OPM memo on awards

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is this really a big deal? If you're lucky enough to get an award in my office, it's usually $750 or less. I did see one person get $1500 once but that was the only one in the office and that person put in a lot of work to get that. I made the calculation a long time ago that these amounts are not worth my time. Instead I play the long game to ward off burnout.

I work in a production fee funded agency and they heavily use bonuses to incentivize extra work. For very top performances it can amount to a significant amount of money, scaled on your quality rating. They will lose a significant motivator to do extra work if they remove those.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this is the memo folks are talking about:
https://www.opm.gov/news/secrets-of-opm/not-managing-performance/

That’s not a memo. It’s the OPM director’s blog.

My agency is paying awards for FY25 per usual. FY26 may be a different story but we don’t know that yet.

It's saying those with a 3 should still get awards, just less than 4s and 5s. That seems reasonable.

It is also saying that very few people should get 4s and 5s, and that the large majority of the money goes to those people. So very little left over for the 3s, many of whom are high performers but not allowed to be given 5s for arbitrary reasons

I think it says 60% of the awards go to the 30% who get 4 or 5. So in an office of 10 with 10k total award money, 3 people get 2k each and the other 7 (assuming all got a 3) split the remaining 4k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is this really a big deal? If you're lucky enough to get an award in my office, it's usually $750 or less. I did see one person get $1500 once but that was the only one in the office and that person put in a lot of work to get that. I made the calculation a long time ago that these amounts are not worth my time. Instead I play the long game to ward off burnout.

For many people I think it’s the principle of getting a mandatory low rating more than the award amount. But my group at least used to get a decent bonus that was tied to rating - like 3% or more. That was in our union contract so that’s probably gone now anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is this really a big deal? If you're lucky enough to get an award in my office, it's usually $750 or less. I did see one person get $1500 once but that was the only one in the office and that person put in a lot of work to get that. I made the calculation a long time ago that these amounts are not worth my time. Instead I play the long game to ward off burnout.

They will be targeting the 3s for RIF. They have changed the rules for firing and seniority no longer matters; it’s all past 3 performance ratings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this really a big deal? If you're lucky enough to get an award in my office, it's usually $750 or less. I did see one person get $1500 once but that was the only one in the office and that person put in a lot of work to get that. I made the calculation a long time ago that these amounts are not worth my time. Instead I play the long game to ward off burnout.

They will be targeting the 3s for RIF. They have changed the rules for firing and seniority no longer matters; it’s all past 3 performance ratings.

This is made up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought Feds cared about the mission?

You give good Feds a bad name.

Non sequitur. This is about caring deeply about the mission, working hard, and then getting only a 3/5 for "reasons." No one at my agency is expecting a $ award, but the least they can do is tell us we did well.

Your productivity has gone down because you have to work in an office like most of America? It doesn’t sound like you did actually do well.

DP. My productivity has gone up but my motivation has gone down due to a year of insults and harassment. While I am very conscientious about getting my work done, we have latitude to do it more quickly or more slowly. And it will go more slowly because my coworkers and I can only do so much.

You don't seem to understand what productivity means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this really a big deal? If you're lucky enough to get an award in my office, it's usually $750 or less. I did see one person get $1500 once but that was the only one in the office and that person put in a lot of work to get that. I made the calculation a long time ago that these amounts are not worth my time. Instead I play the long game to ward off burnout.

They will be targeting the 3s for RIF. They have changed the rules for firing and seniority no longer matters; it’s all past 3 performance ratings.

This is made up.

+1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is this really a big deal? If you're lucky enough to get an award in my office, it's usually $750 or less. I did see one person get $1500 once but that was the only one in the office and that person put in a lot of work to get that. I made the calculation a long time ago that these amounts are not worth my time. Instead I play the long game to ward off burnout.

The money isn't much, but in my agency you can choose money or time off awards. (Step increases are not one of the options given to supervisors to offer, although I don't know if they're actually forbidden.) As a parent with young kids, an extra 4-5 days of time off for a 5 rating is HUGE to me. I am really going to miss it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Commerce instituted a 30% limit (10% for the top rating, 20% for the second level) for FY25 ratings. It's blatantly illegal, but laws and regulations don't matter under Trump.

All the tech companies are bringing back stack ranking, and then cut the bottom 10%. I assume that is the same dynamic they are trying to replicate, only without the generous tech pay to make it worthwhile.

People stop taking risks, its a zero-sum game so people stop collaborating, sabotaging and information hoarding, and of course hire to fire. It almost killed Microsoft in its Lost Decade -- but it keeps coming back as a quick fix to budget or performance problems.

That's utterly bonkers when you work in a specialized field. My agency has offices of just highly specialized attorneys. You can't just find 10%/year of people who are knowledgeable in a niche upon niche field. Hiring and replacing 10% just because would cost an absolutely insane amount of money.

They want to eliminate regulations and have you using your skills in the private sector.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this really a big deal? If you're lucky enough to get an award in my office, it's usually $750 or less. I did see one person get $1500 once but that was the only one in the office and that person put in a lot of work to get that. I made the calculation a long time ago that these amounts are not worth my time. Instead I play the long game to ward off burnout.

They will be targeting the 3s for RIF. They have changed the rules for firing and seniority no longer matters; it’s all past 3 performance ratings.

Yeah but if most people have 3’s or below won’t a 3 matter less for RIF purposes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this really a big deal? If you're lucky enough to get an award in my office, it's usually $750 or less. I did see one person get $1500 once but that was the only one in the office and that person put in a lot of work to get that. I made the calculation a long time ago that these amounts are not worth my time. Instead I play the long game to ward off burnout.

The money isn't much, but in my agency you can choose money or time off awards. (Step increases are not one of the options given to supervisors to offer, although I don't know if they're actually forbidden.) As a parent with young kids, an extra 4-5 days of time off for a 5 rating is HUGE to me. I am really going to miss it.

I don’t know this for sure, but I have some hope time off awards will be less impacted. The August memo from OPM suggests that agencies should more heavily use TOAs and consider QSIs instead of cash bonuses. Cash bonuses are never very generous at my agency, so I also find TOAs more valuable, but I don’t really understand the push towards QSIs, because those also involve money and can be more valuable than a one time cash award.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this really a big deal? If you're lucky enough to get an award in my office, it's usually $750 or less. I did see one person get $1500 once but that was the only one in the office and that person put in a lot of work to get that. I made the calculation a long time ago that these amounts are not worth my time. Instead I play the long game to ward off burnout.

The money isn't much, but in my agency you can choose money or time off awards. (Step increases are not one of the options given to supervisors to offer, although I don't know if they're actually forbidden.) As a parent with young kids, an extra 4-5 days of time off for a 5 rating is HUGE to me. I am really going to miss it.

I don’t know this for sure, but I have some hope time off awards will be less impacted. The August memo from OPM suggests that agencies should more heavily use TOAs and consider QSIs instead of cash bonuses. Cash bonuses are never very generous at my agency, so I also find TOAs more valuable, but I don’t really understand the push towards QSIs, because those also involve money and can be more valuable than a one time cash award.

How is a time off award valuable if I already get 26 days off a year, and earn credit time for any hours worked more than 40 in a week?

[Anonymous]

Maybe the entire work force should phone it in

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this really a big deal? If you're lucky enough to get an award in my office, it's usually $750 or less. I did see one person get $1500 once but that was the only one in the office and that person put in a lot of work to get that. I made the calculation a long time ago that these amounts are not worth my time. Instead I play the long game to ward off burnout.

The money isn't much, but in my agency you can choose money or time off awards. (Step increases are not one of the options given to supervisors to offer, although I don't know if they're actually forbidden.) As a parent with young kids, an extra 4-5 days of time off for a 5 rating is HUGE to me. I am really going to miss it.

I don’t know this for sure, but I have some hope time off awards will be less impacted. The August memo from OPM suggests that agencies should more heavily use TOAs and consider QSIs instead of cash bonuses. Cash bonuses are never very generous at my agency, so I also find TOAs more valuable, but I don’t really understand the push towards QSIs, because those also involve money and can be more valuable than a one time cash award.

How is a time off award valuable if I already get 26 days off a year, and earn credit time for any hours worked more than 40 in a week?

Who actually gets that though?
Working parents with school-aged kids can use it. Our county school system calendar only has 12 full weeks of school. The other 37 weeks have at least one A) closure B) early dismissal or C) late arrival. Not to mention sick days. Or doctor appointments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this really a big deal? If you're lucky enough to get an award in my office, it's usually $750 or less. I did see one person get $1500 once but that was the only one in the office and that person put in a lot of work to get that. I made the calculation a long time ago that these amounts are not worth my time. Instead I play the long game to ward off burnout.

The money isn't much, but in my agency you can choose money or time off awards. (Step increases are not one of the options given to supervisors to offer, although I don't know if they're actually forbidden.) As a parent with young kids, an extra 4-5 days of time off for a 5 rating is HUGE to me. I am really going to miss it.

I don’t know this for sure, but I have some hope time off awards will be less impacted. The August memo from OPM suggests that agencies should more heavily use TOAs and consider QSIs instead of cash bonuses. Cash bonuses are never very generous at my agency, so I also find TOAs more valuable, but I don’t really understand the push towards QSIs, because those also involve money and can be more valuable than a one time cash award.

How is a time off award valuable if I already get 26 days off a year, and earn credit time for any hours worked more than 40 in a week?

Who actually gets that though?
Working parents with school-aged kids can use it. Our county school system calendar only has 12 full weeks of school. The other 27 weeks have at least one A) closure B) early dismissal or C) late arrival. Not to mention sick days. Or doctor appointments.