	Overview of EAC Creation and Purpose

The EAC was established by Comptroller General David Walker to provide  a consolidated forum for him to meet with representatives from the  various employee liaison groups (e.g. Advisory Council for Persons with  Disabilities, Blacks In Government, Gay and Lesbian Employee  Association, etc.) so that these groups could voice the concerns of their  constituency groups. He also decided to include representatives from each  of the staff positions (i.e. Administrative Professional Support Staff  (APSS), attorneys, and each of the Band levels). Consequently, the EAC  was chartered in January 2000 to serve as an advisory body to the  Comptroller General and other senior executives by seeking and  conveying the views and concerns of the individual employee groups they  represent, proposing solutions to those concerns where appropriate,  providing input by assessing and commenting on GAO policies,  procedures, plans and practices, and communicating issues and concerns  of the CG and senior managers to employees. Overall Survey Response Rate

The survey was sent to all GAO employees except Senior Executive  Service/SL and interns (a total of 3,002 employees). Conclusion

In general, Band IIA staff reported more unfavorable responses to many of  the topics covered in this survey (Band II restructuring, the Watson Wyatt  studies –analyst and APSS, market-based pay, and overall GAO climate)  than staff in other bands and positions. African American staff, older staff,  and staff with more years at GAO, also had generally less favorable  opinions of these topics. There were few differences of opinion between  male and female staff, and headquarters and field staff about these topics. Respondents used the open-ended question that we included to further  highlight their concerns regarding these topics as well as to express their  continued belief in the work of the agency. While the narrative comments  can not be generalized to the overall GAO population, they did provide  insightful and thoughtful feedback for consideration.
Why GAO Did This Study

This testimony discusses H.R. 3268, the "Government Accountability Office (GAO) Act of 2007" and other GAO reforms, to discuss the results of the survey that Congress previously requested that the Employee Advisory Council (EAC) conduct of all GAO employees (except Senior Executive Service/SL and interns) on GAO's Band II restructuring and the Watson Wyatt market-based compensation study used to set salary ranges. The EAC was established by Comptroller General David Walker to provide a consolidated forum for him to meet with representatives from the various employee liaison groups (e.g. Advisory Council for Persons with Disabilities, Blacks In Government, Gay and Lesbian Employee Association, etc.) so that these groups could voice the concerns of their constituency groups. He also decided to include representatives from each of the staff positions (i.e. Administrative Professional Support Staff (APSS), attorneys, and each of the Band levels). Consequently, the EAC was chartered in January 2000 to serve as an advisory body to the Comptroller General and other senior executives by seeking and conveying the views and concerns of the individual employee groups they represent, proposing solutions to those concerns where appropriate, providing input by assessing and commenting on GAO policies, procedures, plans and practices, and communicating issues and concerns of the CG and senior managers to employees.

What GAO Found

In general, Band IIA staff reported more unfavorable responses to many of the topics covered in this survey (Band II restructuring, the Watson Wyatt studies -analyst and APSS, market-based pay, and overall GAO climate) than staff in other bands and positions. African American staff, older staff, and staff with more years at GAO, also had generally less favorable opinions of these topics. There were few differences of opinion between male and female staff, and headquarters and field staff about these topics. Respondents used the open-ended question that we included to further highlight their concerns regarding these topics as well as to express their continued belief in the work of the agency. While the narrative comments can not be generalized to the overall GAO population, they did provide insightful and thoughtful feedback for consideration.