Overview
Title
Excepted Service
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Office of Personnel Management told everyone about special rules, called Schedule A, B, and C. These rules help some people get jobs without having to go through the usual process. In August 2020, they didn't make any changes to Schedule A or B, but they did change some of the Schedule C rules, which are like special jobs for people who might work with important government leaders.
Summary AI
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has issued a notice identifying specific appointing authorities, known as Schedule A, B, and C, which were created or removed for a single agency between August 1 and August 31, 2020. These authorities allow agencies to appoint people to jobs without standard competitive hiring processes. During this period, there were no new or revoked Schedule A or B authorities, but some Schedule C authorities, which typically relate to political appointments, were either approved or revoked. OPM regularly publishes updates and annual summaries of these types of appointing authorities in the Federal Register.
Abstract
This notice identifies Schedule A, B, and C appointing authorities applicable to a single agency that were established or revoked from August 1, 2020 to August 31, 2020.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document in question is a notice from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), published in the Federal Register, identifying changes to Schedule A, B, and C appointing authorities during August 2020. These authorities allow federal agencies to hire staff through means other than the traditional competitive process, often speeding up hiring for specific roles.
General Summary
The notice clarifies that there were no changes in Schedule A or B authorities for August 2020; however, some Schedule C authorities were adjusted. Schedule C positions typically involve roles that have a policy-making or confidential character and often relate to political appointments. Annually, OPM publishes a consolidation of these notices, ensuring transparency regarding the authorities available to federal agencies.
Significant Issues or Concerns
Lack of Specificity:
One primary issue with the document is its lack of specific details regarding which Schedule C positions were approved or revoked. This gap in information leaves readers wondering about the exact nature and scope of these changes.
Irrelevant Content:
Inclusion of Schedule A and B is arguably unnecessary since no changes occurred under these categories, which might mislead some readers into expecting further information that simply isn't there.
Contact Information Ambiguity:
The contact details provided in the notice lack context about the responsibilities of the person listed, which might make it difficult for interested parties to know if Julia Alford can assist with specific inquiries regarding the notice.
Access to Information:
References to external websites for more information lack hyperlinks, potentially making it harder for digital readers to access further details conveniently. Additionally, the mention of a print page number seems outdated in an online context.
Impact on the Public
For the general public, this notice might seem to have limited direct impact, being more an administrative update than something that affects daily life. However, for those closely following federal hiring practices—such as job seekers or policy analysts—these notices serve as an important resource for understanding government staffing dynamics.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Government Agencies:
This document directly impacts federal agencies by informing them about their ability to make appointments without the usual competition. While no Schedule A or B changes occurred, the Schedule C updates might affect the staffing plans or political strategy of agencies reliant on appointees for critical roles.
Political Appointees:
Individuals seeking politically appointed positions may find this notice particularly relevant. Changes to Schedule C authorities can indicate shifts in administrative priorities or policy directions, impacting those engaging in or aspiring to these roles.
Policy Analysts and Watchdogs:
Entities that track federal employment trends and government transparency might take particular interest in such documents. The lack of detail here, however, presents a challenge to those trying to conduct comprehensive analyses of government staffing changes.
In summary, the document is a routine but important update from the OPM concerning federal employment practices, notably lacking in transparency or detail regarding the actual content of the changes it describes. While routine for most, it holds larger implications for some stakeholders directly involved or affected by these appointments.
Issues
• The document does not specify the actual Schedule C appointing authorities that were approved or revoked in August 2020, making it unclear what specific changes occurred.
• The notice mentions Schedule A and B appointing authorities but states no changes for August 2020, which makes the inclusion of these schedules potentially unnecessary or misleading in this context.
• The contact information provided does not specify the area of expertise or responsibility of the contact person, which might be useful for readers seeking specific information.
• The document references a page number in parentheses ('print page 8235') which may not be relevant or useful for online readers.
• The document refers readers to a website for more information but does not provide a hyperlink, which could make accessing additional information inconvenient in digital formats.
• The summary section briefly describes the notice but lacks detail that might help readers understand the implications of the Schedule C appointments and revocations.