In its latest issue, Newsweek asked 20 “leaders and experts” for ideas about policy fixes federal officials should pursue right away.
Some are good, while others smack of nanny-state paternalism. Among the more interesting suggestions is that of Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels: merit-based civil service.
Like many states, Indiana rewrote its civil-service statute in 1941. It’s been frozen in time ever since. By 2005 this geriatric law had us in a straitjacket. Employee complaints about the most trivial of matters (“I don’t like my uniform style”) subjected management, administrative-law judges, and indirectly the taxpayers to a five-step, year-long grievance process. Promotions and layoffs were dictated by seniority. Disciplining or dismissing poor performers? Forget it. This year, we are replacing this system with one that highly rewards the best workers and deals with the worst. Employee rights will still be carefully protected, but in a streamlined, three-step process less vulnerable to abuse. Fairness for taxpayers and that large majority of diligent, deserving state employees will result.
Even New York’s nanny-in-chief, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, offers a good idea: eliminating seniority hierarchy in education.
The U.S. is the world’s greatest meritocracy. Hard work is rewarded. Talent is recognized. Achievement is celebrated. But in 14 states, including New York, a law known as “last in, first out” forbids school districts from taking performance into consideration when conducting layoffs. Instead, only one factor matters: years on the job. In New York City, we are facing 4,600 teacher layoffs. But rather than lay off those rated unsatisfactory, convicted of crimes, or lacking certification, we would have to let go of nearly every teacher hired over the past few years. We’ve made huge progress—graduation rates are up 27 percent over the past five years. “Last in, first out” would jeopardize that progress—and harm our kids. They—and their hard-working teachers—deserve better.
