OPM’s new acting director defends federal telework regulations that conflict with Schedule F

On Wednesday, new acting director of the Office of Personnel Management, Rob Shriver, once again defended the Biden administration’s approach to telework and other federal workforce policies to Republicans who at times seemed uninterested in precisely what they have been begging officials for over the past few years: new data.

Over the past year, at various hearings involving representatives of OPM or the Office of Management and Budget, House Republicans ridiculed executive branch leaders for “not knowing” how many federal employees were working remotely at any given time and suggested they would be willing to support the Biden administration’s proposed telework and remote work policy, provided the government provides public data on its use and impact on productivity.

“At the beginning of the COVID pandemic, mass telework of federal employees was a legitimate necessity, but that necessity ceased long ago,” House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman Jeff Comer, R-Ky., said last month. “Yet the Biden administration is continuing mass telework with the goal of making it a permanent part of federal work life. How do we know this is in society’s best interest? The only data we’ve seen on this is a survey of federal workers themselves, and they think it’s doing a great job.”

While the path to more up-to-date and readily available data on the federal workforce’s use of telework remains elusive – OPM is only now implementing telework functionality in its Enterprise Human Resource Integration platform – a recent Congressional Budget Office report comparing federal workers’ “total compensation” vs. their private sector counterparts included new information: By comparing federal and private sector workers’ responses to the U.S. Census Bureau’s annual American Community Survey, the watchdog agency found that by the end of 2022, 25% of private sector workers “usually” worked from home, compared to 22% of federal workers.

This statement seemed to astonish legislators.

“Did you say federal workers returned to work faster than those in the private sector?” asked Rep. Glenn Grothman, R-Wisc.

“It’s not what I believe; it’s a CBO report and I’m happy to share it with you,” Shriver said. “It is also worth noting that 54% of federal employees do not telework at all.”

“So you are saying that two years after the pandemic ended, more federal employees were working compared to non-federal employees?” Grothman said.

– You mean in the office? Shriver asked.

“I mean the whole thing,” Grothman said. “(Let’s say) the pandemic ended on December 31, 2022. Which workplace had a higher percentage of people? And who had the higher work percentage, period?

“So federal employees have been working during the pandemic,” Shriver said. “They were working at the maximum level of telework, with the exception of more than 50 percent who had to report to the labor market every day. I’m referring to the recent CBO study that…

“Well, I personally don’t know anyone who isn’t working in December 2022.” Grothman said. “I do not know anyone like that”.

Rep. William Timmons, R-S.C., pressed Shriver on how the administration knows telework is helping its efforts to improve service delivery and productivity.

“What worries me most is that I haven’t seen any data yet that shows the benefits of telework,” he said. “Do you have any evidence that this is effective for in-person work?”

“That’s the key question, right? Are we ensuring that the working arrangements we have in place are leading us to successfully accomplish the mission?” Shriver said. “I am proud of OPM’s achievements in the telework workforce, whether it is policy achievements or progress in our core operations. We’re not there yet, and we need a partnership with Congress to get where we need to be. . . but when I see inventory dropping from 35,000 two years ago to 16,000 for pension claims, average claim processing time dropping from 87 days to 61 days, and wait times in our call center dropping by almost 50%, these are indicators , which show that he is “heading in the right direction.”

“(The private sector) has real-time metrics to evaluate work product, but instead it uses results rather than actual metrics,” Timmons said. “You can’t track employee data to see what they’re achieving, or can it be done in the same way as the private sector?”

“Yes,” Shriver said. “It depends on the job, but as an example, the organizational metrics I mentioned translate into individual performance metrics. That’s why our legal administration specialists deal with incoming pension claims. They have performance standards against which their productivity is measured, and their increased productivity leads to faster turnaround times and lower inventory backlogs.”

“Are you reducing costs associated with physical space as a significant number of employees work remotely?” Timmons asked.

“We have vacated some leased space across the country, although we still have a lot of work to do there to reach a new, stable condition,” Shriver said.

Shriver was repeatedly asked about OPM’s recent finalization of regulations aimed at making it more difficult for a future Republican administration to restore Schedule F, a controversial policy that would strip tens of thousands of federal employees in “policy-related” positions of civil service protections, effectively making them at-will employees. Shriver warned that if it is resumed, it could create a chilling effect among experts in the government against giving unvarnished advice to political leaders and reduce public confidence in the agency.

“It is extremely important for Americans to have trust and confidence that the decisions, information and data presented are made by experts in the field,” Shriver said. “Especially when we’re talking about risks to life and property, it’s important that we make sure the American public understands that the information they receive comes from experts.”

Republicans have sought to highlight recent actions organized by some federal employees to protest U.S. support for Israel during its bombing and invasion of Gaza as a reason to support Schedule F.

“They kind of kept their job against this administration for political reasons, and I think I would say it would be bad for any administration, Republican or Democrat, to find someone who thinks they’re hidden under the manhole Act to provide this kind of political content ” said Rep. Pete Sessions of Texas. “That’s what the Hatch Act was created for. “It was directly aimed at the policies of the United States that this administration seeks to support and that are important to the country.”

The Hatch Act prohibits federal employees from making certain speeches related to elections and campaigns, usually involving candidates or political parties. It does not prohibit federal employees from speaking on political topics, and in fact specifically protects this type of speech.

“(Hatch Act cases) are fact-based findings, and years of precedent determine how the Hatch Act is applied,” Shriver said.