Some long-time/long-suffering feds believe they may be about to undergo the biggest government shake-up since the Clinton years when 270,000 federal jobs were eliminated and, in many cases, privatized.

New Republican members of Congress have pledged to reduce government spending, reduce federal employment and make changes in the government’s retirement and health insurance programs.

After implementing a 2-year federal pay freeze (his bipartisan commission had proposed an even longer one) President Obama has said he wants to make government “more affordable” and efficient. Coming up, he said, is a plan that will “merge, consolidate and reorganize the federal government” to make the U.S. more competitive in the world and more efficient at home.

Before the election, the administration talked about bringing former federal jobs that have been privatized (during the Clinton and Bush administration) back into the federal fold. But with agency budgets due to get tighter, returning “inherently governmental” jobs to the civil service may be easier said than done.

Federal unions had anticipated (maybe even welcomed) a battle with congressional Republicans over the size and scope of the federal government. What they hadn’t anticipated and certainly don’t welcome is a battle on two political fronts. But since the November election, which brought 119 idealistic/angry new members to the House and Senate, they’ve been forced to ward off friendly fire.

The unions managed to have the federal intern program (which they said was undermining the merit system by fast-tracking newcomers at the expense of long-time feds) all but abolished. And there is a more pro-labor feeling in most federal agencies. And while both are solid wins for the unions, neither is the kind of in-your-face victory (like getting a pay raise or defeating an effort to trim benefits) they can show members and potential members.

What they, and most career feds, hope won’t happen is what one former lobbyist calls the “we-had-to-destroy-the-village to save it!” approach. That is to demonize or label a program, division, function or even an agency as wasteful or worse. ” Previous administrations, when they wanted to change something, first had to destroy or discredit what they are were trying to change. We don’t need another round of that,” he said.

Pro-fed groups are now trying to figure out what the President’s proposed 5 -year freeze on domestic spending covers. And which agencies will be exempt from being overhauled or downsized.

The reorganizations will be accompanied by civil service reform. The shape and style will be spelled out shortly. There also appears to be a major difference in attitude toward the bureaucracy between the Clinton (and certainly Bush) administrations and the Obama team. “The Clinton people often seemed to be uneasy or mistrustful of the career civil service. The same for Bush 2.” But he said the first President Bush, and “apparently President Obama, seem to have great respect for the institutions of government and the career people who run it.” That, he said, bodes well when there is talk of a major reorganization.

So what about internal civil service reforms? It is likely to follow the outline we gave you in a sneak preview in November, 2009? To check that out, click here.

To reach me: mcausey@federalnewsradio.com

Nearly Useless Factoid
by Suzanne Kubota

Yahoo!’s Shine.com tackles the topic of Slap Watches being poised to become the next Silly Bandz.

MORE FROM FEDERAL NEWS RADIO

Open season for long-term care made easier
The Office of Personnel Management said the open season for its Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program will begin in April.

Federal pros rise to social media challenges
Federal News Radio hosted a panel discussion on the best ways to effectively use collaborative tools.

Copyright © 2024 Federal News Network. All rights reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.