Breaking Down Competitive vs. Excepted Service: The Untold Side of Federal Jobs

For many Americans, the idea of a secure, stable career often conjures images of federal government employment. However, navigating the landscape of federal jobs can be surprisingly complex, particularly when understanding the distinctions between the “competitive service” and the “excepted service.” While often glossed over, these classifications significantly impact how individuals are hired, promoted, and even fired. This explainer breaks down the nuances of these two systems, exploring their history, current realities, and potential future.

What are the Competitive and Excepted Services?

The United States federal civil service is broadly divided into two main categories: the competitive service and the excepted service. The competitive service encompasses the majority of federal positions. These jobs generally require open competitive examinations or assessments to determine eligibility and merit. Think of it as the traditional "apply, test, interview" process.

The excepted service, on the other hand, allows agencies to hire individuals without going through the standard competitive process. This is often justified by the unique nature of the position or the agency's specific needs.

Who is Affected by These Classifications?

Both classifications affect millions. As of 2023, the federal government employs over 2.2 million civilian workers. While precise figures fluctuate, the competitive service typically accounts for the larger share. The excepted service includes a wide array of employees, from attorneys and chaplains to intelligence officers and individuals with disabilities hired under special authorities. This also includes positions related to national security where specific expertise or trust is paramount.

When and Why Were These Systems Created?

The roots of the competitive service trace back to the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act of 1883. This landmark legislation aimed to replace the “spoils system,” where government jobs were awarded based on political patronage, with a merit-based system. The Act established the Civil Service Commission (a predecessor to the Office of Personnel Management, or OPM) and mandated competitive examinations for many federal positions. The *why* behind this was to improve government efficiency and reduce corruption.

The excepted service emerged alongside the competitive service, recognizing that certain positions required specialized skills or circumstances that didn't lend themselves well to standardized testing. The *why* here was flexibility – allowing agencies to fill critical roles quickly and efficiently, especially those requiring specialized knowledge or sensitive security clearances.

Where Do These Systems Operate?

These systems operate throughout the entire federal government, impacting agencies across the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. However, the proportion of competitive versus excepted service positions can vary significantly from agency to agency. Agencies with significant national security mandates, such as the Department of Defense or the intelligence community, often have a higher percentage of excepted service positions.

Current Developments and Concerns:

Recent years have seen increased scrutiny of the excepted service, particularly regarding its potential for abuse. Concerns have been raised about political influence and the erosion of merit-based hiring principles.

One significant development was the creation and subsequent rescission of Schedule F under the Trump administration. Schedule F aimed to reclassify potentially tens of thousands of federal employees in policy-making positions as "excepted" employees, allowing them to be hired and fired more easily. This raised serious concerns about politicizing the civil service and undermining its independence. While the Biden administration rescinded Schedule F, the underlying concerns about the potential for its reinstatement remain.

Data from the Partnership for Public Service indicates that employee engagement and satisfaction can vary depending on service classification. While comprehensive data comparing the two categories directly is limited, anecdotal evidence suggests that employees in the competitive service often perceive greater job security and opportunities for advancement based on merit.

The Untold Side: Potential Drawbacks and Benefits

While the competitive service offers stability and structured career paths, it can also be bureaucratic and slow-moving. The excepted service, on the other hand, offers greater flexibility and opportunities for specialized roles, but can be less transparent and potentially more vulnerable to political influence.

A key challenge lies in ensuring accountability and transparency within the excepted service. Without robust oversight mechanisms, there's a risk that hiring and promotion decisions could be based on factors other than merit, potentially leading to a less qualified and less diverse workforce.

Likely Next Steps:

Several potential next steps could shape the future of the competitive and excepted services:

• Legislative Action: Congress could introduce legislation to clarify the scope of the excepted service and strengthen protections against political interference.


• OPM Guidance: OPM could issue updated guidance to agencies on best practices for hiring and managing employees in the excepted service, emphasizing merit-based principles and transparency.


• Judicial Review: Legal challenges could arise regarding the classification of specific positions or the implementation of new excepted service authorities.


• Continued Debate: The debate over the appropriate balance between the competitive and excepted services is likely to continue, fueled by concerns about political influence and the need for a skilled and impartial federal workforce.

Conclusion:

Understanding the differences between the competitive and excepted services is crucial for anyone considering a career in the federal government, as well as for citizens interested in the functioning of their government. While the competitive service provides a structured path based on merit, the excepted service offers flexibility for specialized roles. However, the potential for abuse within the excepted service necessitates ongoing scrutiny and robust safeguards to ensure a fair, competent, and apolitical federal workforce. The balance between these two systems will continue to be a subject of debate and reform as the federal government adapts to evolving challenges.