Federal managers are aware of the phrase “probationary period,” and most have dealt with employees who are in it while under the manager’s supervision. Research conducted by the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) have shown repeatedly, however, that while managers know what a probationary period is, they more often than not don’t use it for its intended purpose: to assess the work performance of new employees and to remove nonperforming probationary employees before they obtain job protection rights under Title V that make it more cumbersome for managers to remove poor performers or employees who fail to fully conform to workplace conduct rules.
Some of the reasons for managers’ reluctance are due to internal politics, e.g., a manager may feel that an action to terminate a probationary employee will not be supported by upper management. Others say it is better to have a mediocre performer than no one since, in these days of dwindling resources, the manager risks not being allowed to replace the poor performer. Some managers also say they fear the prospect of an Equal Employment Opportunity complaint resulting from a removal action.
I tell my managerial clients that none of these reasons are significant enough to not take advantage of the probationary period. After all, if the employee is performing unsatisfactorily or demonstrating a bad attitude or having attendance issues when he or she knows they are, in essence, an at-will employee, then how poorly will they perform when they obtain further rights and protections from removal? According to the MSPB’s research, if that employee was not so great during his probationary period, it is virtually guaranteed that he is not going to improve but will likely remain in government service for some time. Why would a manager do that to himself and to the workforce?
There is one real issue that has caused managers to use caution and to not remove problem employees during the probationary period: insufficient time for proper evaluation. Earlier this year, federal employee management associations urged members of Congress to consider legislative reforms relating to the probationary period that covers most federal employees.
Some of you work in agencies where your employees have to use highly specialized, technical skills to carry out their job duties. In those agencies, new employees often spend months in formal training and on-the-job instructions. For example, new air traffic controllers spend months in formal training classes and then do on-the-job training; Social Security claims representatives can take several years to become proficient at their specialized duties; and, tax collection agents’ class room and on-the-job training exceed the time of their probationary period. If Congress agrees that managers don’t currently have sufficient time and tools to properly assess probationary employees before the period is up, they might extend the probationary period. For those of you who don’t have probationary employees in long on the job training, use the probationary period wisely. Route out those employees clearly not cut out to permanently join the federal workforce. Failing to do so, simply delays having to deal with the employee’s performance, conduct or attendance issues when he or she has many more job rights.
Management within the USPS have recently became aware of the ease in removing career and non-career employees in their probationary periods. Removals in probation periods are not arbitable under the current National Agreement. Further, to address the length of probation periods they make the employee go through two ninety day trials once as a non-career and again once they are converted into a career position. It is noteworthy that as a non-career employee outside of his/her probation they have more rights afforded them than a career employee within his/her first ninety days.
Also a question about job protection rights under Title V, what is Title V? a quick google search yields hits on the social security act, civil rights act, Americans with disabilities act, and a maternal and child block grant. I am almost positive none of those would deal with termination of employment due to performance or workplace conduct rules.
Title 5 deals with the Competitive Civil Service.
U.S. Code Title 5, Administrative Personnel
Chapter I – OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
Subchapter B – CIVIL SERVICE REGULATIONS
Part 315 – CAREER AND CAREER-CONDITIONAL EMPLOYMENT
Subpart H – Probation on Initial Appointment to a Competitive Position
Section 315.804 – Termination of probationers for unsatisfactory performance or conduct.