The Federal Workforce: Characteristics and Trends

Understanding the characteristics and trends of the federal workforce is important because, among other things, agencies accomplish their missions via that workforce. Total personnel costs (direct compensation and benefits) for all federal employees (civilian and military, current employees and retirees) were estimated at more than $523 billion in 2008, and civilian personnel costs in the executive branch alone were estimated at about$194 billion. Three cabinet departments — the Departments of Defense (DOD), Veterans Affairs (DVA), and Homeland Security (DHS) — accounted for almost 60% of the nearly 1.9 million executive branch civilian employees in 2008. The duty stations for more than 35% of these employees were in four states (California, Virginia, Texas, and Maryland) and the District of Columbia, and DOD was the top federal employer in 35 states. DOD also employed more than 90% of federal civilian employees in foreign countries, and was the top federal employer in U.S. territories. The federal workforce grew by more than 120,000 employees between 2000 (the low point during the last 10 years) and 2008, with the growth concentrated in homeland security-related agencies and DVA. Civilian employment in other agencies (including DOD and most independent agencies) declined during the last 10 years. The number of blue-collar and clerical federal jobs declined between 1998 and 2008, but the number of professional and administrative jobs increased during this period. The percentage of the federal workforce that was made up of minorities also increased, but the percentage that was women remained almost constant. Although women and minorities represented an increasing portion of the growing professional and administrative groups, the representation of women and minorities in the Senior Executive Service was less than their presence in the overall workforce. The federal workforce was somewhat older in 2008 than it was in 1998, but the average length of service declined from 15.2 years in 1998 to 14.7 years in 2008. The number of white-collar employees in the General Schedule (GS) pay system declined during the last 10 years, while the number of employees in agency-specific pay systems (primarily at DOD and DHS) increased dramatically (from less than 1% of the workforce in 1998 to 16% in 2008). If these trends continue, the GS system will cover less than half of the federal civilian workforce by the year 2020. The average salary of the workforce was $69,061 in 2008, but average salaries varied substantially between and within federal agencies and pay systems. Although the federal workforce has grown somewhat in recent years, a 2006 study estimated that the “hidden” federal workforce of contractors and grantees grew by more than 50% between 1999 and 2005, when it reportedly included more than 10.5 million jobs in 2005. That figure is more than twice as large as the combined total of all three branches of government, the U.S. Postal Service, the intelligence agencies, the armed forces, and the Ready Reserve. This report will be updated when September 2008 data for the federal workforce become available

The micro-politics of micro-management: exploring the role of programme leader in English universities

This study is based on interviews with 25 programme leaders at two universities in England. Programme leadership is ubiquitous and essential to effective university operations, yet there is surprisingly little research on the role. It is an ambiguous and complex form of leadership, existing as it does in the space between standard academic and manager profiles. Existing literature on other leadership roles highlights such ambiguity as a major source of stress and cause of inefficiency. Drawing from the perspectives of current programme leaders, four main areas of difficulty are identified: role confusion, the management of others, the status and demands of leadership, and bureaucratic burdens. The paper suggests that the role of programme leader should be taken more seriously at both a research and institutional level, and that sufficient support should be implemented in relation to the four challenges mentioned above. Any real engagement with leadership at programme level, however, should also take into account the micro-politics of institutional management, a politics that combines issues of values, status and identity with more prosaic concerns over role definition, workload and student support

1991 Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act Compliance Monitoring Report

The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) mandates removal of status offenders and nonoffenders from secure detention and correctional facilities, sight and sound separation of juveniles and adults, and removal of juveniles from adult jails and lockups. In Alaska, one instance of a status offender held in secure detention was recorded in 1991, as compared with 485 violations in the baseline year of 1976. 65 separation violations were recorded in 1991, representing a 92% reduction from the 1976 baseline and 48% from 1990. 81 jail removal violations occurred, representing a 90% reduction from the 1980 baseline and an 18% reduction from 1990.Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, Division of Family and Youth ServicesA. General Information / B. Removal of Status Offenders and Nonoffenders from Secure Detention and Correctional Facilities / C. De Minimis Request / D. Progress Made in Achieving Removal of Status Offenders and Nonoffenders from Secure Detention and Correctional Facilities / E. Separation of Juveniles and Adults / F. Removal of Juveniles from Adult Jails and Lockups / G. De Minimis Request: Numerical / H. De Minimis Request: Substantive / APPENDICES / I. Method of Analysis / II. Common Offense Acronyms and 1991 Violations by Offense Type and Locatio

FY 1997 Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act Compliance Monitoring Report

The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) mandates removal of status offenders and nonoffenders from secure detention and correctional facilities, sight and sound separation of juveniles and adults, and removal of juveniles from adult jails and lockups. In Alaska, 1 instance of a status offender held in secure detention was recorded in FY 1997, compared with 485 violations in the baseline year of CY 1976. 2 separation violations were recorded in FY 1997, representing a 99.8% reduction from the CY 1976 baseline of 824 violations. 68 jail removal violations were projected (52 actual), representing an 92% reduction from the CY 1980 baseline. Originally completed December 1997; revised July 1999.Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, Division of Family and Youth ServicesA. General Information / B. Removal of Status Offenders and Nonoffenders from Secure Detention and Correctional Facilities / C. Full Compliance Request / D. Progress Made in Achieving Removal of Status Offenders and Nonoffenders from Secure Detention and Correctional Facilities / E. Separation of Juveniles and Adults / F. Removal of Juveniles from Adult Jails and Lockups / G. De Minimis Request: Substantive / APPENDICES / I. Method of Analysis / II. Fiscal Year 1997 Violations by Offense Type and Location / III. Common Offense Acronym

Communication and control in small batch part manufacturing

This paper reports on the development of a real-time control network as an integrated part of a shop floor control system for small batch part manufacturing. The shop floor control system is called the production control system (PCS). The PCS aims at an improved control of small batch part manufacturing systems, enabling both a more flexible use of resources and a decrease in the economical batch size. For this, the PCS integrates various control functions such as scheduling, dispatching, workstation control and monitoring, whilst being connected on-line to the production equipment on the shop floor. The PCS can be applied irrespective of the level of automation on the shop floor. The control network is an essential part of the PCS, as it provides a real-time connection between the different modules (computers) of the PCS, which are geographically distributed over the shop floor. An overview of the requirements of such a control network is given. The description of the design includes the services developed, the protocols used and the physical layout of the network. A prototype of the PCS, including the control network, has been installed and tested in a pilot plant. The control network has proven that it can supply a manufacturing environment, consisting of equipment from different vendors with different levels of automation, with a reliable, low cost, real-time communication facility

Historical Gloss and the Separation of Powers

Arguments based on historical practice are a mainstay of debates about the constitutional separation of powers. Surprisingly, however, there has been little sustained academic attention to the proper role of historical practice in this context. The scant existing scholarship is either limited to specific subject areas or focused primarily on judicial doctrine without addressing the use of historical practice in broader conceptual or theoretical terms. To the extent that the issue has been discussed, most accounts of how historical practice should inform the separation of powers require “acquiescence” by the branch of government whose prerogatives the practice implicates, something that is viewed as critical to giving historical practice the force of law. Yet the concept of acquiescence has been treated much too casually in the literature. Claims about acquiescence are typically premised on a Madisonian conception of interbranch competition, pursuant to which Congress and the Executive Branch are each assumed to have the tools and the motivation consistently to guard against encroachments on their authority. It has become apparent from political science scholarship, however, that the Madisonian model does not accurately reflect the dynamics of modern congressional-executive relations. This requires a reexamination of the premises and implications of the idea of institutional acquiescence in particular, and of the role of historical practice more generally. Ultimately, we argue, the problems with the Madisonian model are not fatal to crediting historical practice in interpreting the separation of powers. But they do require more attention to the reasons why such practice is invoked, the extent to which the reasons demand institutional acquiescence, and the precise method by which such acquiescence is identified. To illustrate the importance of each of these questions, we present three case studies of constitutional debates concerning the separation of powers in which practice-based arguments are prominent - war powers, congressional-executive agreements, and removal of executive officers

Disproportionate Detention of Minorities: A Case Study of One State's Compliance with the Mandates of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act

Pursuant to Section 223(a)(23) of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, states must examine whether minority youth are disproportionately detained in relation to their proportion in the general population. For a preliminary assessment of Alaska’s compliance, five and a half years of detention data (1990–June 1995) for the state of Alaska are analyzed to assess the detention of minority and non-minority youth. A number of factors are used to compare racial groups: type of offense, prior record, gender, age, length of detention, etc.This study was made possible by a gift from Cook Inlet Region, Inc. and was conducted in collaboration with the Alaska Division of Family and Youth Services.Abstract / [Introduction] / Background / Background of the Study / Findings / Discussion / References / Appendix 1. Repeat Offender

Presidential Power, Historical Practice, and Legal Constraint

The scope of the President’s legal authority is determined in part by historical practice. This Essay aims to better understand how such practice-based law might operate as a constraint on the presidency. Some scholars have suggested that presidential authority has become “unbounded” by law, and is now governed only or primarily by politics. At the same time, there has been growing skepticism about the ability of the familiar political checks on presidential power to work in any systematic or reliable fashion. Skepticism about law’s potential to constrain in this context is heightened by the customary nature of much of what purports to be the law of presidential power, and by the limited availability of judicial review. As the Essay explains, no examination of whether law constrains the President can succeed without careful specification of what constraint entails and how it relates to distinct but related phenomena like genuine disagreement about the content of the law. After attempting such specification, the Essay identifies various internal and external causal mechanisms through which law, including practice-based law, could constrain the President. The Essay explains, among other things, that one way that law might constrain the President is through the simple fact that issues of presidential power are publicly criticized and defended in legal terms. To gain additional traction on the topic, the Essay considers two other areas of debate that pose analogous questions about the constraining effect of law: whether the doctrine of stare decisis (itself a practice-based norm) constrains Supreme Court decision making, and whether international law (including the international law that is based on customary practice) constrains the behavior of nation-states. The Essay concludes by suggesting some avenues of possible empirical research