| Comment Number: | OL-10500750 |
| Received: | 2/20/2005 6:14:00 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:
Essentially what the regulations have done is set precedence for supervisory staff to take advantage of their workers without the worry of having to be right. Preponderance of evidence is subjective, what may be preponderance to a fair and well meaning supervisor is the whip another will user to keep employees under their thumbs. The Union provides the individual employee an avenue to follow when the preponderance is a whip and not a tool to correct, teach, discipline, or remove an employee that is not willing to follow set guidelines. I know from first had experience that this will only create a tighter "Good Old Boys" club. Managers are human also, they have their perceived good workers and they have their friends. They now, with your proposal, have the tools to punish an employee with some tactics that are not even open to review. After 22 years on active duty and 3 years in Civil Service, I have seen the level the "Good Old Boys" club descends in Civil Service. With an option to have an agency to watch over the attempts of a manager whose only motive is retaliation is to invite legal action. This so-called new system is similar to sending our soldiers into harms way without the means to protect themselves. When you know that you have no backup, individuals tend to be cautious, not forward looking. They do not think through the process the same way they would had they known that their back was covered. What your proposal has effectively done is taking the initiative away from the workers and placed the power in the hands of individuals that should be the first tested under this superior system. After using the new personnel procedures on the supervisor and management and then seek feedback you will ultimately see that without representation they will also show hesitation to make decisions, implement new ideas and seek better ways to make they system work. All because they know that they have no backing and are open to a supervisor that holds grudges, is out for him/her and is not above using your wax on wax off system to ride an employee into leaving or being so cautious that they make the mistakes that lead to their dismissals. The only way I can put is that would be understood by all is that without union protection from a management that will not have their advisory arm (MER) cut off as you are doing with us is the same as "Taxation without Representation". You are creating a system that gives the same rewards to managers that big business had and you saw what happened to their trusting employees. We have seen how the trickle down effect has work with big business; it is discouraging to see that the lessons learned from absolute power and what it does has not really changed anything. It is going to be applied to the same workforce that has worked side by side with its counterparts for so long and to be sent into a possible unequal competition against supervisory and management without due process is a sad day. The lessons learned is that without an over watch process you will have a very unproductive workforce due to supervisors and managers taking advantage of their new found power to hold over the head of your loyal workforce.