Photo credit: www.govexec.com
The recent passing of former President Jimmy Carter brings to light the nearly half-century since the implementation of the Civil Service Reform Act. In discussions regarding this legislation, Stuart Eizenstat, who served as Carter’s chief domestic adviser, highlighted the president’s view that federal employees required enhanced flexibility, improved incentives, and greater motivation, amidst concerns over stagnant practices within the federal workforce.
As part of his reforms, Carter established the Senior Executive Service (SES), which aimed to provide federal managers with enhanced flexibility and connect their pay to performance metrics. However, this initiative had limited longevity and impact.
The ultimate aim of the reform, as noted in legislation and reiterated on the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) website, was to ensure a government workforce that was competent, honest, and productive, thereby enhancing the quality of public service.
Despite the establishment of the SES, systemic changes within the management of federal employees have been minimal. The General Schedule, largely unchanged apart from pay increases and locality adjustments, continues to follow outdated classification standards that predate Carter’s presidency. While agencies are indeed streamlining their hiring processes, a report from NEOGOV indicated that, as of 2020, the average federal hiring timeline stretched to 119 days, a stark contrast to the private sector’s significantly shorter average.
During his time in office, Carter expressed his frustrations with a government system he deemed an “administrative jungle,” one that sidelined meritocracy and overlooked poor performance. Years of employee survey results reflected low confidence in management’s responsiveness to underperformance, emphasizing the challenges that persist.
In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, workplace dynamics have notably shifted. Many newly employed Gen Z individuals have entered the workforce without experiencing traditional office settings, while the rise of artificial intelligence is reshaping job responsibilities. Increased incidents of burnout and turnover have further complicated the employment landscape, contrasting sharply with the government’s relative stagnation in adapting to these changes.
As the administration of President-elect Trump prepares for its transition, early indications suggest a potential hiring freeze and a push for employees to return to physical office spaces. The administration’s objective appears to involve dismantling what is termed the “deep state,” alongside efforts to eliminate perceived waste, which may lead to substantial staff reductions. Such changes could discourage prospective applicants from considering careers within government roles.
Challenges in Government Staffing
Current data from Fedscope reveals that close to 650,000 federal employees are aged 55 or older, signaling a wave of retirements that could commence as early as 2025. This trend might result in a significant loss of institutional knowledge, particularly among senior personnel.
Among the younger workforce, approximately 195,000 individuals, making up 8.5% of total federal employees, belong to the Gen Z demographic, defined as those aged 29 or younger. Although youth engagement in federal job programs has historically been low, the looming threat of layoffs could further diminish the appeal of such positions.
This week, OPM officials asserted their commitment to reinforcing the agency’s fundamental role in a functional government and expressed optimism about future advancements. However, a persistent challenge remains: many government employees are perceived primarily as a financial burden rather than valuable assets worthy of investment.
A recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on staffing issues at the Homeland Security Department indicated that OPM’s previous reforms failed to adequately address the ongoing concerns of increasing workloads and lengthy hiring durations, which ranged from three months to over a year. Some personnel found recent hiring strategies beneficial, yet many expressed concerns that these measures exacerbated staffing shortages.
The staffing struggles are particularly critical at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which is responsible for agencies like the Border Patrol. Recently, President-elect Trump announced ambitious targets for hiring 10,000 new border agents, while simultaneously seeking congressional approval for a 10% salary escalation and retention bonuses. Despite these initiatives, historical attempts by Presidents Obama, Trump, and Biden to bolster Border Patrol staffing have not successfully materialized, even with substantial recruitment incentives.
Staffing deficiencies are not isolated to DHS; other departments, including FEMA, TSA, and the Coast Guard, have similarly struggled with vacancies and recruitment. Additionally, various agencies like the Department of the Interior, Department of Energy, Bureau of Prisons, and VA Medical Facilities are experiencing staffing challenges as well.
The complexities surrounding recruitment problems are multifaceted, influenced by factors such as specific job titles, applicant supply, and levels of community engagement across different regions. While OPM has prioritized becoming a “model employer,” the reality is that prospective job candidates are not eagerly pursuing federal job opportunities. Looking ahead, the outlook for staffing challenges seems bleak.
The Increasing Need for Knowledge Workers
Today’s workforce, both in the private and public sectors, reflects a dramatic transformation from prior decades. When the General Schedule was conceived post-World War II, most jobs were categorized as administrative and routine; however, many such roles have faded away. The contemporary landscape increasingly emphasizes knowledge occupations that demand specialized skills and innovative problem-solving.
Knowledge workers, who typically thrive in collaborative environments or work independently, focus on analysis, data interpretation, and strategic planning rather than traditional bureaucratic functions. The healthcare sector represents the most significant group among these specialists, particularly relevant as the population continues to age, highlighting the need for expertise across approximately 50 tracked healthcare occupations.
Moreover, STEM jobs, particularly in information technology, stand as critical pillars of both government operations and broader economic frameworks. Fedscope indicates that over 600,000 knowledge workers are currently employed in various capacities, including about 360,000 in healthcare-related roles, with many others potentially filling contractor positions.
An integral aspect of this workforce is the competition between governmental agencies and private enterprises to attract top-tier specialists. Promotion within these fields is often tied directly to an individual’s expertise, leading to situations where emerging talent may eclipse their senior counterparts. The existing General Schedule and outdated classification methods fall short of effectively engaging these professionals.
Top specialists expect compensation reflective of their qualifications rather than predetermined salary scales, which can further complicate the recruitment landscape. Reports on federal salary evaluation practices suggest that existing methodologies are insufficient, failing to account for critical variations in skills and market demands across specialized fields.
A recent GAO audit highlighted staffing issues within the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health, tasked with fostering innovation. The agency’s bureaucratic structure differs significantly from conventional agencies, signaling the necessity for adaptive hiring practices that align with industry trends.
As the federal landscape braces for potential downsizing, it remains uncertain how knowledge workers will fare. In high-demand scenarios, top professionals may seamlessly transition to private sector roles or contractors, as government projects continue to advance even amidst potential staffing reductions.
Emphasizing Competitive Employment Strategies
The disparity in compensation between federal white-collar salaries and private sector roles persists—notably, for 2025 data indicates an average gap of 59%. In certain metropolitan areas, the difference may exceed 100%. This significant wage gap likely contributes to the reluctance of Gen Z applicants toward federal employment opportunities.
Furthermore, prevailing BLS surveys fail to provide a nuanced breakdown of compensation levels by occupation, nor do they adequately track critical salary information like entry-level pay. The current locality pay system further complicates efforts, comparing salaries for employees regardless of their proximity to work locations.
A 2021 RAND study on STEM compensation practices for the Defense Department generated notable recommendations, such as:
- Conducting comprehensive analyses of non-GS pay frameworks to assess effectiveness and deployment.
- Investigating the success of various hiring initiatives aimed at attracting skilled personnel into federal roles.
- Examining the interplay between specialized labor market practices and traditional hiring platforms like USAJOBS.
- Tailoring policies to reflect specific occupational and labor market needs.
The transformations in workplace dynamics galvanized by the pandemic make these recommendations exceedingly relevant. Shifts in demographics and labor shortages across various sectors are intensifying competition for skilled professionals. Agencies must remain vigilant in studying occupation-specific recruitment practices, taking cues from specialists who can provide insights into what entices job seekers. Proven strategies, such as forming Employee Resource Groups, can further illuminate ways to enhance the appeal of government service positions.
As the economy continues to recover, the competitive landscape for acquiring top talent is increasingly fierce. Data from a recent Human Resource Executive survey underscores that attracting and retaining skilled individuals is now regarded as a higher priority than many other HR considerations. According to a report by McKinsey & Co, “simply filling roles is no longer sufficient; an investment in leadership and innovation is essential to navigate complexities and align with organizational values and visions.” The current civil service framework presents a significant challenge in mounting a competitive response to evolving talent acquisition needs.
Source
www.govexec.com