| Comment Number: | OL-10500475 |
| Received: | 2/17/2005 11:33:56 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:
No one allowed for the individuals who are at the end of a career where they were designing a career based some very specific pre-determined set of standards. For instance, as a CSRS GS-15 step 7, I don't want to pay band with only 2.5 years from retirement at age 55. I have looked at the Federal regster and the many briefings and news articles, and tried a search/find for CSRS information, but can not find any reference to answer how my career/retirement is affected. The advice two years ago was to prepare and plan in a five year process allowing individuals to look at options nearing retirement. I don't know how my options will change now. I'm also upset that DOD has individuals making decisions on my career who are probably FERS employees and looking at the past nine years I've seen the same leadership (military and SES), and politicians trying to make changes in law affecting and/or eliminating the few remaining CSRS workforce. Historically, a government improvement is to the benefit of management, and detriment of the workforce. It is a tool to save money. Even as you propose it as a leverage to rapidly hire industries "cream of the crop." You will soon discover the concept of pay banding is a reverse rainbow and the pots of gold are at the top. I see it as having a greater opportunity for abusing favoritism than for propertizing a reward system for the "best of breed." In your perfect world you see the political SES manuevering as your temp plate, or as was mentioned in one of the articles the best will move in and out of workforce and get better broadbase experience and renew the energies of the organization. I disagree the individuals will always see the government as a cash cow, and try to excell to the top pay band and homestead. Especially as they get older and require an established "secure" safety net nearing retirement. If it were not so, then why do you see so many politically appointed SES trying to get career positions, or convert theirs, or trying with each administration to manuever and posture for the future. I believe more information is needed on those nearing current retirement who could care less how you posture for the future. Second, there should be an option to release as was done in the 70's the remaining CSRS without age/time penalties. Third, I find this as a compromise to solving what was always needed for the government workforce (at least in DOD); an interoperable civilian personnel process (not four duplicative, redundant and charter (i.e., "not an AF "Chartered Career Plan" civilian, then you can't apply for one of our AF positions...and the same mentality was used by the Navy, Army and Marines.) organization. FERS is costing the government more than CSRS after twenty years of collectable data; why not target that issue as a force management concern. I'm sure it will be as a future change/modification to NSPS. I'm not happy with the OPM decision or Congress' to a change that has not analyzed all the second order effects and ramifications to ANY or ALL segments of the workforce.