| Comment Number: | EM-022932 |
| Received: | 3/16/2005 4:07:11 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 am opposed to all aspects of the proposed regulations for the National Security Personnel System (NSPS). I have read the proposed regulations thoroughly, including the lengthy introductory remarks. Perhaps the most glaring problem with the changes proposed in the regulations is that ABSOLUTELY NO JUSTIFICATION IS PROVIDED FOR THEM! The entire NSPS proposal is a sham; look, for example, at the fact that, in the introductory remarks to the regulations, it?s stated ?the [DoD] Secretary and the [OPM] Director were extensively informed by the DHS experience? (emphasis added) ? how intriguing the Secretary and the Director could purport to be ?informed? by a set of regulations that has not even been implemented yet so one could determine whether or not they are a DISASTER. The introductory remarks are filled with nothing but opinions and conclusions with absolutely NO facts to support them. The introductory remarks propose an end that SOUNDS good, but provide absolutely NO evidence the existing Department of Defense (DoD) does not already possess and exhibit each and every positive attribute the proposed regulations purport to achieve. In other words, the Administration is proposing to ?fix? something they have yet to show is ?broken.? Even if we were to believe the existing DoD needed to be changed, the proposed ?means? (personnel system changes) outlined in the NSPS are NOT designed to achieve the ?ends? (improvements) the Administration claims are needed! If anything, the NSPS will turn the already-efficient and successful DoD into an inefficient morass of political agendas, in-fighting, favoritism, dishonesty, and lack of disclosure to the American public. The proposed regulations should be REJECTED in their entirety! The proposed NSPS will undermine the Civil Service, harm DoD employees, and hurt the mission of the DoD and our nation. Subpart A ? General Provisions Section 9901.106 ? Continuing Collaboration Process The proposed process is unfair and is dishonest in referring to the process as ?collaborative.? It is well established people are more motivated and work harder when they have input to the decision-making process and, in general, feel that they can be ?heard.? By permitting the Secretary of the DoD to control or limit the role of the Union in developing the details of the NSPS, if the NSPS is needed at all, employees? motivation and performance will be negatively impacted and management, with no checks on its actions, will almost certainly abuse its authority. Subparts B and C ? Classification; Pay and Pay Administration Sections 9901.201 to 9901.231 and 9901-301 to 9901.373 Pay banding and ?pay for performance? should be rejected in their entirety. It has repeatedly been shown PAY BANDING AND PAY-FOR-PERFORMANCE DO NOT WORK. We used to have ?pay-for-performance? in Civil Service ? it was that system under which certain managerial positions were designated as ?GM? instead of ?GS.? Where is that system today? Gone. Why? Because it DID NOT WORK. In the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), where employees have now been working under pay banding for three-to-four years, the one thing managers and labor agree on is that the pay system DOES NOT WORK. FAA managers and employees alike find the system unfair. Managers have initiated a lawsuit against the agency because of the pay system. The system unfairly impacts employees? ?high three? salary years, among other things, thus reducing employees? retirement pay for the rest of their lives! Pay banding and ?pay-for-performance? have NO PLACE in the Federal government. Unlike private industry, the Federal government does NOT work to earn a profit; the Federal government works to serve the people of America. As such, it is paramount Federal employees maintain neutrality and the highest level of honesty and integrity. THIS WILL BE DESTROYED IF PAY BANDING AND PAY-FOR-PERFORMANCE ARE ADOPTED! Should a ?pay-for-performance? system ever be put into place, it will be nothing more than a ?pay for saying ?yes?? system or ?pay for keeping your mouth shut? system. Agency directors will march to the tune of the White House, lest they not be paid for their ?performance.? Everyone down the management chain-of-command will march to the same tune, lest they not be paid for their ?performance.? And the line-staff employees will be left with no choice - either march to the same tune as the managers and directors, while the White House plays the melody, or say ?goodbye? to ever seeing a pay raise - and even being able to keep up with the ever-increasing cost of living - for the remainder of your career and, through your retirement pay, your life. A pay-for-performance system in any form IS NOT NEEDED. The current pay system includes more than adequate provisions for ?the best and the brightest? to be rewarded: QSIs, lump sum awards into the thousands of dollars, time off awards, selection for prestigious assignments and premium training opportunities, to name a few. The current pay system also includes more than adequate provisions for ?new talent? to be hired; new Federal employees are hired every day at an increased step and/or increased grade to provide them an incentive to come to work for the Government and to compensate them for the potential they bring. In addition, other hiring incentives can be offered such as paid relocation, travel expenses for interviews, etc. Not only is the current pay system more than adequate to meet today?s hiring and retention needs, the current system is NECESSARY to ensure honesty, integrity, and non-partisan service to the American public are maintained in the Federal government. Employees do not leave the Federal government because of problems with the pay; they leave when those essential tenets of honesty, integrity, and non-partisan service to the American public are violated, and if pay banding and pay-for-performance are adopted, we will see the GOOD employees LEAVING IN DROVES because they will refuse to work for the corrupt organization that will be created under such systems. Subpart D ? Performance Management Sections 9901.401 to 9901.409 The performance management system in the Federal government has always needed improvement. Despite what may be written about procedures for the system, managers routinely fail to implement the system is such a way that employees feel they have been evaluated fairly, thus leading to poorer performance through lack of motivation, lack of a clear understanding what the supervisor expects of the employee to achieve ?improved? performance, and time wasted fighting over the performance rating the employee believes is unfair. Under the system proposed by the NSPS, these problems will only increase. The problems will increase because more will be at stake in terms of the pay increases that will be linked to performance ratings, because the process for appealing performance ratings will not be impartial and fair, and because no appeal will be permitted at all regarding the pay increase determined by the supervisor! To ensure fairness and accuracy, DoD employees must be able to appeal any performance rating and any pay increase to an independent grievance and arbitration process, as they can now. Subparts E and F ? Staffing and Employment; Workforce Shaping Sections 9901.501 to 9901.516 and 9901.601 to 9901.611 Regarding external recruitment, the DoD, like all Federal agencies, needs to be careful in its hiring practices to ensure it is indeed selecting and hiring individuals based on their knowledge, skills, and abilities, not based on their political and/or personal affiliations, subjective criteria, and/or some other unfair and counterproductive basis. In particular, the DoD must be careful not to hire individuals with potential but who are nonetheless inexperienced in the specific tasks they will perform for the Federal government and start these individuals at salaries equal to or greater than the salaries of employees who have successfully performed the tasks in question for 15 years! Such practices, whether in the DoD or any Federal agency are demotivators to the workforce and smack of personal favoritism and other impermissible hiring practices. Such practices, which are already being seen in the FAA, are only a source of employee discontent, distrust, in-fighting, and lack of teamwork. Similarly, the DoD should not change the current layoff/RIF rules, which give balanced credit to performance and the employees valuable years of committed service to DoD. Subparts G and H ? Adverse Actions; Appeals Sections 9901.701 to 9901.721 and 9901.801 to 9901.810 The provision to provide the DoD Secretary the authority to determine mandatory removal offenses and to have the sole authority to mitigate removal as the penalty is unconscionable and must be REJECTED! The current review systems in place, particularly the Merit Systems Protection Board, function well, are independent (thereby guaranteeing fairness), and are already in place. There is NO justification for creating a separate system that, by its very nature, would be highly partisan; would provide no measure of independence or fairness whatsoever; would most certainly lead to gross abuses, including threatening employees with removals they could not appeal if they failed to follow the political agenda of the Secretary; and would cost the taxpayer additional money to establish! It is difficult to say what the most egregious aspect of such a system would be: the complete lack of fairness to employees or the certain outcome that the American public could no longer count on honesty and appropriate conduct from the DoD because it would be nothing but a political machine. Adopting such a system would be tantamount to placing our Federal government under a military dictatorship. Similarly, the entire appeals process proposed under the NSPS is ridiculously lop-sided in favor of the agency and managers who simply do not want to be responsible for doing their job (i.e., supervising and managing people); is unfair and lacks ample provisions for due process, such as adequate access to an independent and impartial review body and access to representation by legal counsel (the proposed standards for granting attorney?s fees will discourage attorneys from representing DoD employees); and is UNNECESSARY. THE SYSTEMS CURRENTLY IN PLACE WORK! As stated at the beginning of these comments, the Administration has provided NO basis for the proposed changes to the existing systems for addressing conduct and performance issues, and the proposals under the NSPS for changing the systems to address conduct and performance issues ARE NOT DESIGNED TO ACHIEVE THE ENDS LISTED BY THE ADMINISTRATION AS THE RATIONALE FOR ADOPTING THE NSPS! One of the many dangerous aspects of the proposed NSPS is that performance issues seem to be ?lumped together? with misconduct issues, thus making it appear the DoD intends to treat performance issues as being no different than misconduct issues. This is WRONG! Managers are responsible for ensuring their employees have adequate training, instruction, guidance, supervision, feedback, clarification, and reinforcement to perform their jobs successfully. Many managers are notoriously deficient in the performance of THEIR DUITES in this regard; this is an on-going problem and requires correction. However, the solution is NOT to continue to allow managers to fail to do their jobs and let them FIRE employees when the employees do not perform adequately due to the manager?s failings, as the NSPS would permit managers to do! The NSPS, in general, fails to address the REAL PROBLEMS in the Civil Service system and proposes changes that will only increase those problems, not solve them. Subpart I ? Labor Management Relations Sections 9901.901 to 9901.928 The labor management law that has governed the employees? right to organize and engage in collective bargaining has worked well since 1978. There is no compelling reason to take away most of the employee?s collective bargaining rights or grievance rights. Among other things, the NSPS proposal to create an internal, agency-appointed ?board? is utterly ridiculous in terms of ensuring any sort of independence and neutrality with respect to the functioning of the board. Further, the idea that an internal board such as that proposed by the NSPS would disclose its decisions and proceedings to the public, as it should, is fantasy ? look at the internal review boards and systems utilized by entities such as the military service academies that stop at nothing to prevent the public from being able to learn what ?dirty laundry? the academies are hiding behind their gates. There is NO NEED FOR A SEPARATE, INTERNAL BOARD IN THE DOD! Again, the existing systems and review bodies already established in the Federal government are doing their jobs and doing them well. In addition, the American taxpayer would have to pay additional taxes to fund the creation of new systems ? or see the already deplorable and inexcusable national deficit continue to increase. Sincerely,