| Comment Number: | OL-10500804 |
| Received: | 2/22/2005 8:02:38 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:
Performance Management – Subpart D, pg 7562 “As part of the performance management system, supervisors and employees should stay aware of the status of performance and behavior…difficulties.” “By the same token, supervisors and managers will be held accountable for clearly and effectively communicating expectations and providing timely feedback regarding behavior and performance.” Concerns – Irrespective of how the supervisor/manager communicates, ultimately, the performance reward is in the hands of the pay pool manager who may well know nothing about the employee. A supervisor can conduct monthly feedbacks with the employee and consistently tell the employee he’s on track for an “exceeds standards” rating…only to have the pay pool manager change it to “meets standards”. What would be the point of the feedbacks then? An additional factor could be an arbitrary cap placed on “high”, “exceptional”, or “star” performers. For example, let’s say in any given pay pool the number of employees eligible for a “high” rating is capped at 15%. While the Federal Register doesn’t mention this anywhere (or I missed it), it stands to reason there will be a method to prevent too many “high” ratings since too many would devalue the payouts for the exceptional performers. Since we do not know the exact structure and details of this process we are left to wonder. Consider my own case. As an Air Reserve Technician (ART), will I be grouped (pay pool-wise) with the other current GS-12s at my location/wing? If so, then this is a pay pool of 6 people. Assuming the rule of 15% only one of us is going to get the big payout, while 5 go away disappointed. Equally confusing is the fact that for the 6 of us, there are 4 different supervisors. What if all four supervisors are telling at least one of their employees they’re on track for the “exceptional” rating? Three people who thought they were doing exceptional work walk away with average payouts. Works great for the government as they get four exceptional performances and only pay for one! And while the employee has the option to challenge his rating (Performance Management – Subpart D, pg 7563), which element takes precedence…a 12 month history of monthly feedbacks containing exceptional ratings comments or an arbitrary 15% cap (or whatever percentage the cap would be) or an arbitrary decision by the pay pool manager? Even worse, suppose the current GS-12 ARTs all across the Air Force Reserve Command are grouped into one pay pool. Who’s the pay pool manager that decides? And what could he possibly know about my performance? Yet if my supervisor has been telling me I’m “exceptional” and my payout is average, what will be my motivation for next year? There’s no “transparency” here.