Each year Federal News Network ranks agencies on their Best Places to Work list. This is based upon surveys done by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). For 2019, Social Security ranked near the bottom in the large agency category, a significant downgrade from 2018. I wonder how Social Security will rank on the 2020 list.
 |
| Click on image to view full size |
18 comments:
And if I remember right, this survey was done before the ending of telework and before employees were aware of benefits and other losses as part of the new contract.
I have always found these to be funny, I never met a CR working in a FO or DO that thought it was all great when SSA was on top.
This was before the new contract took effect. And to the poster talking about FO, I can say there is a dramatic shift in perception of the agency in components outside the FO. I am not in the FO anymore and the feeling in my component used to be that this was a great place to be. Now not so much. Especially with all the other federal agencies we interact with and see every day. They seem
much happier.
The sole responsibility for SSA’s marked fall into the abyss lies squarely on the shoulders of management at all levels, and their Draconian, abominable, bumbling views on labor/employee relations, personnel policies, and handling a 21st century workforce.
11:03 is too polite and kind to management but otherwise is spot on.
For an agency that really did try to promote women and "minorities" (and yes, there were some spectacular failures in each), SSA management often had some things in common (esp those who came from the field/ Operations). Such things as top down management, a "militaristic" view of "rank" and such privileges rank gets, an innate distrust of what employees are capable of doing, a tendency to overreact when it comes to discipline and "the rules", more favoritism than is considered healthy, and a hatred of the union (or union lite) that seems organic. But despite that, there were so many decent supervisors etc that you'd have islands of "fantasy island" while other places were more "lord of the flies" . And everyone's point of view is different - Systems folks seemed to roll easily enough while viewed by Operations management types as folks who skated and didn't know hard work and who abused the rules. Folks in CO heard horror stories about the PSCs and OCRO and their organizations belief that their employees were too stupid to know when to eat. But despite all that, for many if not most employees, it wasn't a bad place to work. But the days of SSA being a career seem to be dying, if not already dead. Too many employees and their bosses look at it as a job.
The low ranking is a feature, not a bug.
Not surprised. Self serving political appointees and cowardly career leaders are a huge part of the blame as is not enough staffing, the inability of great emoloyees to be promoted or move to different positions or even be taken seriously when offering up real suggestions for improvement. Next, employees will need to ask for permission to take a potty break then disciplined if they take too long. The Agency has gone downhill the past 2-3 years and continuing to trend downward. Why isn't anyone doing anything to address ans reverse the trend. The good senior leaders have left or planning to leave and the ones remaining are too afraid of their shadow and are puppets.
Morale, motivation, and production at an all time low. Leadership does not care and the results of them not caring shows up in the survey. Too concerned about politics, making a name for themselves, rather than focusing on excellent service to the public and the many SSA workers that make it happen. Get out of the way and embrace REAL LEADERSHIP! Things can change for the better but the buck stops with leadership, not egos.
When I started they were ranked like 9 and they published being one of the top 10 like mad. At the time I thought it was kind of pathetic since there was only like 15 at the time. Then I realized what a pathetic place it was and left. I think they used to be work life balance forward then the other places caught. They might be dead last next year now that they take things away without giving anything in return to employees.
Management in the component where I work are clueless. The GS-14 department head/branch chief told one of my co-workers recently, "Managers don't have to know how to actually do the work."
Actually, not being able to do the work is a facet of SSA management theory going back at least into the 1980s, when I became a supervisor. 1st line got a lot of management training and were expected to know the work. As you move up, your lower management types know the work, you depend on them. So by GS-14 levels, a regular management job learns the technical area but isn't necessarily any kind of expert. That's what staff is for. Back in the day they also had a tendency to post you in places you had no background in to broaden your horizons, ensure you don't just become a higher graded specialist with management duties and because they really do believe that you can parachute in any old cog in teh wheel manager because it is interchangable work. Just watch how ACs, acting ACs and even DCs get moved.
@10:11 IF your assertions are true, the management theory is idiotic. How can you manage/supervise folks when you don't have the slightest clue how to do the jobs performed by those you supervise. And then the HPI project has proven to be a bad joke and a tremendous waste of taxpayer money.
No where I have worked is it realistic for management to know how to do all the same job functions of everyone else. Delegation is the name of the game if you go into management. You lose your tech skills quickly. However you should be able to jump in on a pinch to assist.
However the trend now is for management to do production. Management is unable to coach, train, develope staff. Numbers is the name of the game. Since management is not protected by collective bargaining they can't do any job well. I left the agency management and work for a non profit. Like night and day. Many managers start out with Noble intentions...some anyway. Many just want the pay and power. Upper management will turn a blind eye to the abuse as long as numbers met.
It's not just a theory it is the whole working world in both government and business. You can't possibly know every aspect of a corporation that hires you from the outside to be a CEO. The US president cannot possibly know every job in the civil service. But at any mgmt level you need to know the people who know how the work is done, and get their advice. I don't know if that always happens.
This is the current biggest problem with the agency
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Saul
@2:24 pm I couldn't disagree more. If management does not know the job functions of the folks they supervise, management cannot then effectively supervise those folks. And how can management properly delegate duties if they have no clue as to how the job of those they supposedly manage/supervise is supposed to be done.
9:22 didn't read very carefully. 1st line supervision is expected to know the work. As you move up, that need is less. Because you have staff under you who do know the work, which is their job, not yours. But 1st level supervision is horrid because you need to know teh job and learn the management side of it as well.
When I was promoted from TE to OS I was chastised for doing TE work. I did the work because of the lack of staff and the need to keep numbers up. The DM was out smoking slot.
Years later as a DM I was expected to do production because of the lack of staff and to keep numbers up. No OS in that office. Couldn't win either way.
Post a Comment