• on Sep 6th, 2010 in Labor | 99 comments
    What’s the best way to encourage good performance? Employers have always struggled with this question. One answer is to pay employees based on how well they perform their jobs. Many private sector employers have adopted pay-for-performance (PFP) programs, and several federal agencies have also experimented with PFP. Some federal PFP programs have operated successfully for many years; others have been more controversial. Last year, Congress terminated a PFP program at the Defense Department. Employees complained that the program was arbitrary and lacked transparency. Clearly, designing a successful PFP program is not always easy. The Postal Service adopted an annual PFP program in 2003. PFP is the only source of annual pay adjustments for Postal Service non-bargaining employees. Employees and their managers review targets and expectations at the beginning of the year. During the year, managers provide feedback to employees through mid-year performance reviews. Then, at the end of the year, employees receive a rating. For most employees, the rating is based on a combination of their individual accomplishments and how well certain targets have been met by the unit, district, area, or the Postal Service as a whole. The employee’s position determines the choice of targets included. For example, the rating for a postmaster of a small Post Office would be based on factors such as how well Post Offices in his or her group met revenue and expense targets and how well the district met delivery performance goals. The Postal Service’s PFP program has won awards and been cited by other organizations as a model to emulate, but there have been some criticisms. Some of the factors on which an employee is evaluated may be outside the employee’s immediate control. Given the Postal Service’s current financial condition and the drop in mail volume, it can be difficult for even high-performing employees to receive an increase. What do you think? What makes for a good system of rewarding performance? This topic is hosted by the OIG’s Risk Analysis Research Center (RARC). Please remember we do not post comments that contain vulgar language or include the names of individuals. See our Comment Policy for further information.
  • on Aug 30th, 2010 in Labor | 38 comments
    The Postal Service processes payroll for more than 500,000 employees. To handle this monumental task, time and attendance information is gathered through the Time and Attendance Collection System (TACS). TACS then transmits the payroll data to the mainframe run by the Information Technology and Accounting Service Center (ASC) in Eagan, MN, for payment processing. Recent news stories have identified a few instances where Postal Service employees have had time deleted from electronic time card records. There have also been other time and attendance instances where managers inaccurately calculated employee work hours for out–of-schedule work. If you are a Postal Service employee and are experiencing similar problems or any other time and attendance issues at your work place, we would like to hear from you. Please take our brief survey or provide comments below. This topic is hosted by the OIG's Human Resources and Security audit team.
  • on Aug 23rd, 2010 in Labor | 27 comments
    To encourage employees to contribute constructive ideas to enhance customer satisfaction, generate revenue, increase productivity, and improve competitiveness, the Postal Service offers the web-based eIDEAS program. Postal employees can submit ideas online or at a mail processing plant kiosk. The Office of Inspector General recently issued a management advisory report titled eIDEAS Timeliness and Transparency. The audit’s objective was to identify opportunities for the Postal Service to enhance the timeliness of the eIDEAS process and transparency of the resulting management actions. We found that eIDEAS reviews took far too long and management’s resulting actions were not transparent. Our survey of employees revealed that slow evaluations, poor management response, and lack of program transparency inhibited the program’s success. If you are a postal employee or a stakeholder, do you believe you have a way for your suggestions to be heard? Is eIDEAS the best way for employees to communicate their ideas? Whether you are a postal employee or not, do you believe there is a better way to encourage and gather employee input? If so, let us know in the comments section below. This topic is hosted by the OIG's Audit Engineering and Facilities team.


This site provides a forum to discuss different aspects of the United States Postal Service and how it can be improved. We encourage you to share your comments, ideas, and concerns.

This is a moderated site—we will review all comments before posting them. We expect that participants will treat each other with respect. We will not post comments that contain vulgar language, personal attacks of any kind, or offensive terms that target specific individuals or groups. We will not post comments that are clearly off-topic or that promote services or products. Comments that make unsupported accusations will also not be posted.

We ask that reporters send questions to the USPS OIG Media Office through their normal channels and refrain from submitting questions here as comments. We will not post questions from reporters.

We recognize that the Web is a 24/7 medium, and your comments are welcome at any time. Given the need to manage Federal resources effectively, however, we will review comments and post them from 9:00 a.m—5:00 p.m Eastern Time, Monday through Friday. We will read and post comments submitted after hours, on weekends, or on holidays as early as possible the next business day.

To protect your own privacy, and the privacy of others, please do not include personal information or personally identifiable information such as names, addresses, phone numbers or e-mail addresses in the body of your comment.

Except when specifically noted, any views or opinions expressed on this forum (or any other forums available via an RSS feed) are those of the individual bloggers. The views and posted comments do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Postal Service Office of Inspector General, or the Federal government.

Thank you for taking the time to read this comment policy and disclaimer. We plan to blog weekly on as many emerging new media topics as possible. We encourage your participation in our discussion and look forward to an active exchange of ideas.