[IPAC-List] PPM article on FL reform
Mitch.Stein at tn.gov
Wed Jun 16 10:30:04 EDT 2010
Good questions, Bryan, and since I have not been provided any operational definitions by those who want this info I can only make educated guesses as to what the definition should be. So, for my first stab at a definition to define outsourcing I will say: taking major portions of state government HR services provided by state employees and contracting these services to be provided in the private sector such that state employees no longer provide these services, such as occurred in Florida over the past decade.
I would specifically exclude a major change in the "civil service" concept and laws (e.g. Georgia) that did not result in the private sector taking over major HR responsibilities, and would also exclude cases where states (e.g. your own sunny California) who once had a centralized HR agency who provided most of the services who then decentralized and allowed individual state agencies to begin to provide these services (e.g. examination development) for themselves.
I don't know what you mean by ATS, but I would also exclude HRIS. For example, TN no longer uses its own ancient HRIS (which met our needs just fine) but contracted this out for something new and are now using a Neogov + Peoplesoft system. However, this did not result in any HR services previously supplied by state employees now being provided by private sector employees. Its still the same state HR employees who use the HRIS, its just a different HRIS.
Hope this helps clarify.
>>> "Bryan Baldwin" <Bryan.Baldwin at doj.ca.gov> 6/15/10 3:57 PM >>>
Georgia and Washington come to mind in terms of states that have gone through major civil service reform recently but dunno about the extent to which that involved outsourcing. I would imagine it depends somewhat on your definition of "outsourcing". If you include things like ATS or HRIS, that group is probably quite large.
More information about the IPAC-List