectations will be retained.

At my agency, supervisors are not allowed to give out ratings lower than "fully successful." Even the worst employees receive "fully successful" ratings each year.

What does “not allowed” mean? The option does not exist in the dropdown? Or they will receive consequences for choosing it?

Sounds like that’s an issue that needs to be resolved, and is part of the reason why everyone thinks Feds are lazy and useless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This sounds like those who aren't meeting expectations will be let go, and those who are meeting/exceeding expectations will be retained.

At my agency, supervisors are not allowed to give out ratings lower than "fully successful." Even the worst employees receive "fully successful" ratings each year.

Not allowed by who?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow this would be incredible for my agency. Some of the recent hires are awful but (in my agency) firing someone on probation is almost as difficult as firing a permanent employee. My boss is going to be thrilled.

Your boss will be thrilled. However, I bet the same forces that prevented your boss from firing poorly performing probationary employees will intervene and will again prevent your boss from firing anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This sounds like those who aren't meeting expectations will be let go, and those who are meeting/exceeding expectations will be retained.

At my agency, supervisors are not allowed to give out ratings lower than "fully successful." Even the worst employees receive "fully successful" ratings each year.

Not allowed by who?

The head of my office.