| Comment Number: | EM-022876 |
| Received: | 3/16/2005 1:20:10 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:
These comments on the Proposed NSPWS Regulations are submitted by: Time in Federal Service: 15.5 years Suspense date for submission of comments: 16 March 2005, per page 7552 Vol 70, No. 29, 14 Feb 2005 Federal Register These comments may be transmitted in the public media. You may use my name. Comment No. Page Column Paragraph 1 7553 2 2 (middle of page) The proposed regulation states"The current system limits opportunities for civilians at a time when the role of DoD's civilian workforce is expanding to include more significant participation in total force effectiveness." The DoD has eliminated most engineering positions during the past 10 years by systematically outsourcing most of the technical analysis work to FFRDC and contractors because the federal workforce was deemed inefficient, untrained, and without incentive. The DoD has encouraged engineers to change from engineering positions to program management positions in order to remain within the government. How do you plan to ease the "administrative burden" as stated in the proposed regulations? Will you rely upon additional outsourcing for administrative work? The DoD can not so easily reconstitute a civilian core. This will take a decade and long term commitment. The administrative burden includes attention to the FAR and all the other service unique re gulations. The DoD has suppressed opportunities for civilians such as decreasing meaningful assignments that could lead to promotions, minimizing opportunities for exposure/briefings to higher officials, minimizing travel funds to conferences and off site training. How does the DoD propose to change that? Just putting that objective in a regulation will not make it happen. 2 7581 2 9901.313 (a), (b) How do you know what would be allocated if there were no NSPS? Where is this formula and when will it be released? We would like to see more details. 3 7578 3 Subpart B - Classification General Para. 9901.201 (a) Purpose The paragraph states that "equal pay should be provided for provided for work of equal value." Some work assigned to civilians may be below their skill set and experience level but needs to be done in accordance with the mission at least for a period of time. Equal value may change with the mission. How and who decides that specific work is of equal value? My experience is that advancement opportunities are determined by exposure to management. That process is currently subjective. How would adopting these regulations make advancement opportunities less subjective? 4. 7574 1 E.0. 12866 second paragraph middle of page The paragraph states "The primary benefit to the public.......the primary mission of the DoD." What metrics are proposed to measure the benefits to the DoD in this paragraph? How does the DoD propose to quantify a more proficient workforce? If the measurements do not show increased proficiency, is the DoD prepared to scrap the regulations or part of the proposed regulations and return to the present system? Bargaining processes may be quantified but only a small part of the DoD workforce has to actually use the bargaining processes. The major goal of these proposed regulations is to create a more efficient work force but without quantifiable measures of performance, there is no way to state in a clear way that the proposed regulations have succeeded in achieving the goals set by the DoD. 5. 7575 3 9901.101(b) Purpose The paragraph states "The system established under this part....designed to facilitate are as follows:" How does the DoD plan to quantify these items such as performance, leadership, commitment to public service, flexibility, accountability, cost effectiveness, etc..." so the employee may be rated? Much depends upon the assignment. The better assignments are given to the military to demonstrate leadership in an acquisition environment. Some important assignments may be necessary but receive no visibility, offer few resources, and are subject to budgetary constraints. How can people be rated fairly when the implementation of the guiding principles espoused in the proposed regulation varies so widely across the DoD? 6. 7579 2 9901.211 Career groups "DoD may establish career groups." Career groups should include systems thinking and not narrow stove piping. But there are no metrics for visionary thinking or systems thinking. What are the metrics offered for "pay progression?" 7. 7571 2 11.0 Representation Rights and Duties The "Weingarten Rule" does not apply to GS-13s and above (excluding CID, OSI or NIS investigations). Union representation is not allowed even if requested by the employee. I know this from personal experience. 8. 7560 2 Rating methodology How is it the amount of money available in the pay pool determined? Currently, a percentage reflecting inflation and/or cost of living is applied across the board. Presently, a bonus program awards the higher performers. The wages keep growing; the bonus is variable and changes each year. Since retirement under FERS is based on the highest earnings of three years, it is possible to fall backwards and loose retirement earnings. Awards within the pay pool take on added significance in the NSPS. Yet, there is no easy way to quantify the performance of individuals since performance depends upon opportunities that are presented, visibility that is granted, and opportunity to travel and receive training. Employees could fall backwards in retirement earnings through no fault of their own. 9. 7559 3 Setting and Adjusting Rate-Ranges "The bands will have open pay ranges." Does this mean that the GS 1-15 system is abolished? The only promotions are to move between the three pay bands. 10 7562 3 Setting and Communicating Performance Expectations "Supervisors and managers must establish performance expectations and communicate them to employees." This describes the minimum expectations and does not describe initiative and personal energy levels the employee brings to the task. 11 7562 3 `"to receive higher ratings and increased pay" Increased pay is a function of the challenges, visibility and authority of the assignment presented to the employee. Promotions currently are almost non-existent. Promotions depend on longevity, visibility, resources, and who you know. How will the NSPS change all that? 12 7564 3 1.0 Actions and Employees Covered Do adverse actions include letters of admonishment? 13 7565 1 2.0 Mandatory Removal Offenses How can the DoD approve the Proposed Rules without having a list of Mandatory Removal Offenses? The proposed regulations state that the "DoD will identify and publish MROs in advance of their implementation." However, there should be some guidance in the proposed regulations with opportunities for enlargement. 14 7555 2 High Performing Employees They are compensated based on performance and contribution to the mission. This really depends upon opportunities offered to the employee. This is hard to quantify especially if the employee is working to achieve a result in the future that is not directly connected to the current mission. 15 7555 2 NSPS will be operational and demonstrate success before Nov 09 What quantifiable or non-quantifiable criteria will be used to measure aggregate success over the entire DoD? What happens if the aggregate success is not obvious or the results are not as expected? Will the NSPS be scrapped? 16 7582 2 9901.342 Performance payouts Performance payouts should include an incentive for not using sick leave. The idea is to discourage the use of sick leave unless the employee is sick. For example, a percentage of unused sick leaves may be used as compensation time, time added to compute the pension, or a monetary payback.