| Comment Number: | OL-10500655 |
| Received: | 2/18/2005 12:14:16 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:
Greetings, 1. Page 7533, column 2 contains the following statement: " The law requires the Department to establish a contemporary and flexible system of human resources management." The current paradigm is that people/employee are resources. "Resources" is a term that needs to be changed to Assets. Human Assets have value, are nurtured, trained, etc. Hire me as a resource and I can be trashed to attain some goal. Hire me as an asset, I will be trained, mentored, and encouraged to succeed in my work in order to exceed some goal. I am an asset, not a resource. 2. Page 7561, column 1 contains the following statement: "It is designed to adjust individual pay levels based on the acquisition and assesment of competencies, skills, and knowledge and on the basis of performance or contributions to the mission." It would be nice to see some sort of guarantee that any employee will receive the training necessary to improve skills and competencies. If my pay band and bonus is dependent on the training (supposidly) received, please ensure funds are available to access training. 3. Page 7561, colum 1 contains the following statement: "The hiring official will determine starting pay based on available labor market considerations; specific qualification requirements; scarcity of qualified applicants; program needs; education or experience of the candidate; AND OTHER CRITERIA AS APPROPRIATE." What other criteria? The hiring official has a good day so my starting pay is higher. Maybe I don't look good, or there is some other prejudice within the hiring official that lowers my starting pay. Recommendation is to delete "other criteria as appropriate" and soundly define how starting pay is determined. Develop a weighted criteria that is in print and understandable by all. 4. It is nice to see a performance based system. When will the military get on board with this? Thanks for your consideration.