Eleanor Holmes Norton: “I thank my good friend from Virginia. He is doing a public service with his response to the bill that is coming forward…”

“I thank my good friend from Virginia. He is doing a public service with his response to the bill that is coming forward today. Mr. Chairman, you can call this bill whatever you want, but it is not a reform bill. It creates a problem in order to get rid of it. Mr. Chairman, 0.18 percent is all of the employees who get dismissed. The sponsor must want more. Instead of taking that as an indication of the competency and of the excellence of Federal employees--under 1 percent, only 0.18--there must be more to be fired than that. The data shows the opposite. The Federal workforce has consistently been understood to be the best qualified public employees in the country however you look at them, particularly with their education and with their efforts. The first reason the sponsor gives for this bill is that managers ``simply lose track of time and are unaware of the 1-year deadline approaching.'' Whose competency should we be checking? Not the employees, surely. Management should be doing its job. They are paid big Federal bucks precisely for that. But they are paid to do something else. They are paid to observe. They are not observing if they are not even looking for the 1-year deadline wherein they could fire an employee. They are supposed to assist employees during that first year. They are supposed to help correct employees during that first year. What are they doing during that first year losing track of it?…”