[IPAC-List] Would you rather.....?

[RPClare at aol.com]

If we don't "test" and depend on a trial period, we need to decide who we  
try in the temporary position...which is a test. We speak of these issues as if  
all managers know how to evaluate employees. Many times, they really rate  
employees based on how they are personably pleased by the employee and it is  
only loosely tied to the job. I have worked for Governors who wanted non-lawyers 
 appointed to Chief Legal Counsel positions because the pay was right and 
they  were good electoral fund raisers. I have also experienced high level 
managers  who wanted to hire/promote folks who did not meet classification minimum  
requirement that they helped developed. One of the great Public sector  
challenges is that not everyone works toward the "best interests of the  
organization. 
They are folks (including myself of course) who I would trust in evaluating  
new employees as the only selection criteria. Public sector Performance  
evaluations are often a wasted exercise because "no one" ever fails them (and  
there's nothing positive connected to them). Politics, both big "P" and small  
"p", interfere with the process. The "testing" process often restricts the  
degree of impact non-work related factors influence such decisions. Top people  are 
often replaced in HR when elected officials change so the new administration  
can trust the system to work in a manner that benefits  them.
**************Feeling the pinch at the grocery store?  Make dinner for $10 or 
less. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001)