References: The Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act of 1883 established an independent civil service. [ LINK ]

References: The Pendleton Act specifically addresses these issues, with the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 further refining these restrictions. [ LINK ] Also, 5 U.S.C 2301 (8) state employees should be protected against arbitrary action, personal favoritism, or coercion for partisan political purposes.

References: Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 provides for an appeals process.

References: Under 5 U.S.C 2302(b) (10), even a criminal conviction does not automatically justify taking a job action unless a nexus can be established between the conviction and performance of the employee's duties. However, 5 U.S.C 7371 requires any law enforcement officer who is convicted of a felony shall be removed from employment as a law enforcement officer on the last day of the first applicable pay period following the conviction notice date.

Peer Review Comments: I am not aware of statutory provisions prohibiting future government employment following a corruption conviction, although as a practical matter it is highly unlikely that one convicted of corruption would be able to obtain federal employment in the future.

References: Although few civil servants lose their jobs as a result of political interference and favoritism, their work content is often influenced by politics (especially as the heads of most agencies are political appointees). See stories related to the U.S. Surgeon General above, and "Profiling Report Leads to a Clash And a Demotion," The New York Times, August 24, 2005, p. A1.

References: The vast majority of the immense civil service force is hired on merit. However, over one thousand high-level positions are political appointees for whom neither professional criteria nor congressional approval are necessarily required. (In fact, a congressional report notes that the number of Schedule C political appointees, who are hired without congressional approval, has increased by over 400, from 1,229 in 2000 to 1,640 in 2005, an increase of 33%). [ LINK ]

Hurricane Katrina provided a particularly egregious example of a senior official of the Federal Emergency Management Agency who apparently lacked any professional training in this area prior to assuming the position. "Leader of Federal Effort Feels the Heat," New York Times, New York Times, September 3, 2006, p. A17.

References: The vast majority of the immense civil service force is hired on merit. However, over one thousand high-level positions are political appointees for whom neither professional criteria nor congressional approval are necessarily required. (In fact, a congressional report notes that the number of Schedule C political appointees, who are hired without congressional approval, has increased by over 400, from 1,229 in 2000 to 1,640 in 2005, an increase of 33%). [ LINK ]

Hurricane Katrina provided a particularly egregious example of a senior official of the Federal Emergency Management Agency who apparently lacked any professional training in this area prior to assuming the position. "Leader of Federal Effort Feels the Heat," New York Times, New York Times, September 3, 2006, p. A17.

References: Civil service jobs descriptions are highly detailed. Examples can be found at the federal government's online job search Web site. [ LINK ]

References: 5 U.S.C § 5384 states that the amount of a performance award may not be less than 5 percent nor more than 20 percent of the career appointees rate of basic pay.

References: See the Federal Employment Statistics division of the Office of Personnel Management, an authoritative source for statistical information on the size and composition of the Federal civilian workforce.

[ LINK ]

Peer Review Comments: I think this needs a bit more sourcing. I can't find information on the number of authorized civil service positions.

References: To protect the rights of civil service employees, the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board was set up in 1978 as an independent, quasi-judicial agency in the Executive branch that serves as the guardian of Federal merit systems. The Board's mission is to ensure that Federal employees are protected against abuses by agency management, that Executive Branch agencies make employment decisions in accordance with the merit systems principles, and that Federal merit systems are kept free of prohibited personnel practices. [ LINK ]

References: There have been no reports of delayed employee disbursements over the past year. Source: Lexis Nexis search.

References: The law does not require terminating felons, with the exception of law enforcement officers. Employees convicted of a felony may not receive a bonus, however. 5 U.S.C 8148.

Peer Review Comments: The researcher is correct, but as a practical matter, it is unlikely that civil servants convicted of corruption will be hired for future government employment. As I noted earlier, I am not aware of any statutory provisions prohibiting rehiring, but I think as a practical matter this is the case.

References: See: Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch ([ LINK ]) and Common Ethics Issues ([ LINK ])

References: If the employee's involvement in such a matter was personal and substantial, then the employee is permanently barred from representing anyone back to any Federal department, agency, or court on that same matter. If the matter was under the employee's official responsibility during the last year of Government service, then the employee is barred for two years after leaving Government service from representing anyone back to the Government on that same matter. In addition, certain high level officials are subject to a so-called one-year "cooling off " period. For a period of one year after leaving a "senior" position, these officials may not make any appearance before or communication to their former agencies on behalf of any person (other than the United States), with the intent to influence them on any matter in which that person seeks official action. [ LINK ]

References: [ LINK ]

References: [ LINK ]

"A Matter of Trust," [ LINK ].

Peer Review Comments:

References: As noted above, far less controversy surrounds gifts received by members of the executive branch compared to Congress. Nevertheless, a recent bipartisan congressional report shows how corrupt lobbyist Jack Abramoff "spent almost $25,000 in meals and drinks for the White House officials and provided them with tickets to numerous sporting events and concerts." The report also notes, however, that the lobbyist was not especially successful in getting what he wanted. "Abramoff and Rove Had 82 Contacts, Report Says," New York Times, September 29, 2006.

References: As "Matter of Trust" notes: The revolving door casts grave doubts on the integrity of official actions and legislation. A government employee could well be influenced in his or her official actions by promises of a future high-paying job from a business that has a pecuniary interest in the official's actions while in government." p. 8.

References: Certain senior officers and employees of the executive branch are required to file publicly available reports. However, certain other executive branch employees whose duties involve the exercise of discretion in sensitive areas such as contracting, procurement, administration of grants and licenses, and regulating or auditing non-Federal entities are required to file confidential financial disclosure reports The most notable difference between public and confidential reports, however, is that confidential reports are not available to the public. [ LINK ]

References: As noted above, disclosure forms for ministerial level officials are easily available. However, because the disclosure forms of "other executive branch employees" in "sensitive" positions are not publicly available, transparency is compromised. Also, FOIA requests for this material could be rejected based on exemptions related to sensitive personal information. See the OGE FOIA report for 2005: [ LINK ]

References: Cost has little bearing on publicly available disclosure reports. As noted above, however, appealing rejected FOIA requests can be very expensive.