Comment Number: EM-010804
Received: 3/7/2005 3:16:14 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 7, 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.  There is nothing wrong with the current system other than mismanagement.  All elements of the new system are currently in the existing system.  The significant difference between this system and NSPS is the reduction/removal of accountability and oversight.  You indicate that the unions were given the opportunity to participate. Sitting in a room and being dictated to is not participation.  My installation has never had a problem providing DoD with whatever request they have made.  NNSY delivered 44 employees to USS Cole within 48 hours of notification. The vast majority belonging to exclusive bargaining units.  When asked for 50 volunteers to report to Bagdad 150 of our employees requested to be deployed.  NNSY has 25 volunteers working at a Humvee plant in texas all members of an exclusive bargaining.  Our installation routinely provides support around the world in all theaters of operation. How is this level of support considered a hinderance to DoD mission?  Part of the hiring delay is due to security clearance background investigations. Why is SECDEF jepordizing national security?  You have done nothing to facilitate demotion of non-performing supervisors and managers.  Your proposals are akin to giving a poor mechanic a new set of tools and hoping that it improves their performance.  How can you say you have retained due process when there is no independent third party review? Please retain the current appeals process. It can be processed via a single source but it must be independent.  How can you say collective bargaining were retained when SECDEF has the authority decide what is a negotionable item?  What is your plan if this new system fails?  Why are we spending money on this when our troops overseas are in need of equipment and Navy and Air Force budgets are being drained to support the war?  Our installation answers numerous unscheduled events every year and we are still able to meet or exceed our scheduled events. This is possible only to our ability to have a sufficient overhead to accomodate excess employees during periods without emergent situations. We accepted 90,000 additional mandays of work a one year when we were already above normal capicity. Although overtime pushed us over cost and schedule (about 7 days longest) on some projects we met most of our targets.  You propose that available funding will be budget sensitive. The current system has significant overhead charges but this is because in DoD you can not have any delay to respond to surge requirements. Your plan puts DoD at a disadvantage when it comes to the unforeseen. All other agencies may be able to operate under such a plan but DoD is what makes all we have possible.  Classification  Current position descriptions are designed to outline the qualifications and skills required to perform those duties. How can you generalize the skills for a tank mechanic, airframe mechanic, fire control technician or nuclear power plant refueling technician?  The pursuit of liberalized job assignment is already available. I have yet to see a position description that does not include the phrase ?and other duties as assigned?. How much more flexibility do you need?  Defined classifications ensures qualified personnel are performing the required duties. Pay  The only reason poor performers receive the same pay is poor supervisors and managers. The current system addresses this problem but if the supervisors/managers do not apply it properly it will not work.  Despite your assertion that objective criteria will be applied it will not happen because objective criteria already exists and it is not being used. Nothing will change except the suffering of the employees will increase.  You indicate that ?market-sensitive compensation? will be used to set pay. We already have a system that does that. For GS employees it?s the locality pay and for WG employees it?s the wage survey. Government wide pay set by this program is below the civilian market rates. If you are ignoring this now why should we believe you will honor the same program under a new name.  Basing pay on assignments provides employees on high visibility tasks greater recognition than those on lesser tasks even when they are high level performers.  There are currently several ways to reward employees. Special act or achievement awards, on the spot awards, group achievement awards and quality step increases. The only bar to receiving one of the above is poor performing supervisors/managers.  There are current several ways to deal with poor performers. Poor performance ratings automatically trigger improvement programs, time off, reduction in step and or grade and termination. The only bar to any of the above is poor managers/supervisors. Bargaining  Collective bargaining is the cornerstone of the United States. The Jamestown pact, the Mayflower Pact, the Decleration of Independence and The Constittion are all collective bargaining agreements.  DoD has never suffered a loss of mission accomplishment due to union bargaining. You currently have the ability to implement mission demands and do post implementing bargaining.  Unions are not opposed with national level bargaining but must have installation level bargaining to address local concerns.  Four tiers of bargaining at the following levels, each bargaining only on those matter specific to that level of concern. DoD, agency, command and installation levels. This permits the appropriate control at the appropriate level, addresses the unique concerns at each level and allows your most valuable assets, the employees, to have some legitimate avenue of input. i.e., DEFAS would have DoD agency and installation level because they cover all commands in all agencies while Navy would have all four because Naval commands are varied and numerious, NAVSEA, CICLANT, CICPAC, NACAIR ect. Sincerely,