Elimination of Time-in-Grade

IFPTE Local 777, a union representing federal employees, opposes the proposal to eliminate Time-in-Grade requirements because it replaces an objective standard with increased management discretion. They argue that removing this standard could undermine trust in the merit system and advocate for clear written promotion criteria and transparency if the change proceeds.

A federal employee supports the elimination of time-in-grade requirements, arguing that these rules prevent qualified individuals from being promoted based on merit and skills. The commenter notes that they have consistently exceeded performance expectations but remain ineligible for higher positions due to arbitrary calendar requirements.

A military veteran and federal employee supports the elimination of time-in-grade restrictions, arguing that the current policy prioritizes arbitrary timelines over actual capability. The commenter asserts that removing these barriers will allow for a merit-based system that better utilizes the skills of qualified veterans and improves operational efficiency.

The commenter supports the elimination of time-in-grade requirements, arguing that the current rules impede the promotion of qualified employees and hinder the retention of skilled staff. They suggest that focusing on skillsets rather than time-in-grade will allow for a fairer and more merit-based hiring process.

An examiner at the USPTO supports the elimination of the Time-in-Grade requirement, arguing that it prevents high performers from being properly rewarded and may lead to turnover. The commenter suggests that removing these requirements will provide agencies with more flexibility to reward performance while cautioning that safeguards against sabotage should remain.

The commenter supports the elimination of Time-in-Grade requirements, arguing that it allows for a more merit-based promotion system that prioritizes education, experience, and performance. They contend that the current system can lead to underqualified individuals being promoted over more qualified candidates, potentially harming organizational efficiency.

The commenter, likely a federal employee, supports the elimination of the 52-week time-in-grade requirement. They argue that the current rule unfairly penalizes qualified employees with relevant experience and could lead to a "mass exodus" of talent.

The commenter, a federal civil servant writing as a private citizen, proposes a middle-ground approach to the elimination of time-in-grade requirements. They suggest allowing employees to move up to two grades after a specified period (two or three years) to balance career advancement with the need for experience and institutional knowledge.