The top Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is urging the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to withdraw a proposed overhaul of federal employee performance evaluations, warning the plan is unlawful and could undermine its goals.
In a letter sent to OPM Director Scott Kupor on March 26, Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., pushed back against OPM’s proposed rule that would cap the number of employees eligible for top performance ratings – effectively introducing a forced distribution model – while also consolidating rating categories and requiring agencies to recertify evaluation systems with OPM every two years.
The proposed changes aim to address what OPM describes as inflated ratings and weak accountability in the current system. But Garcia argued the approach would distort performance assessments, increase workplace friction, and introduce legal and operational risks across federal agencies.
In his letter, Garcia said forced ranking systems would “likely result in dysfunction, error, bias and potential abuse” and could degrade mission performance by discouraging collaboration among employees.
“By requiring that federal employees be separated into distinct categories based on relative standing rather than objective performance, this approach risks preventing agencies from obtaining a clear picture of worker performance,” Garcia wrote.
Garcia also questioned the legality of the proposal, arguing that federal performance management systems must rely on objective criteria under existing statutes and regulations. A quota-based system, he said, would require some employees to receive lower ratings regardless of whether they met or exceeded standards, raising concerns about compliance.
Beyond the ranking structure, Garcia raised objections to proposed limits on employee appeals. The OPM plan would restrict formal challenges to performance ratings and eliminate automatic second-level reviews for the lowest “Level 1” scores.
“The ability to challenge performance ratings serves as an important check on error and bias, and maintains incentives for supervisors to apply standards carefully and consistently,” Garcia wrote.
He later added that, “In the absence of such a mechanism, supervisors will face little accountability for their evaluations, increasing the risk that ratings may reflect subjective or inconsistent judgments.”
The lawmaker also warned that the proposal could exacerbate ongoing federal workforce recruitment and retention challenges.
He pointed to private-sector examples – including Microsoft and General Electric – that previously used forced distribution models but later abandoned them due to negative impacts on morale and performance.
OPM decided against using forced distribution systems in 1995 when it updated its appraisal system structure. At the time, OPM said that “forced distributions were incompatible with effective performance management.”
Garcia wrote, “It remains unclear how this approach could consistently produce ratings that reflect actual job performance rather than artificially imposed quota-based targets.”
OPM’s proposal is part of a broader set of workforce policy changes under the current administration. Comments on the rule were due last week, a required step before finalizing regulatory changes.
Separately, OPM earlier this month made another proposal to make employee performance the primary factor in determining who gets laid off during future reductions in force.