Comment Number: 05-02582-EREG-137-d7391-c32223
Received: 3/8/2005 8:00:00 AM
Subject: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment
Title: National Security Personnel System
CFR Citation: 5 CFR Chapter XCIX and Part 9901
No Attachments

Comments:

Such a system should, at a minimum, include the following elements:

It should provide for collective bargaining over the design of the pay, performance, and classification systems. Such bargaining is common in the public and private sectors, including federal components not covered by the General Schedule pay and classification system. Bargaining would in no way negatively impact the agencys ability to accomplish its mission. Instead, it would enhance the effectiveness of the system by providing greater fairness, credibility, accountability and transparency.
It should ensure that employees are not disadvantaged by the implementation of any new pay system. That is, employees must, at a minimum, be entitled to the same pay increases and advancement potential under a new system that is available under the General Schedule.
It should retain the provisions of 5 U.S.C. Chapter 43 and 5 C.F.R. Part 430, governing performance management.
It should provide, as does the current system, for a choice between the Merit Systems Protection Board and the negotiated grievance/arbitration procedure for serious adverse actions.
It should provide for impartial review of labor relations disputes by an independent entity like the Federal Labor Relations Authority.
It should protect, as we believe Public Law 108-13 mandates, the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively over workplace decisions that affect them. It should protect all Chapter 71 bargaining rights, including the right to bargain over procedures and appropriate arrangements related to the exercise of managements right to assign work, deploy personnel, and use technology. To require such bargaining would not prevent management from exercising its rights. Instead, it would allow agreements to be reached over such things as fair and objective methods of assigning employees to shifts and work locations. It would allow agreements to be reached over fair and objective methods of reassigning employees on short notice to new posts of duty that may be thousands of miles from home and family. It would allow agreements to be reached over training and safety issues related to the use of new technology by employees whose jobs put their lives at risk on a daily basis.
It should encourage, not suppress, the pre-implementation participation of employees and their unions in mission-related decisions. Frontline employees and their unions want to help DoD accomplish its mission, and they have the expertise to do it. They should not be shut out of mission-related decisions.
It should, as the law requires, protect the due process rights of employees and provide them with fair treatment. Employees must have the right to a full and fair hearing of adverse actions appeals before an impartial and independent decision maker, such as an arbitrator or the MSPB. DoD should be required to prove, by the preponderance of the evidence, that adverse actions imposed against employees promote the efficiency of the service. An impartial and independent decision maker must have the authority to mitigate excessive penalties.