NTEU
Working
Today for a Better Tomorrow
Topics Associated with Appraisals:
Contact Dale Yeilding in the NTEU Union office (O1G22) at 301-415-3600 or email "NTEU" for assistance.
Informal-resolution discussions, or formal grievances per Article 51 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, can be used to seek changes to your official performance rating of record which remains in your personnel file for 3 years.
An NTEU steward will help employees assemble the necessary information to justify some, if not all, of the following possible changes to your appraisal:
- Raise the overall appraisal summary level rating.
- Raise many of the individual appraisal element ratings.
- Add more accomplishments to make each appraisal element more accurate.
- Delete negative language in an element if the rating in that element is FS or higher.
The appraisal appeal presentation to raise ratings should contain justification, focusing on: quantity, quality, timeliness and amount of supervision for your past year's work efforts and accomplishments.
An example of what an NTEU appeal would look like follows.
To: NRC Chief Policy & Labor Relations, Human Resources
NTEU is filing a [choose one: request for a informal-resolution discussion or Step A Grievance] on behalf of John Doe with regards to his appraisal. This request is filed under the provisions of Articles 51.3 and 27.8 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). As a remedy, NTEU requests that Elements 2 and 4 be raised from a Fully Successful (FS) to an Excellent (E) rating. NTEU further requests that all of John's accomplishments throughout the past year be accurately reflected in the appropriate elements. Also, remove any negative language if the rating is FS or higher. NTEU will present details to support these remedies at appeal meeting. Please reply to NTEU with the date and location of the meeting within the next 10 days, as required by the CBA.
---Signed, Dale Yeilding, NTEU Chapter President
Appraisal Questions and Answers
Q: What is the Purpose of the Appraisal?
A: Appraisals are attached to your application for consideration for promotion. NTEU views this to be the overriding purpose of an appraisal, and the motivating factor to pursue needed changes if the appraisal rating or content is not accurate. Merit-selection rating panels and selecting officials may place significant importance on the applicants appraisal, highly considering the past supervisor's opinions.
A: Provide a means for the supervisor to communicate areas for improvement. NTEU suggests that frequent verbal communications are more effective to achieve improvement in lieu of waiting until the end of the appraisal year.
A: Does not necessarily provide a basis for an award. NTEU reviews agency-award proposals, and finds many employees with Outstanding ratings do not receive an award while some employees with Excellent ratings do receive an award. Thus, there is not a direct correlation between Performance Appraisals and awards.
Q: If I am rated Outstanding should I get an award?
A: Article 29.3 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement requires that management consider you for a performance award. If you do not receive an award, you are entitled to an explanation within thirty days of your request. Contact NTEU (301-415-3600) with the explanation.
A: Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued a regulation (5 CFR 451) that became effective on February 12, 2007 that requires there be a meaningful distinction between awards and performance. Prior to this regulation the agency gave awards to some employees with an Excellent performance rating without giving all Outstanding performers an award. This awards-performance correlation past practice has the appearance to lack meaningful distinction. If you find yourself in this situation without an award, contact NTEU (301-41-3600) since together we may ensure the agency adheres to the regulation and their limited award distribution to Outstanding performers is properly scrutinized and possibly appealed depending upon the agency's explanation.
Q: Could an employee appealing their appraisal, experience reprisal from the supervisor?
A: Presentation of a factual, objective, unemotional appeal should be viewed by management as an employee exercising his right to due process. Appealing your appraisal now may cause your supervisor to spend more time next year more accurately appraising, which might prevent a subsequent appeal.
Q: Should I add my comments to the appraisal, or appeal through NTEU?
A: You should do both if the appraisal contains inaccuracies. Your comments become a permanent part of the appraisal, and should be written objectively towards a target audience of rating panel members or selecting officials reviewing your application for promotional consideration. A successful appeal would include your ability to change your earlier comments that no longer apply.
Q: Do I have to sign my appraisal if I disagree?
A: Yes, MD10.67, Part II.E.3.c says: "The employee's signature acknowledges receipt of the rating indicating that he/she has been provided the opportunity to meet with the supervisor to discuss the contents of the appraisal. The employee's signature carries no implication that the employee concurs in the appraisal or in the supervisor's comments."
Q: How much time do I have to review/sign my appraisal and to attach my comments for the permanent appraisal record?
A: 5 days from your receipt of the appraisal. Don't be pressured by your supervisor to sign any sooner to meet the agency's October 31st deadline.
Q: Should I write my comments in the 1-inch space on the appraisal coversheet?
A: No. Write "see attached" in the coversheet 1-inch comment area. This permits you to modify your comments later if any appeal may have successfully changed appraisal language. You might then want to change your comments, and it is difficult to do this on the coversheet since the page contains original signatures.
Q: Can I comment on changes to next year's Elements and Standards?
A: Yes, you have 10 days to comment on any changes of what your supervisor will be expecting from you in the future prior to signing.
Q: Are there quotas for the number of Outstanding and Excellent appraisal ratings?
A: Management Directive 10.67, Part II, item D.6, "Prohibition of Forced Distribution," says "By OPM regulation, NRC may not prescribe a distribution of ratings that interferes with the appraisal of actual employee performance against performance standards."
Q: How long do I have for NTEU to file an appraisal appeal?
A: 15 working days from receipt of your appraisal.
Q: If my summary rating drops should I have been warned?
A: CBA Article 27.11 says, "Employees should be given feedback at other times during the year, if their performance deteriorates significantly. If you summary rating is Minimally Successful or Unsatisfactory see an NTEU steward for help.
Contact Dale Yeilding in the NTEU Union office with any other appraisal questions at 301-415-3600.
NTEU
Score of
Office and Region
Performance Ratings
NTEU prepared the table below to compare the percentage of Os, Es, and FSs given in the different NRC Offices and Regions to measure management's evaluation of employee performance. NTEU did this by developing a scoring system to weight the "O", "E," and "FS" performance appraisal percentages with similar point values used in the actual appraisal process. This gives a single Office-level and Region-level NTEU score.
NTEU Scoring Method
Outstanding (O) = 4 points
Excellent (E) = 3 points
Fully Successful (FS) = 2 points
NTEU's Score of Office / Region
Performance Ratings =
( %Os x 4 ) + ( %Es x 3 ) + ( %FSs x 2 )
Results
The NTEU "Score of Office / Region Performance Ratings" ranges from 2.83 to a perfect 4.0.
What does this mean?
Either 1) Employees are truly lower or higher performers in different offices and regions, or
2) Employee evaluations are not consistently administered.
Score Color Definitions
Green = 3.5
or above , Large percentage of Os
Yellow = Near 3.2, the NRC average
Red = Below 3.18, Large percentage of Es and FSs
NRC 2006 Appraisals
1963 Bargaining Unit Employees
Rank
Order
Office / Region Alphabetically Ordered or Rank Order |
%O | %E | %FS | 2006 NTEU's Score of Office / Region Performance Ratings (%O x 4) + (%E x 3) + (%FS x 2) ú or ü >0.1 pt. change |
2005 NTEU Score |
2004 NTEU Score |
2003 NTEU Score |
2002 NTEU Score |
| NRC Agency | 34 | 54 | 12 | 3.22 | 3.22 | 3.30 | 3.32 | 3.27 |
| ACRS | 75 | 25 | 0 | 3.75 | 3.67 | 3.73 | 3.75 | 3.77 |
| ADM | 35 | 58 | 7 | 3.28 | 3.21 | 3.23 | 3.29 | 3.34 |
| ASLBP | 86 | 14 | 0 | 3.86 | 3.79 | 3.60 | 4.00 | 3.56 |
| CAA | 50 | 50 | 0 | 3.50ú | 3.67 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 3.75 |
| CFO | 33 | 64 | 3 | 3.20 | 3.21 | 3.38 | 3.32 | 3.35 |
| EDO | No bargaining Unit Employees | 3.25 | 4.00 | 4.00 | ||||
| HR | 50 | 35 | 15 | 3.35 | 3.32 | 3.43 | 3.25 | 3.34 |
| IP | 25 | 69 | 6 | 3.19 | 3.25 | 3.53 | 3.60 | 3.50 |
| IS | 31 | 52 | 17* | 3.14 | 3.18 | 3.24 | 3.14 | 3.13 |
| NMSS | 49 | 47 | 4 | 3.45ü | 3.34 | 3.43 | 3.41 | 3.30 |
| NRR | 31 | 54 | 15* | 3.16 | 3.21 | 3.35 | 3.37 | 3.33 |
| NSIR | 28 | 62 | 10 | 3.17ú | 3.28 | 3.36 | 3.47 | 3.30 |
| OE | 45 | 55 | 0 | 3.46ü | 3.31 | 3.57 | 3.36 | 3.17 |
| OGC | 61 | 39 | 0 | 3.61ü | 3.48 | 3.44 | 3.50 | 3.47 |
| OI | 4 | 74 | 22 | 2.83 | 2.88 | 3.00 | 3.19 | 3.13 |
| PA | 100 | 0 | 0 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 3.67 | 3.56 |
| RES | 34 | 48 | 18* | 3.15 | 3.11 | 3.18 | 3.27 | 3.32 |
| RI | 18 | 63 | 19 | 2.98 | 3.04 | 3.11 | 3.13 | 3.09 |
| RII | 37 | 52 | 11 | 3.26 | 3.17 | 3.18 | 3.31 | 3.25 |
| RIII | 27 | 57 | 16 | 3.12 | 3.10 | 3.07 | 3.03 | 2.99 |
| RIV | 38 | 55 | 7 | 3.32 | 3.24 | 3.36 | 3.43 | 3.36 |
| SECY | 50 | 50 | 0 | 3.50ú | 3.60 | 3.67 | 4.00 | 4.00 |
| STP | 44 | 56 | 0 | 3.44ú | 3.65 | 3.62 | 3.63 | 3.42 |
* FS data includes 7 employees that were rated minimally successful
NTEU
SUMMARY CHART
PERFORMANCE LEVELS &
RATING CRITERIA
Contact Dale Yeilding in the
NTEU Union office for more information,
O13F2 or 301-415-3600
| Performance
Levels & Rating Criteria Reference: Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), Article 27, Management Directive 10.67, Part I (B)(20) |
||||
| Performance Rating Level |
Performance Rating Criteria | |||
| QUANTITY | QUALITY | TIMELINESS | SUPERVISION | |
| OUTSTANDING | Very High | Rare & Exceptional | Significantly Ahead of Established Schedules or Deadlines |
Very Little |
| EXCELLENT | High | Unusually Good or High | Ahead of Established Schedules or Deadlines |
Less Than Normal |
| FULLY SUCCESSFUL | Expected | Good | Meets Schedules or Deadlines |
Normal |
| Minimally Successful | Performance is not Unacceptable but needs improvement to achieve Fully Successful. | Close supervisory review, discussion, training and correction of work products. | ||
| Unacceptable | Fails to meet established performance standards in one or more critical elements which mandate an overall summary rating of "Unacceptable". Within-grade step increases require acceptable performance, CBA, Article 37. | Action must be
taken for a Performance Improvement Requirements Memorandum (PIRM),
CBA Article 27.12
|
||
NTEU Working Today for a Better Tomorrow