| Comment Number: | EM-022904 |
| Received: | 3/16/2005 5:30:31 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 16, 2005 DoD NSPS Comments , DoD NSPS Comments: I write to express my concerns about the National Security Personnel System (NSPS). This will be sent to both DoD and my representatives in Congress. I have worked for DoD for a little over two years now, and am a veteran of 10 years. The first thing that concerns me is the scope of the proposed changes. The current system may not be perfect, but it works. The civil service is not broken. It may need some adjustment or repair in some areas, but an entirely new system is not the responsible way to go. I work in a field that is constantly changing to some degree. When a deficiency is identified somewhere in the system, a change is made to fix that deficiency. With an ever-changing world of technology we live in, new regulations must be made to account for things never dealt with in the past. However, the overall system is not replaced. That would be ridiculous, and who in their right mind would want to work under that. The employee would not feel safe. Instead of focusing on their jobs, they would be distracted by the fact that things could change yet again when someone new takes over the position of authority. No one in DoD feels safe right now. NSPS proposes to change nearly every facet of how we are managed and paid. This new system may work in some lab or simulation, but this is the real world with real people and families. This is not a responsible way to manage one's people. If there are areas that are broken they should be identified and a solution proposed to address that problem individually. Yes, that takes time, but time should be taken in these matters to ensure the employees are protected. It would appear that a change has occurred in the way the civilian workforce is viewed. During my time in the military, the civilian workforce was always viewed as the expert and experienced part of our unit that we would go to for the answers, and that we relied on to help provide quality training for those military members new to the job. The civilians were the ones who provided stability and continuity to better enable the military members to remain a flexible force in readiness. I am now part of that stable force, whereas before I was part of that flexible force in readiness. It seems now that the military has been called on to do so much around the world, that even with the reserve force, we are running out of military members or over working them through prolonged or frequent deployments. And so the DoD civilian workforce has been identified as a human resource that can be tapped into to fill this lack of personnel, if they can only get complete control of it and remove all the barriers that prevent that from happening at this time. I, for one, did my time and served my country in that way, now I serve in a different way. If I need to be called on to serve in that way again, then I should be drafted. It appears as though a new branch of military is being constructed out of the preexisting DoD civilian workforce. The difference is that we were hired; we did not enlist. I do not believe this was the purpose of the Defense Authorization Act, and would be careful before I listened to those that simply state things such as that are outdated. I believe that the purpose of the civilian workforce within DoD is to provide continuity and support to our military counterparts in the capacity we were hired under. Not to be deployed or reassigned to meet the needs of the military or the whim of management. If the civilian workforce is changed into this new flexible force that they claim is necessary to meet mission, then what will happen to the stability that is maintained at bases across the country and overseas? The civilians in place at these locations compensate for the vertical learning curve that the military member must deal with. The proposals in NSPS, such as pay-for-performance and performance management, might function well in a perfect world. We don't live in one. First of all, how many supervisor or managers have the training to properly use those management tools? What kind of accountability will there be to protect the "unpopular" employee at work? Remove the regulations, and where money is involved, human nature will take over. The managers that will be in place over more technical fields are not going to have the understanding necessary to effectively or fairly use these tools. They sound good, but they won't work. This new system claims to reduce the burden on management, but in order to effectively and fairly use these management tools; managers would be required to learn the intricacies of the jobs of the employees under them. This would greatly increase their burden. It obviously will not happen that way. Most of the civilian workforce consists of former military personnel. We have an intricate knowledge of the workings of the military and posses the ability to meet those needs. We have chosen to leave the military and enter the civilian workforce for various reasons. NSPS creates an uncertain future for all of us. I do not believe this is what was intended for the future of the civilian workforce in DoD. This is why I oppose the NSPS and urge you to act to instruct the Secretary of Defense to halt any further development of it. Sincerely,