Summary: During the fiscal year 1980, the GAO Career Level Council transmitted its views on the Division Directors' Group paper on Teams and the first set of draft regulations implementing the GAO personnel legislation. The Council recommended the development and implementation of formal standards by which to evaluate and promote career ladder staff. The Council recommended that all members of the competitive selection panels for vacancies at the GS-2 through 12 levels be knowledgeable in the subject matter related to the vacancies. It encouraged personal interviews of the final candidates, whenever possible, and the release of persons selected for a vacancy as soon as possible after they are selected. Regional depositories should be established with the same deadline that headquarters staff have for submitting their competitive selection paperwork. The Council also recommended that GAO eliminate the $300 per semester limit on evening college courses,and that serious consideration be given to allocating travel funds for training. In commenting on the proposed disciplinary actions and guidelines, the Council found that the proposed Table of Disciplinary Offenses and Penalties is vague and the penalties are severe. It could be subject to inconsistent interpretation and would require a tremendous monitoring effort by Personnel. The Council requested that GAO support a proposal that maximum allowances for per diem and for actual expenses be increased. Proposed changes in local travel regulations would unnecessarily increase administrative costs and paperwork, not adequately reimburse staff for costs incurred, and deal only with problems in the District of Columbia area. It suggested that performace appraisals be given at least annually and be subject to appeal. It supported the proposals to expand regional office participation in program planning and develop greater subject matter expertise in the regions. Personnel should insure that its current procedures for validating certification scores are followed. Direct supervision of staff should not be a requirement for a sub-team leader title. GAO should consider reinstituting a field/headquarters rotation policy as a mechanism for career development. The maxi-flex alternative work schedule has been a morale booster and improved the quality of life for employees, but regulations should clarify what constitutes an abuse of the system and what disciplinary actions are available when abuses occur.
