Bill Overview
Title: Inspired to Serve Hiring Improvements Act
Description: This bill expands the hiring authorities of executive agencies, including by increasing the maximum length of temporary and term appointments to up to 3 years (including extensions) and up to 10 years, respectively.
Sponsors: Sen. Lankford, James [R-OK]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals employed or seeking employment in executive agencies
Estimated Size: 200000
- The bill impacts hiring processes within executive agencies, thus primarily affecting current and prospective employees.
- It includes changes to temporary and term appointments, affecting individuals seeking such opportunities.
- Executive agencies employ a significant portion of the labor force, so changes will potentially have broad implications for employment practices.
- Increased appointment lengths could make government positions more attractive, affecting labor market dynamics.
- The changes could affect the quality of candidates applying for federal jobs.
Reasoning
- The policy focuses on changes in hiring authorities in executive agencies, meaning its primary impact will target those interested or involved in federal employment.
- The policy's budget suggests coverage for potentially up to a few hundred thousand new or extended positions, aligning with the estimated 200,000-1,000,000 individuals affected.
- Not all employees or job seekers might be directly impacted, as some may not be reaching the limits of temporary or term appointments where benefits would be realized.
- Additional funding requirements might limit the scope or scale of implementation; estimated impacts are considered alongside financial constraints.
- Expect varied responses regarding the quality of employment, with prolonged terms perhaps affecting job security positively.
- Ensuring that simulated individuals cover diverse geographic and demographic backgrounds aligns with US workforce diversity in federal employment.
Simulated Interviews
Policy Analyst (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy allows me to transition from short-term to more stable government work.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
IT Specialist (Denver, CO)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's crucial that these hiring changes bring more permanence to roles like mine.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Federal Program Manager (Austin, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm interested in how these hiring adjustments might bring new skills and talent into our agency.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Human Resources Specialist (Seattle, WA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Adjustments like these could streamline processes and help us fill roles more effectively.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Recent College Graduate (New York, NY)
Age: 22 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could increase my chances, as entry roles might become more available.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Communications Specialist (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- For my team, term extensions can mean continuity and effective project completion.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Assistant to the Regional Director (Chicago, IL)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It provides more structure and possibly lowers turnover, which is beneficial for planning.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Environmental Scientist (Miami, FL)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any change that eases recruitment hurdles is a boon for senior staff managing projects.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Entry-Level Administrative Assistant (Detroit, MI)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see this as a path to more permanent roles, opening career growth in federal work.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Retiring Federal Employee (Philadelphia, PA)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The longer appointments might indirectly ease my transition by stabilizing replacement hires.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $70000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $90000000)
Year 2: $80000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $100000000)
Year 3: $85000000 (Low: $65000000, High: $105000000)
Year 5: $90000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $110000000)
Year 10: $95000000 (Low: $75000000, High: $115000000)
Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)
Key Considerations
- The scalability of administrative systems and processes within agencies to handle longer employment terms.
- Potential barriers in harmonizing current federal employment laws and union agreements with extended appointment lengths.
- Addressing possible unintended side effects on temporary and term job markets, including impacts on workforce fluidity and short-term job availability.