OPM memo on awards

[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.

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.

It’s already a proposed rule change:

https://www.govexec.com/management/2025/11/agency-layoff-rules-get-overhaul-under-nearly-finalized-trump-administration-proposal/409706/

Well, that sucks.

[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.

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.

It’s already a proposed rule change:

https://www.govexec.com/management/2025/11/agency-layoff-rules-get-overhaul-under-nearly-finalized-trump-administration-proposal/409706/

Well, that sucks.

Putting performance ratings ahead of tenure seems wise to me.

[Anonymous]

I don't give a crap about awards. I want the people who do nothing to get fired.

[Anonymous]

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.

You think most of America works in an office?

Really?

Is your stupidity innate or a product of your environment?

[Anonymous]

Will there be a VERA next year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

It’s already a proposed rule change:

https://www.govexec.com/management/2025/11/agency-layoff-rules-get-overhaul-under-nearly-finalized-trump-administration-proposal/409706/

Well, that sucks.

Putting performance ratings ahead of tenure seems wise to me.

Yes but requiring everyone to get 3’s is not a performance rating. The system was off before and it continues to be off but in a different way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

It’s already a proposed rule change:

https://www.govexec.com/management/2025/11/agency-layoff-rules-get-overhaul-under-nearly-finalized-trump-administration-proposal/409706/

Well, that sucks.

Putting performance ratings ahead of tenure seems wise to me.

Yes but requiring everyone to get 3’s is not a performance rating. The system was off before and it continues to be off but in a different way.

Sure, if everyone gets the same rating, it will default to tenure. But if there actually is some variation in ratings, I’d rather use that than tenure if there is a RIF.

[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.

This is the way it should be. Not getting 4s or 5s in Govt is not a big deal.

[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.

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.

This is the way it should be. Not getting 4s or 5s in Govt is not a big deal.

It matters now because it will be for rank and yank

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

It’s already a proposed rule change:

https://www.govexec.com/management/2025/11/agency-layoff-rules-get-overhaul-under-nearly-finalized-trump-administration-proposal/409706/

Well, that sucks.

Putting performance ratings ahead of tenure seems wise to me.

Yes but requiring everyone to get 3’s is not a performance rating. The system was off before and it continues to be off but in a different way.

Sure, if everyone gets the same rating, it will default to tenure. But if there actually is some variation in ratings, I’d rather use that than tenure if there is a RIF.

They are making up variation; a supervisor can say they all deserve 5 (and in my team of 5 that’s applicable), but they are then directed to grade on a curve arbitrarily

[Anonymous]

everyone gets a 3 and that shouldn't be the criteria for anyone to get WGI

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Will there be a VERA next year?

Yes, but it's up to your sub agency whether your job series is eligible. We are so short on staff that we plan to deny most.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

It’s already a proposed rule change:

https://www.govexec.com/management/2025/11/agency-layoff-rules-get-overhaul-under-nearly-finalized-trump-administration-proposal/409706/

Well, that sucks.

Putting performance ratings ahead of tenure seems wise to me.

Yes but requiring everyone to get 3’s is not a performance rating. The system was off before and it continues to be off but in a different way.

Sorry if you get a 3/5 for your performance rating, that should be a clue that a PIP is imminent and you aren't good at your job. I only give a 3 when I don't yet have enough ammo for a PIP. A PIP is an extremely high bar at my agency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't give a crap about awards. I want the people who do nothing to get fired.

I wanted this for a long time too. The people who did nothing and were destructive were allowed to remain in my agency. I finally retired. I couldn’t take it anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will there be a VERA next year?

Yes, but it's up to your sub agency whether your job series is eligible. We are so short on staff that we plan to deny most.

Oh no— they’re doing it by job series?? Before it was agency-wide! There’s no way my job series will be eligible.