When Gov. Scott Walker’s presidential aspirations imploded in a flurry of Trump-isms and consistently poor polling results, many Wisconsin leftists celebrated his embarrassment.
Walker’s focus has returned to Wisconsin to continue his personal case study in middling economic performance.
Gov. Scott Walker formally drops out of 2016 presidential race
Walker recently announced support for a proposal by State Sen. Roger Roth, R–Appleton, and Assembly Majority Leader Jim Steineke, R–Kaukana, to overhaul the state’s civil service system of over 30,000 employees.
The proposal would include replacing the state’s current civil service exams with a resume-based hiring system, creating a centralized hiring office for the state and shortening the process for dismissing state employees.
Wisconsin, like many governments, needs some legitimate reform in how it conducts human resource management.
We hire too slowly and recruit too few qualified candidates. It can be frustrating for smart folks who want to serve in government, but government doesn’t seem to want them very badly.
Performance and merit can go unrewarded because managers are poorly trained and asked to do more each year with fewer resources.
Pay has stagnated, and the long-standing tacit agreement between government and employees where employees accept lower base pay in exchange for increased benefits and stability currently lies in pieces, shredded by Walker’s 2011 Act 10.
Yes, government has a problem with its civil service but eliminating neutrality-oriented exams and stripping protections from already battered employees is not the way to fix these problems.
The single biggest challenge to government is attracting smart young graduates to replace a workforce that is dangerously close to retirement.
Helpful proposals to reform how Wisconsin hires could include plain language versions of job openings in addition to the more formal position description — a change University of Wisconsin adopted this year when it launched a new human resources system. They want to be more transparent as to when and how candidates can expect decisions from their hiring managers, be more active in recruiting and target quality candidates for individual positions.
Government can, and should, think hard about how it can balance quick hiring with being fair and balanced.
Modeling a process after Teach for America’s fantastically transparent recruitment process could go a long way to ensure quality candidates are not frustrated by a lack of communication and accept a different position while waiting on a decision.
Simply put — governmental recruitment can benefit greatly from talking to the people who are trying to talk to them.
But, this proposal does not address these concerns and Walker has done absolutely nothing in his career to earn the benefit of the doubt here.
It’s prudent to think of the proposal as nothing more than a lashing for public employees.
Stripping away the core tenants of the neutrality-focused merit system that insulates government bureaucracy from political meddling is a surefire recipe for government impotence and ineptitude.
The civil service system is an essential piece of good governance in place to prevent political appointees from simply hiring partisan hacks into positions they are unqualified for.
Despite the suspicion, Democrats are rightfully heaping on this proposal. I hope that legislative Democrats take this opportunity to work with Republicans to find some common ground to solve state hiring problems while retaining the good governance protections that protect government employees from political capriciousness.
Adam Johnson ([email protected]) is a master’s candidate at the La Follette School of Public Affairs.
