| Comment Number: | OL-10500880 |
| Received: | 2/22/2005 1:02:23 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:
This comment refers to the ability of supervisors to control "pay for performance" under this system. About 25 years ago, when I was young, my supervisor at DCMA in San Diego solicited me for dates and sex. Two other members of the team also solicted me for dates and sex. I refused because I was married and did not want any sexual contact with them. Because of this, the new supervisor in the unit attempted to deny me a step increase and also gave me a bad performance review which I believe was connected to my refusal to engage in sexual activity. My question, is how can supervisors impartially judge an employee's performance when this type of thing goes on in the workplace? I think many employees would be assessed on factors other than their actual job performance, and that at least my pay under the old system was protected and guaranteed. In addition to the sexaul harassment issue, I have witnessed much favoritism in the workplace. Supervisors assign work based upon what people they eat lunch with or go out for drinks with, and not in a fair manner. I think "pay for performance" would also be based on favoritism and not on actual employee ability.