Discipline for Poor Performance?
There’s been some noise over the past few weeks about OPM’s guidance on handling discipline and performance problems in the federal government. One of the things I have noticed is that a number of media outlets don’t understand the differences between performance and conduct. As FELTG readers know, these differences are significant because the section of the law that applies to misconduct is different than the one that applies to performance. In addition, the tools are different, the procedures are different, and the burdens of proof are different, depending on whether you are dealing with a performance situation or a misconduct situation.
Just this week, I have seen articles that refer to “punishments for poor performance,” stating agencies should “discipline a poor performer,” and “progressive discipline … essentially gives employees multiple chances to improve their performance.” Yikes. In the federal government, we don’t discipline for poor performance – we utilize a demonstration period (formerly called a PIP). Discipline is a tool for misconduct, not performance. I mean no disrespect to the hard-working reporters who cover dozens of topics, but do be careful not to believe everything you read. Or, if you prefer, “Trust, but verify.”
Speaking of reading, please enjoy the very first FELTG Newsletter in FY 2020, where we promise not to confuse poor performance with misconduct.
Take care,
Deborah J. Hopkins, FELTG President