| Comment Number: | EM-023100 |
| Received: | 3/15/2005 4:08:23 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 15, 2005 DoD NSPS Comments , DoD NSPS Comments: My Views and Comments on NSPS I have read the February 14, 2005 Federal Register on the proposed National Security Personnel System (NSPS) with detailed attention. I wish to offer some comments on these proposals. Like many employees, I am deeply concerned about what I have read in the Federal Register. Perhaps some unions since the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 may have overreached in some respects and sometimes trivialized the bargaining process, i.e., seeking to negotiate what color to paint a room or which rugs to buy. Additionally, the unions could go to arbitration, FLRA, MSPB, FSIP, EEO, grievance or mediation; perhaps ?forum shopping? prompted management to eliminate some of these remedies in their proposal. But management has also participated in this system and unfortunately management cannot bring itself to ever admit it was wrong. No matter what a manager does it seems no action is ever taken, but let an employee do likewise and the agency doesn?t think twice about taking action. Also the personnel office and the legal office align with management. The employee has only the union, and not a lawyer in most cases. The employee?s representative is also a federal employee who works for the agency and is currently protected in his representational capacity. In this regard, note that NSPS would remove protections afforded to representatives by current case law. Clearly some additional ?reform? may be warranted. Unions have tried to negotiate with DoD but DoD has refused to do so. Over the years management has unfortunately broken its promises with some frequency. As in so many past experiences union hopes have been blasted and the deep shadow of disappointment is always upon us. Perhaps it is easy for DoD to propose these rules when in fact they won?t personally apply to those who propose them. Last summer I had the dubious pleasure of attending numerous meetings in Washington, D.C. with DoD and OPM management to discuss these new proposals. Initially I felt enthusiastic knowing I was going to Washington to have input into a new personnel system. That feeling was unfortunately destined to be short-lived. Sitting in a room with representatives of 39 other unions and numerous DoD/OPM management officials, I was ready to work with some of the government?s best. The meeting started out with management requesting a recitation of union concerns. I was immediately puzzled. How could unions possibly articulate concerns when they had no information on the changes proposed? This went back and forth for some time, the unions trying to elicit some specific proposals orally or better yet written to which they might respond, and management steadfastly refusing to offer any at all; in fact they repeatedly stated that no specific proposals existed. As you can readily see there was increasing disconnection and mistrust among the ?participants.? I couldn?t help but question why they called us here for three days at taxpayer expense when they had nothing to share with us. Imagine if the taxpayers of this country knew what went on, having paid for 30 AFGE personnel not to mention the other 39 unions and their people to attend these meetings in Washington and no sharing of information as DoD had promised and was required by law to do. Regrettably I was there and I saw it all unfold. I have, as I stated, carefully reviewed the Federal Register of February 14th; I note with some befuddlement the sections entitled ?Option Development Process? and ?Outreach to Employee Representatives.? The meetings that I had attended were specifically referenced and touted as having ??provided the opportunity to discuss the design elements, options and proposals under consideration for NSPS and solicit union feedback.? I can only say that whoever wrote this description could not possibly have attended those meetings. I would now like to discuss what I see as a major implosion of the DoD workforce and not just from a union point of view, rather as an American, a veteran and a DoD employee of almost 30 years. The proposals as written can only undermine rather than foster the objectives set forth in the Federal Register. Every employee including local managers would have no option but to agree to any and all demands of their superiors; everyone will be fearful of arbitrary discipline, pay reduction or removal without benefit of a neutral third party review. Such conditions could only demoralize the DoD workforce. What kind of government will result from this proposal? I can tell you. The proposed total control of eliminating the unions and treating employees like inmates, you will allegedly achieve ?flexibility.? But in reality what is proposed is exactly the situation that caused unions to first come into being more than a century ago. Government employees support soldiers who are someone?s father, mother, son or daughter. Should DoD win this ?battle? in the long run they are going to lose the ?war.? Americans are known for cherishing their freedom and their rights; I foresee that Congressmen and Senators will be seeing more Congressional inquiries than ever before and EEO complaints will virtually replace grievances and appeals. The DoD workforce may share the fate of the Edsel and the Dodo bird - extinction; perhaps the true objective of NSPS is to ultimately contract out each and every task now performed by a DoD employee. There are surely people in DoD?s upper echelons and the Congress who can see that this proposal will not only not attract the best or brightest, but may not even retain the current professional workforce. Sincerely,