Linda Chavez: Trump cabinet choices in for a rude awakening

SHARE Linda Chavez: Trump cabinet choices in for a rude awakening
afp_j34hn_659324631.jpg

(L-R)nominees for Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, Secretary of Health and Human Services Tom Price and Energy Secretary Rick Perry (2nd row top) (L-R) Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, Secretary of Commerce Wilber Ross and Secretary of Treasury Steven Mnuchin.(3rd row bottom) (L-R)Secretary of Defense James Mattis, Attorney General Jeff sessions and Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Ben Carson. Bottom row (L-R)Secretary of Labor Andrew Puzder, Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao and Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly. /Getty Images

President-elect Donald Trump is filling his Cabinet with lions of industry and finance, not surprising for a businessman, and the left has predictably focused on the various conflicts of interest that might arise for his nominees.

The likelihood is that most will make it through confirmation, though, and then comes the real challenge — because they have never worked in government.

OPINION

As someone who has spent most of her career outside government but has also headed a small federal agency and had two stints working in the White House, I can tell you that the federal government is a world unto itself. The normal relationships between employer and employees don’t exist. As the head of a department or agency, you pick very few of your own employees, and you have little or no authority to get rid of those employees you inherit. Worst of all, you can’t reward outstanding service (except with very modest bonuses). There is no such thing as pay for performance, which is the rule in business. Nor is it even possible to promote the best hires, except within the constraints of federal civil service rules, and you can’t move employees around easily from one job to another.

The word bureaucracy became a synonym for inefficiency and burdensome rules for a reason. Working within the bureaucracy requires a talent and patience that few CEOs, in my experience, possess. I have served on corporate boards for more than 25 years and worked closely with CEOs and others in the executive suite. What I’ve seen tells me that the businesspeople in the Cabinet are in for a rude awakening.

In the business world, competition is stiff. There’s no such thing as lifetime employment for the top jobs. If you do your job well, you can expect to advance, and you can expect to be rewarded handsomely. Employees receive a base salary and, in many cases, bonuses and stock or stock options — but all are tied to performance. Companies establish compensation programs that look at both individual and company performance. Though various administrations have tried to mimic private-sector practices by setting up performance reviews, the processes bear little in common.

A company sets its budget for the year and then evaluates whether the employee met his or her target. If the company does well, makes more money and, in public companies, sees its stock price go up, executives receive rewards. In government, Congress appropriates the money to fund departments and agencies, and the Office of Personnel Management sets wages on a set scale that evaluates job titles and responsibilities. There is very limited flexibility within the government system.

One of the biggest difficulties the new Cabinet members will encounter is in picking their own team. Traditionally, the president appoints sub-Cabinet officials, sometimes with little input from the department secretary. And so it goes, down the line, with assistant secretaries unable to choose their direct reports.

Cabinet officials in the Trump administration may have more latitude than previous agency heads did because the campaign did not have the legions of volunteers and donors expecting political appointments. But even if the new secretaries can pick more of their own people, the total number of political appointments throughout government is tiny — some 4,000 jobs out of a civilian federal workforce of 1.4 million.

The greatest culture shock for Cabinet members who’ve never worked in government, however, will be how little authority they have to make major changes in their departments. Divisions within agencies often operate as fiefdoms, with their own ties to Congress and appropriations staffers who fund their work. Reorganizing is difficult and painful. Worst of all, firing anyone in the federal government, even for cause, is a tedious process for which few have the stomach. Donald Trump’s famous ”you’re fired” won’t be heard often after he takes over in January.

So my advice to incoming appointees: If you want to accomplish something, you’ll have to rely as much on persuasion as you will on coercion. It’s possible to bring about change, but not nearly so much as you’re used to. You’ll find few allies in government and an even more hostile environment in the power corridors outside, the media and the special interests. Being a Cabinet secretary or agency head may sound like a powerful job, but it’s a lot less powerful than those eager to occupy such a position may envision.

Linda Chavez is the author of “An Unlikely Conservative: The Transformation of an Ex-Liberal.”

 Send letters to: letters@suntimes.com

Follow the Editorial Board on Twitter: @csteditorials

Tweets by @CSTeditorials

The Latest
Despite getting into foul trouble, which limited him to just six minutes in the second half, Shannon finished with 29 points, five rebounds and two assists.
Cowboy hats, bell-bottoms and boots were on full display Thursday night as fans lined up for the first of his three sold-out shows.
The incident occurred about 3:40 p.m. near Minooka. The horse was successfully placed back into the trailer, and the highway reopened about 40 minutes later. No injuries were reported.
The Hawks conceded the game’s only two goals within the first seven minutes and were shut out for the 12th time this season in a 2-0 defeat Thursday.