| Comment Number: | EM-023204 |
| Received: | 3/16/2005 9:13:20 AM |
| 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: The National Security Personnel System (NSPS) is being put into force by the Department of Defense (DoD) and the proposed regulations raise great concerns on the impact it will have on those who had no voice in it?s inception, as our Union(s) were shut out of the development of this new personnel system. The Federal Register Vol. 70, No. 29, released on February 14, 2005 for the ?Proposed Rules?, has two mentions about Labor-Management Relations. One is on page 7569, under Subpart I, Item 4 and on page 7596, Paragraph 9901.905 which both state that there is an ?Impact on existing agreements?. On page 7596, it follows, with Item (a) ?Any provision of a collective bargaining agreement that is inconsistent with this part and/or DOD implementing issuances is unenforceable on the effective data of the applicable subpart(s) or such issuances.? The words ?any provision?,? inconsistent?, and ?unenforceable? denote a no-tolerance to any source other than that of the DoD and OPM to have a voice in the matters of the Federal employees. Yet, on page 7554, under ?Authority To Establish a New HR System?, bullet item Chapter 77 states that: ?In planning, developing, implementing, and adjusting NSPS established under subsections (a), DoD and OPM must use procedures that provide employee representatives with an opportunity to participate and collaborate in the process.? Clearly, this was not the case as the Union was not a part of the initial NSPS Team or its efforts. The proposal on page 7596 follows with Paragraph 9901.907, ? National Security labor Relations Aboard?, under Item (a), subpart (2), that ?Members of the Board will be independent, distinguished citizens of the United States who are well known for their integrity, impartiality, and expertise in labor relations and/or the DoD mission and/or the national security matters-?. This seems rather ambiguous. If the Union is not a part of the decision making, how can there be impartiality? This Proposed Rule appears to be an overview of a summary, and lacks the defined specifics that the criteria DoD and OPM will use. This proposal seems to treat the employees who help defend our country as a terrorist faction. The employees are not the enemy, but productive, conscientious, and responsible people. DoD employees have committed themselves to being Federal employees because we want our forces to be the best. I believe that mistreating the employees will hurt the agency?s mission. This NSPS system on the surface promotes performance, but the proposed changes will be far more insidious in the way employees are 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. Having worked for DoD for 29 years, the way in which the development for the NSPS system was handled has shown no regard for those it will affect the most, the civilian work force. Seniority and Institutional Knowledge will be a thing of the past, and those most affected by this experience-based resource will be the military forces. Issues for Concern: 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 as well as others (like me) that are care-giver(s) for an elderly parent. 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. The Federal employees only want to continue to fulfill our mission of providing the highest quality of support to our war fighters. I respectively recommend you consider these concerns, and amend these unfair actions so that we can continue to do the work we were hired to do, supporting our military forces. This message will be sent to both DoD and my representatives in Congress. Sincerely,