Reduction In
Force and Performance Crediting FAQs
Reduction in force is a process designed to handle
the displacement or removal of employees during agency
downsizing or restructuring. An employee's rating of
record is one factor used to determine the employee's
standing in a reduction in force. Some frequently asked
questions about crediting performance in a reduction in
force include:
List of Questions
|
| Can an agency drop
the use of performance in the reduction in force
process entirely? |
| How is performance
credited in a reduction in force? |
| What happens if an
employee does not have three ratings of record in
the last four years? |
| What is a modal
rating and are agencies required to notify the
Office of Personnel Management of their modal
rating and/or the basis used to determine this
rating? |
| What if the modal
rating for 1997 is based on an agencywide
calculation, but the 1998 calculation is made
using a single competitive area? |
| How much does the
additional service credit based on performance
affect the outcome of a reduction in force? |
| Will an employee's
rating of record change if he or she moves to
another agency or organization that uses a
different summary rating pattern? |
| Can the number of
years of additional service credit be awarded
differently for the same reduction in force in
different competitive areas? |
| If all the ratings
of record being credited for a reduction in force
in the competitive area are under a single rating
pattern, does the agency still have the option to
vary credit? |
| If an agency is
running reductions in force in two separate
competitive areas and each area has ratings given
under a different pattern, does this constitute a
mix of patterns under the reduction in force
regulations? |
| If an agency uses
a single rating pattern, but an employee comes
from another agency and has one or more ratings
of record given under a different pattern used in
the former agency, does this constitute a mix of
patterns under the reduction in force
regulations? |
| Are agencies
required to vary the credit from 12/16/20 in
every situation where they have mixed rating
patterns? |
| Why can't agencies
vary credit for ratings of record given prior to
October 1997? |
| If an agency can
establish different amounts of additional service
credit in different reductions in force,
different competitive areas, and even different
summary level patterns, how can they apply the
additional service credit in a uniform and
consistent manner? |
| Can an agency
assign 16 years of additional service credit to a
Pass (Level 3) in Pattern A (two summary levels)
and 12 years credit to a Fully Successful
(Level 3) in Pattern H (five summary levels) in
the same reduction in force? |
| In prior
regulations, assumed ratings for reduction in
force were used. Why did the Office of Personnel
Management reduce the use of assumed ratings? |
| If employees are
on anniversary-date performance cycles instead of
fixed-date cycles, and the agency implements the
performance crediting provisions for an upcoming
reduction in force, does the agency have to wait
until the new performance cycle begins to assign
additional performance credit? |
| May an agency
grant additional service credit for reduction in
force based on employees' receiving quality step
increases? |
| If an agency gives
a summary performance rating when it does its
mid-year review, can that rating be used for
crediting performance in a reduction in force if
it was given before the cut-off date? |
| Can ratings given
by private industry employers be used as
equivalent ratings of record for crediting
performance in a reduction in force? |
| What are
equivalent ratings of record? |
| Can an agency use
a close-out performance rating brought by an
employee transferring in from another agency as a
rating of record? |
?
|
Can
an agency drop the use of performance in the
reduction in force process entirely? |
| No, under current
law, performance ratings must be a factor in the
reduction in force process. Only under a
demonstration project that waives pertinent law
or regulation could an agency drop the use of
performance in a reduction in force. |
 
?
|
How
is performance credited in a reduction in force? |
Additional years of
service credit are added to an employee's length
of service based on the employee's three most
recent ratings of record during the four years
prior to the reduction in force. In a competitive
area where all the ratings of record being
credited were done under a single pattern of
summary levels, the additional service credit is
computed by averaging the three most recent
ratings of record given in the previous four
years using the following values:
- 20 years of service for each Level 5 (Outstanding
or equivalent rating);
- 16 years of service for each Level 4; and
- 12 years of service for each Level 3 (Fully
Successful or equivalent rating).
In an agency where employees in a competitive
area have ratings of record being credited for
reduction in force that were done under more than
one pattern of summary levels, the agency can
establish the values for the summary levels
(within 12 to 20 years) so that performance
crediting will be as fair and equitable as
possible. Within a competitive area, the agency
must use the same number of years additional
retention service credit for all ratings of
record with the same summary level in the same
pattern of summary levels.
|
?
|
What
happens if an employee does not have three
ratings of record in the last four years? |
| If an employee has
fewer than three ratings of record during the
last four years, the actual rating(s) of record
available would serve as the sole basis of the
employee's credit (no assumed ratings would be
used). Consequently, if an employee has received
only two actual ratings of record during this
period, the value assigned to each rating would
be added together and divided by two to determine
the amount of additional retention service
credit. If an employee has only one actual rating
of record, the value assigned to that rating
would be used. If, however, the employee has no
ratings of record during the last four years, the
modal rating for the appraisal program that
covers the employee's position of record at the
time of the reduction in force is used to grant
performance credit. |
?
|
What
is a modal rating and are agencies required to
notify the Office of Personnel Management of
their modal rating and/or the basis used to
determine this rating? |
| The modal rating is
the summary level within a single pattern given
most often as the latest rating of record to the
employees in a specified group that is no smaller
than the competitive area and no larger than the
agency undergoing a reduction in force. It is
important that the employees undergoing a
reduction in force understand the basis used to
determine the modal rating, but there is no
requirement to notify the Office of Personnel
Management of this information. |
?
|
What
if the modal rating for 1997 is based on an
agencywide calculation, but the 1998 calculation
is made using a single competitive area? |
| The agency will have
to determine the modal rating based on the rating
of record information it has available. If
ratings of record are aggregated only at the
agency level, that is what the agency will have
to use. It might be possible for them to adapt
their systems to do smaller aggregations in the
future. The Office of Personnel Management
recommends that the modal rating which is based
on the most recent ratings of record, be
tabulated for the specific competitive area
undergoing a reduction in force whenever
possible, and that larger aggregations of agency
population be used only when the rating of record
information is not available for the specific
competitive area itself. |
?
|
How
much does the additional service credit based on
performance affect the outcome of a reduction in
force? |
| The possible effect
of performance-based additional service credit is
most likely to appear in the second round of the
reduction in force process, when employees
exercise their bump (into positions held by
employees in lower tenure groups for which they
meet the basic qualification standard) and
retreat (to previously held positions) rights.
Even at this stage, experience suggests that the
performance-based additional service credit often
has no impact on the actual final result of the
reduction in force. |
?
|
Will
an employee's rating of record change if he or
she moves to another agency or organization that
uses a different summary rating pattern? |
| No. A rating of
record does not change when an employee moves to
another agency or organization, whether or not
they use a different summary pattern. However,
there is no predetermined value associated with a
specific rating of record for reduction in force
purposes if there is a mix of rating patterns
within the competitive area. Therefore, an
employee will not know how many years of
additional service credit will be given for a
specific rating of record until an agency is
getting ready to run a reduction in force,
determines whether a mix of patterns exists, and,
if one does, decides how service credit will be
assigned. To help employees understand the
crediting for performance within a particular
competitive area, agencies should communicate
this information as soon as practicable after
they make the necessary decisions. |
?
|
Can
the number of years of additional service credit
be awarded differently for the same reduction in
force in different competitive areas? |
| Yes. Each
competitive area must be looked at individually
to analyze what the situation is regarding the
ratings of record being credited. For example, an
agency needs to determine whether a mix of rating
patterns exists, what the combination of rating
patterns used looks like, and the relative
numbers of employees rated under each pattern.
Only then can the agency make an appropriate
determination of how to assign years of
additional service credit, based on the specific
situation found. |
?
|
If
all the ratings of record being credited for a
reduction in force in the competitive area are
under a single rating pattern, does the agency
still have the option to vary credit? |
| No, the agency may
only vary credit if the competitive area includes
employees with ratings of record being credited
for this reduction in force that were received
under more than one summary level pattern. If all
ratings being credited were given under a single
pattern, the agency must use the 12/16/20 system
regardless of the pattern used. |
?
|
If
an agency is running reductions in force in two
separate competitive areas and each area has
ratings given under a different pattern, does
this constitute a mix of patterns under the
reduction in force regulations? |
| No, there is no
comparison across competitive areas to determine
if a mix of patterns exists. Only if there is a
mix of patterns within a single competitive area
can an agency vary credit. |
?
|
If
an agency uses a single rating pattern, but an
employee comes from another agency and has one or
more ratings of record given under a different
pattern used in the former agency, does this
constitute a mix of patterns under the reduction
in force regulations? |
| Yes. Even if an
agency uses a single summary level pattern, if
there is any employee with one or more ratings of
record being credited in the reduction in force
that were given under a different summary level
pattern, the agency has a mix of patterns. |
?
|
Are
agencies required to vary the credit from
12/16/20 in every situation where they have mixed
rating patterns? |
| The regulations
require that agencies look at the situation and
make a determination on what, if anything, should
be done regarding the credit assigned for ratings
of record when there is a mix of rating patterns
among the ratings of record being credited for
reduction in force. If the agency decides that
the best course of action is to still use the
12/16/20 assignment of credit, they may do so. |
?
|
Why
can't agencies vary credit for ratings of record
given prior to October 1997? |
| The Office of
Personnel Management felt that changing the
credit retroactively would be very difficult for
agencies to administer and for employees to
accept. A phased-in transition was preferable to
give employees, managers, personnelists, and
unions an opportunity to communicate, understand,
and implement the regulations. |
?
|
If
an agency can establish different amounts of
additional service credit in different reductions
in force, different competitive areas, and even
different summary level patterns, how can they
apply the additional service credit in a uniform
and consistent manner? |
| Once an agency
determines how it will assign the amounts of
additional service credit based on performance,
everyone who has ratings of record with the same
summary level within the same pattern in the same
competitive area will get the same amount of
additional service credit. This is a uniform and
consistent application of service credit for
everyone who meets the specified criteria (i.e.,
level, pattern, and competitive area). |
?
|
Can
an agency assign 16 years of additional service
credit to a Pass (Level 3) in Pattern A (two
summary levels) and 12 years credit to a Fully
Successful (Level 3) in
Pattern H (five summary levels) in the same
reduction in force? |
| Yes. Based on its
analysis of the competitive area(s) and its
determination of what would minimize severely
advantaging or disadvantaging employees, an
agency can assign different values to the same
summary level (Level 3) in different patterns (A
and H) in the same reduction in force, and even
within the same competitive area. |
?
|
In
prior regulations, assumed ratings for reduction
in force were used. Why did the Office of
Personnel Management reduce the use of assumed
ratings? |
| The number of
assumed ratings varies widely among agencies,
among competitive areas within an agency, and
even from reduction in force to reduction in
force in the same competitive area. Many factors
affect the number of assumed ratings needed,
including the type of work force, the
implementation of performance management
programs, and many other factors. The Office of
Personnel Management has found, for example, a
competitive area where 5% of employees undergoing
a reduction in force had 3 assumed ratings and
36% had 2 assumed ratings; so, the use of assumed
ratings potentially can affect quite a number of
employees. |
?
|
If
employees are on anniversary-date performance
cycles instead of fixed-date cycles, and the
agency implements the performance crediting
provisions for an upcoming reduction in force,
does the agency have to wait until the new
performance cycle begins to assign additional
performance credit? |
| No. Implementation
of the crediting provisions is not tied to
performance cycle dates. Agencies have some
flexibility regarding when they implement the
provisions for crediting performance; however,
all agencies must implement these provisions by
October 1, 1998. Once the provisions have been
implemented, they can be applied only to ratings
of record put on record (i.e., given to the
employee with all appropriate reviews and
signatures and available to the office
responsible for establishing retention registers)
on or after October 1, 1997. Many agencies
establish a cut-off date after which no new
ratings of record will be put on record for use
in a specific reduction in force. Using a cut-off
date could be particularly helpful when an agency
uses anniversary-date cycles, since there is no
other single, clear-cut date available to signify
when the last creditable appraisal period ended.
However, even for agencies that choose not to
establish a cut-off date, there is no requirement
for an agency to wait beyond the implementation
date of the regulations (e.g., for a new
appraisal cycle) to implement and/or apply the
new crediting provisions. |
?
|
May
an agency grant additional service credit for
reduction in force based on employees' receiving
quality step increases? |
| No. The only basis
for granting additional service credit for
reduction in force is a rating of record as
specified at section 351.504(a) of title 5, Code
of Federal Regulations. |
?
|
If
an agency gives a summary performance rating when
it does its mid-year review, can that rating be
used for crediting performance in a reduction in
force if it was given before the cut-off date? |
| No. Only ratings of
record can be used as the basis for assigning
additional service credit during a reduction in
force. Performance ratings are used to capture
performance information for many different kinds
of situations, including mid-year or quarterly
reviews, details, employee transfers, etc., and
are factored into the employee's rating of record
at the end of the appraisal period, but they do
not constitute ratings of record themselves. The
reduction in force regulations were written
specifically to minimize confusion over which
ratings can be used for reduction in force
purposes by limiting the crediting of years of
additional service to ratings of record only. |
?
|
Can
ratings given by private industry employers be
used as equivalent ratings of record for
crediting performance in a reduction in force? |
| No. Only ratings
given by Federal Government entities can be used
and only when they meet the requirements for
equivalent ratings of record as specified in the
performance management regulations. |
?
|
What
are equivalent ratings of record? |
| There are agencies
and organizations within the Federal Government
that are not covered by the performance appraisal
provisions in the law and regulations. However,
many of them have adopted these procedures or
developed their own procedures to evaluate the
performance of their employees. The previous
regulations on reduction in force restricted the
application of additional service credit based on
performance to those ratings of record given
under the provisions of the appraisal law and
regulations. When employees moved between
agencies and organizations that are and are not
subject to the appraisal law and regulations,
they lost credit for Federal performance. To help
alleviate this problem, the regulations have been
changed to give agencies the basic guidelines by
which they can review the performance evaluations
employees bring with them from other Federal
organizations and determine whether they qualify
as equivalent ratings of record that can then be
used as the basis for assigning additional
service credit in a reduction in force.
|
?
|
Can
an agency use a close-out performance rating
brought by an employee transferring in from
another agency as a rating of record? |
| No. Under the new
regulatory definition, the rating of record is:
the performance rating done at the end of the
appraisal period that reflects performance over
the entire period; or the more current rating of
record required by regulation at section
531.404(a)(1) of title 5, Code of Federal
Regulations, to support a within-grade pay
decision. The regulations do not provide for
agencies to specify other circumstances for
giving a rating of record. |
|
