Postmasters ask OIG to investigate USPS manipulation of Pay for Performance
TweetThe League and NAPUS have jointly asked USPS Inspector General David Williams to investigate the alleged manipulation of the Pay for Performance program. PFP replaced cost of living adjustments and “step” increases for postmasters and supervisors, and was originally supposed to have been based on meeting individual and organization-wide goals.
The organizations say they have tried to work with the USPS to resolve the many complaints that have been filed since the PFP ratings were published in February, but to no avail. The National Association of Postal Supervisors has filed a similar equest with the OIG.
August 28th, 2010 10:33
Let’s see if anything comes of this. I doubt it!
August 28th, 2010 11:22
PFP gotta go. Unachievable goals. Management changing goals at mid-year. Donahoe messaging DMs to lower Core scores. It’s all a sham. Payout percentage for managers has historically been much greater than EAS.
August 28th, 2010 12:53
its about fuc…..ing time
August 28th, 2010 13:27
Jack Potter tried this before:
http://www.postalnewsblog.com/2008/10/27/mailers-council-exec-warns-postal-pay-freeze-attempt-could-backfire/
Why doesn’t belt-tightening apply to him?
August 28th, 2010 17:53
My experience with pay for performance, The guys that play by the rules and try the hardest get screwed and the liars,cheats, and thieves get un-just raises. Typical for the PO.
August 28th, 2010 18:09
You mean the Postal Service has been manipulating your PAY?? Gee, I guess now you know how rural carriers feel…they’ve been manipulating our rural mail counts for YEARS and you postmasters do and say nothing about it :/
August 28th, 2010 19:33
OIG? The OIG? What does the OIG do? They let real criminals free while handing out parking tickets to the rest of us…
August 28th, 2010 19:38
fudging counts, BS pivots. Bullying, hiding behind your little badge. Kiss butt, work 6 days a week, craft employees
hate you. Where did it get you supervisor?
August 28th, 2010 20:59
just a lovely organization isn’t it. Somewhere there is someone who has a set and may get things fixed. where is that person? I have heard enough people complain and people like Potter definitely do not listen. WHER IS THE ANSWER?
August 29th, 2010 05:09
you are miss informed
August 29th, 2010 19:26
Figures don’t lie but liars, do figure what goes around comes around . CHUMPS! All those months/years kissing ass and what did it get you? The same screwing you give the crafts. BOO FREAKIN HOO!!! Ta ra ra boom dee a ,ta ra ra boom dee a, have a very nice day, you got justice today!!
August 30th, 2010 10:44
Yup – the thing is a farce. The year in question I was up 12% in revenue. They changed the rules half way through the year to area revenue. I went to -9.5%. And on top of that I noticed my budget for line 34 went over 165% all of the sudden. I looked in to it and found out that although I had approval for ^,600 for plowing,etc. no dollars were in my budget. I was told they couldn’t put it in budgets because the money isn’t there. I called the whole system a farce. And , on the threat of taking the matter to everyone I could, district rectified the amount of my plowing bill. Manipulation going on – DEFINITELY!
August 30th, 2010 13:57
I am going to have to agree with Sad. I work my behind off and responsible for stuff and I don’t get an raise or anything. My status is a Casual; however, it say’s PTF on time schedule. This is BS.
August 30th, 2010 16:14
PFP is a farce as is any method of rating performance where goals change mid-year. How about someone looking into the fact that now PTF’s are being assigned OIC positions. There is a freeze on transfers and promotions, but positions go unfilled, or worse, go to unqualified individuals. Look also into situations where Postmasters are appointed, and immediately go out on a detail. We have Postmasters who have never seen the inside of their offices. Look into situations like that, and any further investigations can at least have some credibility.
September 15th, 2010 21:40
To sad: unfortunently, I believe you are correct, whether your in management or working for ‘em, it is sad indeed, seems like “the more you do, the less it’s appreciated, and more that is expected, and the less you do, the less that it’s expected, and the more it’s appreciated!