| Comment Number: | OL-10501305 |
| Received: | 2/24/2005 2:16:38 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:
As a government employee for 26 years, I strongly oppose the NSPS for several reasons. It jeopardizes our guaranteed annual pay raise by replacing it with a system that will be influenced by favoritism and left dependant upon the Supervisor's judgment. If a Supervisor doesn't like me what does that mean for me? It surely doesn't mean I'll get the promotion that I've worked hard at qualifying for. It's based on whether someone likes me or not. The Performance Management, (Subpart D), of the Federal Register, Supervisor's has too much flexibility in determining an individuals pay. This leaves room for scrutiny, discrimination, and mismanagement. Again, it goes back to whether the Supervisor likes me or not. This will determine if an employee passes or fails and needless to say pay and retention in a RIF situation is on the line. The pay retention says employees are placed on a retention list in descending order, based on tenure, veterans preference, performance rating and creditable service. A classic example would be: An employee with a 4 year degree has 26 years service, but their performance appraisals have been rated a fully successful for the past 3 years. Another employee/co-worker on the other hand has no education beyond high school, has been on the job for less than 5 years service, and received exceptional performance ratings with awards for the past 3 years. Unfair as this is, this system will allow the employee with a high performance rating and less than 5 years service to displace the employee with 26 years and an education. It doesn't matter how long you have been on the job, nor does it matter how much education you might have. Is this right? Is this how the Gov’t rewards their employees? Implementing this system will weaken employee moral, a person wants to be rewarded for their efforts without prejudice, which is law. Subpart H addresses Appeals and Labor-Management Relations-Subpart I, with this proposal the resolution time is too lengthy and costly and an employees appeal rights are weakened, they have no right to say anything even in the event they are innocent and the Supervisor is wrong. The proposal also ensures employees who are successful in appealing adverse actions cannot recover attorney's. Implemented this system will allow an employee to be treated as a "Deployable Asset". After 26 years I don't want to be deployed to anywhere in the world at any time without notice. I don't see where this new system meets the expressed goal of improving the National Security, in fact, it is just the opposite. An employee would be hard pressed to be competent and dedicated to providing for our soldiers let alone for tomorrow's workforce.