The Merit System Analysis
The word Merit can be defined as "the state or quality of being deserving or worthy of, to earn by service, (Merriam-Webster Dictionary)." Before you can understand the magnitude of the merit system, you have to know systems in which the merit system extended from and how they came about. If looking at the merit system now you would be able to read and see that, the Merit system is designed to provide a fair and equitable personnel management system, which recruits, develop and classify employees. It also assures the fair treatment of employees and applicants within personnel. Under the merit system, personnel decisions are based on specified standards, qualifications, and performance (Cayer 44). Merit hiring is an attempt to end the practice
…show more content…
of hiring political friends and loyalists for jobs as a reward for their political service, in which this practice is related to a system known as patronage, which was embraced by George Washington and other political figures today as well. Patronage is the power of a government official or leader to make appointments and offer favors. Once in office, a politician can use patronage to build a loyal following. Though practiced at all levels of government, patronage is most often associated with a lot of big cities or large states. Politicians always criticize the civil service system, saying they much prefer the patronage structure where they have real control and real power over the people who work for them. The spoils system involves political activity by public employees in support of their party and the employees' removal from office if their party loses the election. The spoils system was the practice of rewarding supporters with government jobs. Often the jobs were given base on personal friendship and didn't take into account any actual merit or ability to perform the job.
In a historical overview of performance based government or personnel systems you could date back as far as our nations first President.
It was George Washington and his men of courage that really started this performance based government system in my mind. During President Washington's time in office, it was very common for the men who displayed excellence on the battlefield to be granted high-ranking government positions. This was at a time in our country when the war and battle heroes were placed on pedestals, in addition these men were the educated men who led us into battle. So in the public mind, George Washington and his men of courage were ideal for these positions based on their performance in battle. This system was brought out in the movie, "The Patriot", with Mel Gibson being a hero in battle, but was also looked at as a political figure with a voice in the senate. Then the performance-based government took a wide turn for change with the system that President Andrew Jackson introduced called the spoils system. "To the victor goes, the spoils." This was the type of government that was favored by Jackson and typically meant that if you support my political affiliation and I am victorious, at that point you will be taken care of in return. To an extent, I agree with taking care of people who support you along the way, however I disagree with placing political supporters in very important government, political, and partisan positions. So in the early years of our nations government, we were ran by presidency that favored performance based style of government and then by one that necessarily did not favor a performance based government. We live in an era today that uses campaigns, debates, commercials, primaries and elections to inform you of the individual, who is seeking an office and what party he or she is represent. Once this person is in office there are certain things that he or she has the power to do and not to do. Congress passed the
Civil Service Act of 1883 also known as the Pendleton Act, which established the first Civil Service Commission to guard against patronage appointments. There have been other civil service laws, which has followed to safeguard or act as a "watchdog", against and eliminate partisan political preferences. The government today is more structured that the government of our early presidents. These changes from George Washington to Bush didn't happen overnight, but it came through trial and error period that has got us to where we are currently today. Some would still say we still live in a performance-based government, because of the policies and procedures that are in place to monitor the creation and execution of programs, hiring and firing of state employees. Some would say we don't live in a performance-based government now, because with the new leadership comes the cutting of previously approved positions and creation of positions and programs that mirror the attitude of the new person I power. These systems still exist in our nations government and are very evident depending upon which state or city you're in. In the late 1960's and early and 70's there were social and technological changes which tested the existence of the merit system challenges which forced conscientious personnel commissioners and administrators to question traditional merit principles and practices. The merit system principles are the public's expectations of a system that is efficient, effective, fair, open to all, free from political interference, and staffed by honest, competent, and dedicated employees. This system is guided by 9 principles, which are:
1. Recruit qualified individuals from all segments of society and select and advance employees on the basis of merit after fair and open competition, which assures that all receive equal opportunity.
2. Treat employees and applicants fairly and equitably, without regard to political affiliation, race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, or handicapping condition, and with proper regard for their privacy and constitutional rights.
3. Provide equal pay for equal work and recognize excellent performance.
4. Maintain high standards of integrity, conduct, and concern for the public interest.
5. Manage employees efficiently and effectively.
6. Retain and separate employees on the basis of their performance.
7. Educate and train employees when it will result in better organizational or individual performance.
8. Protect employees from arbitrary action, personal favoritism, or coercion for partisan political purposes.
9. Protect employees against reprisal for the lawful disclosure of information in "whistleblower" situations (i.e., protecting people who report things like illegal and/or wasteful activities). One disputed area concerns testing and other hiring practices. Some sectors of the public have voiced concern that written examinations and other devices used by employers to screen applicants are often invalid and unfair, and may discriminate against certain minority groups. These are the principles of the merit system that personnel commissions have overall responsibility for administering. With Mayor Daley being head of Chicago, he has adopted a new personnel code, in which every one under his control will follow. Instead of a civil service commission which had been manipulated by politicians over the years, the city now has a personnel director, which means testing procedures which always seemed to wind up heavily weighted toward political favorites have been abandoned, also hiring temporary employees to dodge around the merit system and even city employees can't be solicited for political contributions. "Illinois wasn't the birthplace of political patronage, but it was suppose to be the it's final resting place (Dizon Nicole)." Recently a 555-page list that former Illinois Governor Ryan campaign and his term in office indicated the spoils system, which has continued in Illinois. Within this list were alleged favors, including state jobs, raises, promotions, contracts and appointments. In the case, Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois, the court ruled that government employers generally could not base hiring, transfer and promotion decisions on someone's party affiliation. But it's believed that Illinois state police officers got their jobs not through merit, but through fitness, tests, but by being part precinct captains. Not only Chicago is changing it's personnel system, but Illinois as a state re-developing its whole personnel system to get stem away from the systems of the past, this will give everyone an equal opportunity to have a position. Some of the independent city councilmen suspect the Mayor is pulling a fast one and there are enough loopholes in this system to keep the system in past going. Under the Jacksonian era there was no merit system, then the National Civil Service League that felt there should be a system not dominated by patronage. Dick Simpson, one of the council independents and also a professor of political science at the University of Illinois Chicago Circle Campus, points out that only 1.7 percent of the 45,000 city employees are Latin and only 18 percent are women. " Not only that, he says, "but women are blocked from a whole series of position; for example, there isn't one a single woman building inspector (Cleveland- Chicago Tribune)." Illinois has faced several problems with discrimination and racism especially in its police department hiring and promotion. "No longer could incumbent or challengers rely on the promise of patronage to govern the city. Indeed, it is because merit systems could formally equilibrate local politics that city politicians sought the implement them (Anirudh V. S. Ruhil 167-168)."
Within the state of Kentucky a system of hiring and promoting employees is based upon their qualifications form a position and determined usually by the results of a written examination. The intention is to hire some one who is well qualified for the position, regardless of race, or any other discriminatory factors. " On June 1 Ron McCloud, a friend of former Gov. Paul Patton and former Democratic Party Chairman, left his politically appointed job as a director in the state Revenue Cabinet to accept an appointment to a lower paying job in the same cabinet under the state government's civil-service program, which is the merit system. He did so for job security, because when Ernie Fletcher will have the power to fire Paul Patton's political appointees, but he cannot fire merit system worker without specific legal cause such as misconduct. There's a six month probationary period before anyone gains the status and job security of the merit system. Doug Wylie, a 20 year Merit System employee who has been passed over in seeking promotion during the past year, and recently lost out on another job opportunity states, " In most cases the selection to fill the higher-level Merit System jobs are not based on merit, it's based on who you know. The Merit System Law requires with some exceptions, any hiring be based on results of competitive examination, and applicants for most jobs must take a long multiple-choice test. When a state agency decides to fill a job, it can hire only applicants who have scored within the top five scores on that test, but for positions there are exceptions. Presently Governor Ernie Fletcher is starting fill all non-merit positions, within Kentucky. "Merit positions make up approximately 80% of all state jobs in Kentucky (Lexington Herald 2003)." As authorized under KRS 18A, the State of Kentucky uses an open, continuous competitive register system to fill its vacant merit positions (Officer Personnel Management)." Fletcher has the authority to fill 900 management positions outside the state's merit system, which guarantees jobs from one administration to the next. People in non-merit positions serve at the will of the governor. The governor has been using a three-step interview process, plus background checks. He said hiring decisions are based on ability and integrity, not on political background and support. "We want to transcend politics to the point that we are not going to put people in positions, regardless of political pressure, that are not capable and who do not reflect the values we think are extremely important," Fletcher said, democrats have the same opportunity for a job as Republicans, the governor said. "In response to the serious concerns of the patronage system merit system, reformers are focusing on the advantages of being able to analyze and classify positions and provide greater equity throughout the organization (Nalbandian p.111)." Current employees receive protection from the merit system and in theory receive fair promotion, present a very awkward problem for human resource managers who are trying to balance diversity and demographics of the personnel system.
With an increased awareness of diversity as a part of equity in employment, the merit system is facing a growing challenge of how to balance knowledge, skills, and abilities with diversity (Nalbandian 6). "The challenges facing the Merit System Protection Board and the Office of Personal Management are becoming significant as serious social questions are developing around affirmative action and other initiatives (Merit Systems Protection Board)." Since the Office of Personal Management is responsible for making sure the values of the merit system have fair representation in policy then, in practice it is important that the office maintain the highest standards. With continuing debate about the merit system as a process and the goal-oriented values driving it to produce very specific outcomes, it is only a matter of time before very serious issues present themselves if the process produces results. "The Merit System Protection Board is working to balance the original protection of the ideals of the merit system with the current mission of promoting a values based merit system. It even created the new office of Merit Systems Oversight and Effectiveness work to provide extended protection and oversight of the values that represent the merit system (Personnel Management July 1998)." With continuing debate about the merit system as a process and the goal-oriented values driving it to produce very specific outcomes, it is only a matter of time before very serious issues present themselves if the process produces results. . The Merit System Protection Board is working to provide equal opportunity and equality within the merit system while balancing the bureaucratic value of efficiency. A transition from a patronage system to merit system came about from legislation. Efficiency, competence, and responsiveness are the values currently promoted by the merit system and they define the traditional merit systems. The Merit System in my opinion is just a front for the patronage and spoils systems, which still exist in today's personnel system. As much as the Merit System Protection Board tries implementing the policies and procedures for the Merit System, it's all in whom you know to be able to get higher-level state positions. It's hard to stem away from patronage and spoils, because it's part of the foundation of our country, and with early Presidents such as Jackson and Washington who're two great political figures in our country implemented these systems, which are still present. You could look even at Kentucky State University, with our new President she's going to implement her new system of things and with her will be her new appointees and a lot of administrative positions around the university will be replaced or some people will retire, transfer or demote themselves to a lower position. Kentucky and Illinois have very similar personnel systems, with Kentucky being a Commonwealth, vacancies in state positions I believe is all in who you know just as it is with Illinois. Even though Illinois is trying to get away from the traditional systems of the past, it's all in who you know. Mayor Daley and Governor Ryan are trying to break away and from those traditional systems and so is Governor Flethcher here, but as much as they try to embrace the Merit System, the closer the more they revert back to the traditional systems. The future of the Merit System will be determined by the values of efficiency, quality, equality and what prominent political figure is in office.
of hiring political friends and loyalists for jobs as a reward for their political service, in which this practice is related to a system known as patronage, which was embraced by George Washington and other political figures today as well. Patronage is the power of a government official or leader to make appointments and offer favors. Once in office, a politician can use patronage to build a loyal following. Though practiced at all levels of government, patronage is most often associated with a lot of big cities or large states. Politicians always criticize the civil service system, saying they much prefer the patronage structure where they have real control and real power over the people who work for them. The spoils system involves political activity by public employees in support of their party and the employees' removal from office if their party loses the election. The spoils system was the practice of rewarding supporters with government jobs. Often the jobs were given base on personal friendship and didn't take into account any actual merit or ability to perform the job.
In a historical overview of performance based government or personnel systems you could date back as far as our nations first President.
It was George Washington and his men of courage that really started this performance based government system in my mind. During President Washington's time in office, it was very common for the men who displayed excellence on the battlefield to be granted high-ranking government positions. This was at a time in our country when the war and battle heroes were placed on pedestals, in addition these men were the educated men who led us into battle. So in the public mind, George Washington and his men of courage were ideal for these positions based on their performance in battle. This system was brought out in the movie, "The Patriot", with Mel Gibson being a hero in battle, but was also looked at as a political figure with a voice in the senate. Then the performance-based government took a wide turn for change with the system that President Andrew Jackson introduced called the spoils system. "To the victor goes, the spoils." This was the type of government that was favored by Jackson and typically meant that if you support my political affiliation and I am victorious, at that point you will be taken care of in return. To an extent, I agree with taking care of people who support you along the way, however I disagree with placing political supporters in very important government, political, and partisan positions. So in the early years of our nations government, we were ran by presidency that favored performance based style of government and then by one that necessarily did not favor a performance based government. We live in an era today that uses campaigns, debates, commercials, primaries and elections to inform you of the individual, who is seeking an office and what party he or she is represent. Once this person is in office there are certain things that he or she has the power to do and not to do. Congress passed the
Civil Service Act of 1883 also known as the Pendleton Act, which established the first Civil Service Commission to guard against patronage appointments. There have been other civil service laws, which has followed to safeguard or act as a "watchdog", against and eliminate partisan political preferences. The government today is more structured that the government of our early presidents. These changes from George Washington to Bush didn't happen overnight, but it came through trial and error period that has got us to where we are currently today. Some would still say we still live in a performance-based government, because of the policies and procedures that are in place to monitor the creation and execution of programs, hiring and firing of state employees. Some would say we don't live in a performance-based government now, because with the new leadership comes the cutting of previously approved positions and creation of positions and programs that mirror the attitude of the new person I power. These systems still exist in our nations government and are very evident depending upon which state or city you're in. In the late 1960's and early and 70's there were social and technological changes which tested the existence of the merit system challenges which forced conscientious personnel commissioners and administrators to question traditional merit principles and practices. The merit system principles are the public's expectations of a system that is efficient, effective, fair, open to all, free from political interference, and staffed by honest, competent, and dedicated employees. This system is guided by 9 principles, which are:
1. Recruit qualified individuals from all segments of society and select and advance employees on the basis of merit after fair and open competition, which assures that all receive equal opportunity.
2. Treat employees and applicants fairly and equitably, without regard to political affiliation, race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, or handicapping condition, and with proper regard for their privacy and constitutional rights.
3. Provide equal pay for equal work and recognize excellent performance.
4. Maintain high standards of integrity, conduct, and concern for the public interest.
5. Manage employees efficiently and effectively.
6. Retain and separate employees on the basis of their performance.
7. Educate and train employees when it will result in better organizational or individual performance.
8. Protect employees from arbitrary action, personal favoritism, or coercion for partisan political purposes.
9. Protect employees against reprisal for the lawful disclosure of information in "whistleblower" situations (i.e., protecting people who report things like illegal and/or wasteful activities). One disputed area concerns testing and other hiring practices. Some sectors of the public have voiced concern that written examinations and other devices used by employers to screen applicants are often invalid and unfair, and may discriminate against certain minority groups. These are the principles of the merit system that personnel commissions have overall responsibility for administering. With Mayor Daley being head of Chicago, he has adopted a new personnel code, in which every one under his control will follow. Instead of a civil service commission which had been manipulated by politicians over the years, the city now has a personnel director, which means testing procedures which always seemed to wind up heavily weighted toward political favorites have been abandoned, also hiring temporary employees to dodge around the merit system and even city employees can't be solicited for political contributions. "Illinois wasn't the birthplace of political patronage, but it was suppose to be the it's final resting place (Dizon Nicole)." Recently a 555-page list that former Illinois Governor Ryan campaign and his term in office indicated the spoils system, which has continued in Illinois. Within this list were alleged favors, including state jobs, raises, promotions, contracts and appointments. In the case, Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois, the court ruled that government employers generally could not base hiring, transfer and promotion decisions on someone's party affiliation. But it's believed that Illinois state police officers got their jobs not through merit, but through fitness, tests, but by being part precinct captains. Not only Chicago is changing it's personnel system, but Illinois as a state re-developing its whole personnel system to get stem away from the systems of the past, this will give everyone an equal opportunity to have a position. Some of the independent city councilmen suspect the Mayor is pulling a fast one and there are enough loopholes in this system to keep the system in past going. Under the Jacksonian era there was no merit system, then the National Civil Service League that felt there should be a system not dominated by patronage. Dick Simpson, one of the council independents and also a professor of political science at the University of Illinois Chicago Circle Campus, points out that only 1.7 percent of the 45,000 city employees are Latin and only 18 percent are women. " Not only that, he says, "but women are blocked from a whole series of position; for example, there isn't one a single woman building inspector (Cleveland- Chicago Tribune)." Illinois has faced several problems with discrimination and racism especially in its police department hiring and promotion. "No longer could incumbent or challengers rely on the promise of patronage to govern the city. Indeed, it is because merit systems could formally equilibrate local politics that city politicians sought the implement them (Anirudh V. S. Ruhil 167-168)."
Within the state of Kentucky a system of hiring and promoting employees is based upon their qualifications form a position and determined usually by the results of a written examination. The intention is to hire some one who is well qualified for the position, regardless of race, or any other discriminatory factors. " On June 1 Ron McCloud, a friend of former Gov. Paul Patton and former Democratic Party Chairman, left his politically appointed job as a director in the state Revenue Cabinet to accept an appointment to a lower paying job in the same cabinet under the state government's civil-service program, which is the merit system. He did so for job security, because when Ernie Fletcher will have the power to fire Paul Patton's political appointees, but he cannot fire merit system worker without specific legal cause such as misconduct. There's a six month probationary period before anyone gains the status and job security of the merit system. Doug Wylie, a 20 year Merit System employee who has been passed over in seeking promotion during the past year, and recently lost out on another job opportunity states, " In most cases the selection to fill the higher-level Merit System jobs are not based on merit, it's based on who you know. The Merit System Law requires with some exceptions, any hiring be based on results of competitive examination, and applicants for most jobs must take a long multiple-choice test. When a state agency decides to fill a job, it can hire only applicants who have scored within the top five scores on that test, but for positions there are exceptions. Presently Governor Ernie Fletcher is starting fill all non-merit positions, within Kentucky. "Merit positions make up approximately 80% of all state jobs in Kentucky (Lexington Herald 2003)." As authorized under KRS 18A, the State of Kentucky uses an open, continuous competitive register system to fill its vacant merit positions (Officer Personnel Management)." Fletcher has the authority to fill 900 management positions outside the state's merit system, which guarantees jobs from one administration to the next. People in non-merit positions serve at the will of the governor. The governor has been using a three-step interview process, plus background checks. He said hiring decisions are based on ability and integrity, not on political background and support. "We want to transcend politics to the point that we are not going to put people in positions, regardless of political pressure, that are not capable and who do not reflect the values we think are extremely important," Fletcher said, democrats have the same opportunity for a job as Republicans, the governor said. "In response to the serious concerns of the patronage system merit system, reformers are focusing on the advantages of being able to analyze and classify positions and provide greater equity throughout the organization (Nalbandian p.111)." Current employees receive protection from the merit system and in theory receive fair promotion, present a very awkward problem for human resource managers who are trying to balance diversity and demographics of the personnel system.
With an increased awareness of diversity as a part of equity in employment, the merit system is facing a growing challenge of how to balance knowledge, skills, and abilities with diversity (Nalbandian 6). "The challenges facing the Merit System Protection Board and the Office of Personal Management are becoming significant as serious social questions are developing around affirmative action and other initiatives (Merit Systems Protection Board)." Since the Office of Personal Management is responsible for making sure the values of the merit system have fair representation in policy then, in practice it is important that the office maintain the highest standards. With continuing debate about the merit system as a process and the goal-oriented values driving it to produce very specific outcomes, it is only a matter of time before very serious issues present themselves if the process produces results. "The Merit System Protection Board is working to balance the original protection of the ideals of the merit system with the current mission of promoting a values based merit system. It even created the new office of Merit Systems Oversight and Effectiveness work to provide extended protection and oversight of the values that represent the merit system (Personnel Management July 1998)." With continuing debate about the merit system as a process and the goal-oriented values driving it to produce very specific outcomes, it is only a matter of time before very serious issues present themselves if the process produces results. . The Merit System Protection Board is working to provide equal opportunity and equality within the merit system while balancing the bureaucratic value of efficiency. A transition from a patronage system to merit system came about from legislation. Efficiency, competence, and responsiveness are the values currently promoted by the merit system and they define the traditional merit systems. The Merit System in my opinion is just a front for the patronage and spoils systems, which still exist in today's personnel system. As much as the Merit System Protection Board tries implementing the policies and procedures for the Merit System, it's all in whom you know to be able to get higher-level state positions. It's hard to stem away from patronage and spoils, because it's part of the foundation of our country, and with early Presidents such as Jackson and Washington who're two great political figures in our country implemented these systems, which are still present. You could look even at Kentucky State University, with our new President she's going to implement her new system of things and with her will be her new appointees and a lot of administrative positions around the university will be replaced or some people will retire, transfer or demote themselves to a lower position. Kentucky and Illinois have very similar personnel systems, with Kentucky being a Commonwealth, vacancies in state positions I believe is all in who you know just as it is with Illinois. Even though Illinois is trying to get away from the traditional systems of the past, it's all in who you know. Mayor Daley and Governor Ryan are trying to break away and from those traditional systems and so is Governor Flethcher here, but as much as they try to embrace the Merit System, the closer the more they revert back to the traditional systems. The future of the Merit System will be determined by the values of efficiency, quality, equality and what prominent political figure is in office.