| Comment Number: | EM-010803 |
| Received: | 3/8/2005 2:55:15 PM |
| 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:
March 8, 2005 DoD NSPS Comments , DoD NSPS Comments: I write to express my concerns about changes to work rules in the Department of Defense (DoD). The proposed regulations, known as the National Security Personnel System (NSPS), were printed in the Federal Register on February 14, 2005. This message will be sent to both DoD and my representatives in Congress. I have worked for DoD for years. I am angry that these proposals seem to treat the employees who help defend our country as the enemy. Most DoD employees work hard and are committed. I believe that mistreating the employees will hurt the agency?s mission. I am very upset by NSPS. This system will change the way workers are paid, evaluated, promoted, fired, scheduled, and treated. These rules would create a system in which federal managers are influenced by favoritism rather than serving the civil concerns of the American people. Annual Pay Raises Under the General Schedule and FWS, employee pay was clear. It was funded by Congress and could not be taken away. However, NSPS will take away this certainty. Salaries and bonuses are funded by DoD. In the past ? as recently as just last year ? DoD did not fund its awards program. Given the agency?s miserable record on this issue, how can employees feel confident that our salaries and bonuses will be funded in the future? ?Friend of the Supervisor? Pay System With the new patronage pay system, which DoD calls ?pay for performance,? the amount of a worker's salary will depend almost completely on the personal judgment of his or her manager. This system will force workers to compete with one another for pay raises, which will destroy teamwork, increase conflict among employees, and reward short-term outcomes. There is no guarantee that even the best workers will receive a pay raise or that the pay offered will be fair or competitive. This system will create a situation in which workers are in conflict with one another and afraid to speak out about harassment, violations of the law, and workplace safety problems. Furthermore, there will be no impartial appeal system to assure that everyone is treated fairly. Schedules and Overtime NSPS will allow managers to schedule employees to work without sufficient advance notice of schedule changes. This will make it extremely difficult for working parents to care for their children and family. It will also mean that abusive managers could harass employees with bad schedules or short notice. Overtime rotations can be canceled, which means that employees may not be able to plan adequately for childcare and other important responsibilities. Civilian Deployment Federal employees could be assigned anywhere in the world, even into a war zone, with little or no notice. I am proud to serve my country but I am also responsible for caring for my family and my personal obligations at home. We signed up for a civilian job. We did not enlist in the military. Today?s volunteer system works well. America is at war. We are fighting for democracy abroad. But the regulations are an attack on workers? basic rights. Furthermore, NSPS will divert the attention of defense workers from the soldiers? welfare to protecting themselves from abuse on the job. I urge you to force DoD to rethink this proposal. We need work rules that preserve fairness, serve the American people, and respect the rights of Defense Department workers. In addition, if management would correctly apply the existing provisisons now in place under civil service, there would be no need to apply a new process to correct this problem. (9901.101b) It is stated that high and low performers are paid alike as part of the justification for this new system. Why not correct the failure of management and supervision to correctly manage the current pay system, which does allow for compensation to be linked to performance? (9901.103) Outdated personnel practices are referred to, but why not keep the existing system and properly administer it? This seems like an excuse to to replace the existing civil service system with something that is unproven. (9901.101b) The DoD proposal mentions that civilian employees must be flexible and a responsive part of the team. Does this mean they can be deployed with notice to anywhere in the world to support military activities? What safeguards will protect the DoD civilians from being placed in harms way? (9901.101b) Many feel that the recent centralization of personnel offices has contributed to the slow down in hiring. It seems that the NSPS proposal is an admission of the failure of this process. Why not reestablish local personnel offices? (9901.101b) It appears that the NSPS proposal would allow civilian employees to be assigned to war zones without any recourse on the part of the employee. What if I don't want to be sent to a war zone? (9901.101a) Management seems unable or unwilling to correctly apply the existing civil service rules to eliminate poorly performing employees. But then management's track record of correclty identifying such individuals without bias or labeling certain employees as "trouble makers" would most likely be allowed to grow even worse under the new system. (9901.101b) If the proposed NSPS system is as harmful to the process of hiring and promoting qualified individuals as was the centralization of personnel offices, then rather than improve the flexibility already found in the civil service system, NSPS will merely make things worse. (9901.511) The proposed NSPS seems to be using the new terrorist threat as an excuse to dismantle the civil service system that has served this country so well for so many years. (9901.511) NSPS will not correct the problems with the personnel system created by poor management. The current civil service system can provide for the same level of flexitlity as is now necessary without eroding the rights and protection of the employee. As it is the employee finds himself fighting an uphill battle to defend his rights. NSPS will make this even worse. (9901.601) Can ANYONE show me how NSPS will eliminate a dispute-oriented, and adversarial relationship between management and labor? It seems to be that the problem exists because of the hierarchical nature of DoD, which is far removed from current best labor practice methods employed by private firms that are rated as good places to work. (9901.601) DoD runs the military. Trying to eliminate civil service and replace it with NSPS is just a thinly veiled attempt to use the terrorist attacks of 9/11 to replace the existing civil service system. (9901.602) Just as the current administration was unable to find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, I believe Donald Rumsfeld is attempting to scare the public and Congress into believing that the existing civil service system is no longer viable. (9901.607) DoD is making the attacks of Sept 11 an excuse to demand more flexibility in personnel actions. Yet DoD has yet to identify in what way the current civil service system has failed. (9901.607) DoD in making references to the attacks of 9/11 imply that NSPS would have prevented that attack, yet published findings on the event find blame with management and the organization that prevented vital intelligence from being shared and acted upon. Let's not blame the rank and file DoD workders with the failures of senior management. (9901.608) DoD seems to feel that they are forced to use military personnel or contractors when federal civilian employees would be more appropriate. Because of this DoD feels that NSPS will provide relief. Mismanagement of personnel by supervision and management should not be the reason to create NSPS and effectively eliminate the protections afforded under civil service. (9901.513) I understand that federal law requires that employees may organize, bargain collectively, and participate through labor organizations of their choosing in decisions that affect them absent any restrictions established by law. It seems to me that DoD is violating this part of the law and has unilaterally defined the meaning of collective bargaining. (9901.917) I have been told that DoD is attempting to redefine the meaning of collective bargaining. I have also been told that this would be in violation of existing federal laws. (9901.919) I have read that DoD admits that its rules are "substantially more limiting standards for the mitigation of penalties than those of previoulsy established by MSPB". If this is true, then it appears that DoD is using the new terror threat and war on terrorism as an excuse to eliminate the protections of civil service. (9901.711) I have read that DoD is attempting to restrict the authority of the MSPB to mitigate the maximum allowable penalty in adverse actions. It seems that NSPS will allow this to happen. (9901.713) I understand that DoD wants to establish under NSPS more restrictions regarding the recovering of attorney fees. I see that as one more attempt to limit the rights of federal workers who wish to avail themselves of the right to representation and access to the federal court system. (9901.715e) I understand that the intent of Congress to allow for meaningful discussions concerning the development of the NSPS has not been followed and rather DoD is attempting to put NSPS in place without these discussions. (9901.715e) Limiting the amount of attorney fees as is being proposed under NSPS will have the effect of reducing the ability of employees to defend themselves against capricious acts by the Agnecy not based on just cause. (9901.715e) The current civil service system has been used in all of the wars dating back to WWII. Why is DoD now declaring this system is no longer adequate? (9901.101a) What does national security have to do with redefining a "confidential employee" which effectively will remove most if not all secretaries from being in the bargaining unit? (9901.912b) Sincerely,