Performance ranking ‘unfair and expensive’


Performance ranking ‘unfair and expensive’, says civil servant

A civil servant writing anonymously on the Guardian website today describes the new performance management system in the civil service as “unfair, counterproductive and disgracefully expensive”.

The article goes on to say the new rating system – which identifies the lowest performing 10% of employees – is “one of the worst things I have seen since first joining the service more than 30 years ago.

“Most civil servants actually have jobs to do – work that is important. Spending this ridiculous amount of time of this rating system is abhorrent.”

The writer says: “My anger isn’t just about the fear, the bullying or how ridiculous the quota system is… it is mainly over the utter waste of time and taxpayers’ money going unchallenged.”

The article warns that all that will come out of this process is a “loss of expertise, efficiency and experience”.

Prospect is urging members in the civil service to challenge their performance marking if it does not reflect their performance. If not closely monitored and challenged, the process may be used to force managed exits and drive down pay, the union warns on its dedicated web pages.

Feedback from members has highlighted key issues. These include concerns that employees from ethnic minorities, disabled or part-time workers are disproportionately likely to get lower ratings.

Other barriers identified include ambiguous language; confusing performance descriptors; inconsistent application; and a lack of trust or confidence in the system.